Category Archives: lawsuit

What If I Told You?

What if I told you that a town in Pennsylvania had intentionally ignored federal ADA standards on nearly half of the homes built in a major development, would you believe it?

If you were told that this builder was allowed to intentionally ignore federal standards requiring wheelchair access to 100% of the new condos in this township, would you find that acceptable? Would you feel that a federal lawsuit might be justified?

Well, that’s what’s happening in a Bethlehem Township, where city inspectors intentionally ignored federal rules mandating wheelchair access on new condo developments. Developers have been allowed to run roughshod over laws that require protection for the handicapped. And yes, a lawsuit has been filed.

What’s going on in Pennsylvania, anyway?

(link to Express-Times story on ADA lawsuit)

 

California Does The Right Thing During Drought

We discussed this recently: the California bill to forbid Homeowners Associations from fining homeowners who allow their lawns to go brown.

The drought in the Southwest is historic, with water to Southern California all but going dry. The Central Valley is dry, the Colorado River is almost a dry basin. Commercial irrigation in much of the state has evaporated. People in Los Angeles County who suddenly can’t get drinking water from the tap are going to be astonished.

Despite the water disaster, arrogant HOA boards have been fining homeowners who don’t water their lawns enough. It took a state law to forbid HOAs, their management companies and their lawyers from ordering homeowners to ignore drought warnings. And now all those board members are whining that they have a new law they have to obey.

Strange that HOA boards can be so short-sighted. No concience, I guess.

But that’s why we keep electing them, right?

(link to story on drought legislation)

 

 

Peculiar, Peculiar

Well, other headline writers got to it first so I just have to settle once again for being a copycat.

But in the town of Peculiar, Missouri there’s a really bizarre thing happening. Actually, it’s quite scary if you consider all the implications.

A homeowner is trying to get a permit for an above ground swimming pool. City officials say such a pool would violate the rules of her Homeowners Association so they won’t grant such a permit. The crazy thing is that there ISN’T a Homeowners Association there.

One was planned by the original developer, but he went bankrupt before an HOA ever came about. So here is a government institution enforcing a ‘rule’ that was never actually imposed by a non-governmental non-existing institution.

Reason finally prevailed once the homeowner hired a lawyer. But it’s hard to find any reasonableness in the city officials quoted in the story linked below.

(A city tries to enforce a non-existent corporation’s proposed rules)

 

Separate Doors For The Rich & Poor

This story was outrageous when we first heard about it last year. It’s even more hideous now that New York officials have formally approved it. But the builders of luxury condominiums will be allowed to send residents of ‘affordable living’ units through the back door.

I still remember the segregated water fountains in my grade school in Texas. And I frequently asked my parents questions they had trouble answering.

But when the ritzy buildings go up in New York along with the required amount of affordable dwellings, all those ‘po folk’ will have to enter the building through a separate entrance. Can we say, “separate but equal?” That sure has an ugly sound to it.

(link to article on luxury condos)

 

Equal Voting Rights? You’re Kidding, Of Course!

guest blog by Deborah Goonan

What would you say if I told you that your neighbor voted for the Mayor of your city seven times in the last election? And what if you learned in the news that the owner of the apartment high rise downtown got 240 votes at the polls? What if your neighbor, going through hard times and behind on his property taxes, was turned away at the polls and denied his right to vote? Suppose there was a controversial referendum on the ballot, and lots of wealthy property owners got to cast one vote for each property they owned?

Chances are you would be indignant, as you should be.

But this is exactly the process used to elect your HOA Board of Directors  – that is, when there actually is an election – and how changes are made to your HOA CC&Rs (Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions), all those rules you must follow, or else.

Although your HOA may seem like local government, with the power to enforce penalties for various violations large and small, the fact is that your HOA is a legal corporation and not officially a government.

Therefore, the corporate voting model is used. Each property owned represents one share of the HOA, and gives the right to one vote. Unless, of course, you happen to be the Developer, in which case you have weighted votes – anywhere from three to nine votes per lot owned – during the time of construction and sale of homes. (Not that it matters for elections, because during Developer control, the Board is appointed, not elected. But it still matters for amendments to the CC&Rs.)

It doesn’t matter how many people live in your house, you still get only one vote, as long as you’re the owner. If you’re a tenant, you probably don’t get to vote at all, unless the HOA allows the owner to allocate his or her vote to a tenant.

What about that real estate investor, a friend of the Board President who just purchased 40 homes or condos in your HOA? She gets 40 votes, one for each property. It doesn’t matter that she doesn’t actually live in the community, that she’s an absentee landlord who doesn’t even manage her properties or monitor her tenants (other than to collect rent). She still gets 40 votes to your measly one vote.

As for your next-door neighbor who’s behind on her assessments due to unforeseen medical bills, and the neighbor down the street who hasn’t paid a fine for that stubborn brown spot in his lawn: their votes are not counted! Never mind that the poll tax was declared unconstitutional in 1964, with the ratification of the 24th amendment, because corporations do not necessarily have to guarantee shareholders Constitutional protections.

How might this lopsided allocation of voting rights affect your next Board election? Now imagine what will happen when the Board wants to relax rental restrictions. Who has more votes in your HOA – the full-time owner-residents or the bulk buying landlord-investors?

Contrast this to the more democratic process in conventional American communities, where each citizen who is registered to vote gets but ONE vote, regardless of income level, tax delinquency status, or number of properties owned.

The corporate allocation of voting rights practically guarantees inequity in HOAs.

Welcome to the neighborhood.