Tag Archives: HOA

Should There Be Federal Standards & Regulations For HOAs?

guest blog by Deborah Goonan

My colleagues and I have posed this question on several occasions in HOA discussion forums frequented by Community Associations Institute (CAI) members – mostly community managers and attorneys, with an occasional Board member.

Of course, the knee-jerk HOA industry reply is “NOOOOO!” The standard mantra is that HOAs do not want or need more government control. Why would Association members want some bureaucrats in far-off Washington DC telling communities how they ought to govern themselves? They reason that members of HOAs are quite capable of choosing their own destinies, within their own “form of democracy.”

In theory, perhaps. In reality, perhaps not.

I find it curious that, while HOA cheerleaders abhor government interference in any form, they see nothing wrong about the excessive and often petty interference of HOAs over the property and lives of its owners and residents.
Typical HOA-manager/attorney/developer reasoning is along these lines, “We all know how very important it is to establish rules about what you can put in a flowerpot, how long your dog’s leash can be, where your children are NOT allowed to play, and what colors are acceptable for your front door. For these types of decisions, you, American HOA resident, are incapable of clear thinking and sound judgment. Therefore, the developer’s attorneys have crafted a legal contract detailing every aspect of your limited rights to dwell in your HOA, subject to swift and sure penalty should you fail to conform.” In practice, you may be subject to swift and sure penalty simply in order to keep you in line.

For the official party line on government regulation of HOAs, see page 47 of CAI’s Public Policies (emphasis added in italics):

“Community Associations Institute supports effective state legislation–when it is deemed necessary for consumer protection, conversion limitations, protections for ongoing operations or other additions to existing statutes or common law to ensure that community association housing is developed and maintained consistent with legitimate public policy objectives and standards that protect individual consumers, balancing the legitimate rights of the development industry.

Local legislation concerning the creation or governance of community associations is antithetical to a balanced, well-considered assessment of all issues and interests affecting community associations. It also encourages a patchwork of regulations within an individual state and is, therefore, better dealt with at the state level.”

According to CAI, if you live in an HOA, your legitimate rights are secondary to the rights of the corporate HOA – which is, in fact, the creation of a Developer.

Read this policy between the lines: municipal level legislation would make the HOA’s job too inconvenient, potentially limiting where and how HOAs can be built. However, at the state level, developers can pretty much call the shots to “balance” their legitimate rights.

And how does CAI justify its encouragement of “a patchwork of regulations” within the US, on a state-by-state basis, when their own public policy strongly discourages differing regulations within each state? That stance defies logic. Why is it that owners and residents find vastly different HOA laws in each state? The HOA industry lacks federal consumer protection standards that exist for virtually ever other major market sector in America.

What makes the HOA (i.e. Development) industry so special, that it should be deserving of less scrutiny and oversight than, for example, insurance, banking and financial services, healthcare, or public and private education?

By now it’s old news: HOAs are obviously vulnerable to financial mismanagement, corruption, and white-collar crime. Money crosses state lines and with over 65 million taxpaying residents nationwide, these issues certainly rise to the level of general public interest.

Therefore, there most certainly is a need for federal level legislation and regulation of HOAs.

(link to CAI Public Policy)

 

Texas Judge to Decide Meaning of ‘Family’ in HOA

guest blog by Deborah Goonan

This is an update to an earlier blog about the Plantation Resort 2 in Frisco, Texas. The PR2 HOA is filing a lawsuit against City House, to block use of a home they recently purchased and renovated for use as transitional living for homeless youths.

The local CBS affiliate has been covering the story, and the link to their video is below.

While PR2 HOA has allowed two young women to move into the home owned by City House, they have made it clear they do not want any more residents to join them. The house was originally intended for transitional living for 6-8 youths. Public records indicate that PR2 homes are good-sized, most with 4 bedrooms and between 2500 – 3000 square feet, with an average sale price hovering around $270,000.

This is the part that really sticks in my craw. A statement made by PR2 HOA Attorney Chad Robinson, Riddle & Williams:

“City House is a great cause. But, on the flip side, we can’t pick and choose which rules we enforce.”

To put this statement into perspective, let’s consider that the real estate industry has had a long history of creating all sorts of deed restrictions and business practices intentionally designed to homogenize neighborhoods in the interest of protecting home values. Up until Fair Housing and Civil rights legislation was enacted in the 1960s, federal housing and lending policies explicitly aided and abetted segregation between the haves and the have-nots, along racial lines.

Since the late 1960s, the real estate industry has created hundreds of thousands of HOAs, many of which continue similar, less explicit homogenizing practices by way of carefully crafted CC&Rs. And because the Rules are considered “contractual agreements,” and HOAs are not acknowledged as de facto governing entities or state actors, a lot of ambiguous and petty restrictions escape federal scrutiny.

