Category Archives: HOA

CAI Video

Hoo, boy! In the interests of covering both sides, here’s a link to CAI’s recent promotional video. As you watch this, keep in mind that this 501c3 ‘non-profit’ organization is all about referrals, referring the personal savings of homeowners into the pockets of lawyers, property managers and others who pay dues to the CAI. There are massive profits being made through referrals from this ‘non-profit.’ I also note the connection with Associa, owned by the ethics-challenged state senator from Texas. It’s stomach-turning.

CAI is all about neighborhood governance without our historic Constitutional protections. Your home is your castle? Not when your castle is actually governed by a profit-motivated private corporation.

(link to CAI video)

 

Are HOA & Condo Residents Really Happy?

Ward’s note:
A lot of CAI members furtively log onto this site just to see what we’re all talking about. I know, because I can track their IP addresses. With this in mind, today’s guest blogger, Deborah Goonan, has an astounding look at CAI’s recent and incredibly deceptive survey of homeowner happiness. Spread this one to every legislator!

 

guest blog by Deborah Goonan

According to Community Associations Institute, “The more than 65 million Americans who make their homes in condominiums and homeowners associations are overwhelmingly satisfied with their communities.”

The survey was done by Public Opinion Strategies for the Foundation for Community Association Research. The survey says almost two-thirds of community association residents rate their overall association experience as positive, while 26 percent are neutral on the question. Only 10 percent express some level of dissatisfaction.

Yes, we all know the spin on survey research funded by CAI, conducted by affiliates. What would be more interesting is if an impartial organization would conduct surveys of CIC residents, asking non-leading questions, and addressing more specific issues affecting residents in CICs.

This research does not even encompass basic demographic data on CIC residents such as age ranges, income ranges, geographic distribution, the number of years they have resided in a CIC, how mobile the residents are, education levels, etc. The survey asks mostly subjective questions, and allows more than one in four respondents to remain neutral on level of overall satisfaction! Less than 2 out of 3 respondents rated their CIC experience as positive. I would reject a hotel or restaurant rated at only 64% positive. And had I seen this survey before purchasing – not the news release but the survey summary – it would have steered me away from an HOA.

One can just as easily conclude from 2014 data that 36% of residents are either dissatisfied or neutral – neutral ratings can be construed as meaning that if a better option presents itself, the resident would move elsewhere. (A moot point in metro areas where very few non-CIC options exist). At least that is the way most market research is interpreted. Incidentally, comparing 2012 and 2014 data on supposed overall satisfaction, one notes that the positive rating dropped by nearly 9% (from 70%to 64%).

At the same time, respondents rating their overall CIC experience as negative increased by 25% ( from 8% to 10%). Neutrals increased by 15% (from 22% to 26%). If we combine neutrals with negatives, and compare to 2012, there has been a 20% increase (from 30% to 36%) in the number of residents who cannot rate their overall experience as positive.

By the way, if we are to conclude these percentages translate to the entire population of CIC residents, that means that 6.5 MILLION CIC residents are decidedly dissatisfied. (10% of 65 million). An additional 16.9 million CIC residents are sitting on the fence, or they have mixed feelings about their communities.

These are not small numbers. And the survey has not even touched on several important issues:

* How many residents own vs. rent?

* How many owners are underwater on a mortgage?

* How old is the community where they reside?

* How many residents live in the respondents community?

* What amenities do they have, and which of those do they use regularly?

* How many units does each respondent own? (Very relevant, and it would be interesting to correlate satisfaction with level of financial interest in a CIC)

* What factors led to the resident’s decision to buy or rent in their current community?

* If they could move elsewhere, would they?

* Did they purchase their home directly, or inherit it?

* Knowing what they now know, would they buy/rent in their same community, or would they choose a different community, perhaps not in a CIC?

*  How about measuring the level of knowledge CIC residents have?

An educational organization, which CAI claims to be, might want to know: how many CIC residents have read their governing documents? (Or are even aware of their existence?)

* How many are familiar with their relevant statutes?

* Have residents ever attended a meeting, and if so how often?

* Do they vote in elections, or is the developer still in control?

* Do the residents even know whether their Board is Developer-appointed or Owner-controlled?

* Do they know the rules? Do they know how votes are allocated and how they are cast?

* Do they know what to do if they are having trouble paying assessments?

* Are they aware that the CIC can lien or foreclose their home?

* Do they know their legal rights in the event they get a violation notice, or if the Association fails to maintain or repair common areas per the CCRs?

Lots of questions. Not many answers.

(link to CAI survey summary)

 

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)