In other words, you can agree to any rules and restrictions you want, even if they happen to be petty, socially reprehensible, un-American, or unconstitutional. Remember folks, in HOAs, The Bill of Rights Need Not Apply.

At issue in this dispute is whether a transitional living arrangement fits the definition of “family,” as specified in the governing documents for PR2 HOA. City House believes that their non-commercial use of the home as a stable living environment falls within the definition, but PR2 HOA Attorney Robinson does not.

But in 21st century America, what, exactly, constitutes a family? Gone are the days when most family households consisted of mom and dad with a couple of children. We have single-parent households, same-sex partners with children, families blended following remarriage after divorce or death of a spouse, unmarried couples with or without children, extended families that include grandparents and adult children. And what if you rent the home you own to unrelated roommates? Which of these falls into PR2 HOA’s narrow definition of “single family use?” How many of these variations already exist in PR2?

Next week a judge will hear the case and decide whether City House can continue their great work with homeless youths, and create transitional families in PR2.

(link to CBS-local coverage of Frisco HOA dispute with City House)

 

Another Insignificant HOA Embezzlement?

guest blog by Deborah Goonan

Another isolated incident?

It seems like there are several reports of HOA theft and embezzlement each week. Sometimes it’s a rogue Board member writing checks to herself or buying himself a new car. But sometimes it’s the Community Association Manager skimming funds, as in this case in Georgia. Atlanta, Dunwoody, and Chamblee police departments are currently investigating up to twelve HOAs where Michael Sisson was hired to manage the communities’ operations and finances.

Yes, up to one dozen.

So far, Dunwoody police have filed charges against Sisson involving $180,000 in missing funds from two separate HOAs.  Hopefully, these HOAs had adequate insurance policies and were paid in full. No doubt they were relying on Sisson to pay the bills.

Anyone care to guess how much this investigation is going to cost taxpayers, including the ones who are fortunate enough not to live in one of these HOAs?

(link to news report about GA HOA embezzlements)

Thuggery in Fort Lauderdale

We did a blog here a month or two ago about the president/treasurer of a Fort Lauderdale HOA. Seems the neighbors are irked that this guy has written tens of thousands of  of dollars worth of ‘salary’ checks to himself. Then he got pretty cocky and used money from the neighborhood budget to buy himself a new car.

Well, police have finally seen fit to arrest the guy on a second class misdemeanor. A couple of observations, here. The most this guy can get is a 30 day jail term and six months probation. That’s not bad work at all, if you can find it.

Second observation. The story was broken by a TV reporter. That means (to me, anyway) that the news media are starting to discover a lucrative source of stories and on-camera confrontations among corrupt Homeowners Associations. We’ve got to remember the pioneer in this kind of TV journalism, Nevada’s Darcy Spears of the HOA Hall of Shame report.

(link to Florida arrest story)

 

Another HOA About to get Burned for Discrimination

The good news is that we’re beginning to hear of more and more cases around the country where the homeowner is winning against the HOA bullies. And one big source of those victories involves a Homeowners Association refusing to admit that it’s interfered with ADA laws. Even if you’re a powerful HOA, don’t try to smack down a federal agency that’s entrusted with protection of the handicapped. Still, the skulls of too many HOA board members and managers are too thick to beat common sense into.

We, here at Neighbors At War, are doing our best to keep the jackhammer fired up.

The latest case involves a family in Gilbert, Arizona, members of the Coronado Ranch Homeowners Assocation. Steven Vroman is confined to a wheelchair. His doctor recommended exercise like swimming. He built a small pool in his backyard, but then discovered that he had to be out of direct sunlight. His disease prevents his body from regulating its own temperature. And that could lead to a stroke. So Vroman put in a shade structure to allow his transition from the home into the pool without being subjected to the hot Arizona sun.

Well, the HOA board members, obviously feeling like they were taken advantage of, decided to put Vroman’s swimming pool project on hold, or as we used to say back in the days of telephone operators, “Put him on terminal hold.”

Month after month went by with no action on the part of the HOA. So Vroman has had to file a federal lawsuit.

A word to the wise at Coronado Ranch. You’re going to lose this one. You’ll spend a fortune in legal fees trying to jack this man around, and the federal courts will declare the whole lot of you to be losers. Total losers. You’ll have to pay Vroman’s legal bills as well. Then, sure as shootin’, you’ll each get his with a special assessment to pay for legal costs, damage awards and who knows what else. And you’ll each be getting a slap-in-the-face that all busy-body neighbors should have to endure.

http://www.azfamily.com/news/Gilbert-couple-suing-HOA-279380682.html