A valuable societal goal or un-American activities?

March 17, 2004

By George K. Staropoli (View author info)
Copyright George K. Staropoli 2004

In the March 17th edition of the East Valley Tribune (Arizona),opposing commentaries by Pat Hauff and Lee Wallace presented the essentially differing views about homeowner associations.

Pat talks about constitutional rights and the loss of freedoms, rights and protections afforded other citizens not living in an association. She talks about an "unconstitutional statute", the "law took away the protection of homestead exemption from only those homeowners living in HOAs", and "the fact ... is not disclosed in the sale".

Lee talks about volunteer boards serving the community, maintaining property values and so contributing to the general well being of the community, both within the association and beyond. Yet Lee resorts to such terms as "A stagnated group of complainers", "they are free to leave", "the HOA protects our property values", "we all pay our fair share" and "is it fair to the majority of us law-abiding residents"

As a homeowner rights activist myself, I must point out that laws are made for all of us and for all to be treated equally, which is not the case with HOAs. It is quite clear, from the very beginning with the unconscionable adhesion contract being upheld in the courts, the statutes that serve to reinforce the onerous CC&Rs and thereby "validate" these unjust laws, to the claim that HOAs are private organizations and the US Constitution and Bill of Rights do not apply.

However, it is a general principle of law and the American system of justice, fairness and government to rule any contract contrary to the public interest, such as unconscionable adhesion contracts, and subject to misrepresentation, to be unenforceable and null and void. Yet, they are not when it comes to HOAs. Why not?

Are proponents of HOAs justifying the these violations of rights and freedoms in order to attain better property values for private organizations? That the government's mandating of HOAs is not a form of fascism or national or local socialism, but is the only way to achieve these societal goals, determined by a few profit-seeking groups, and that they are highly advantageous to society?

We must remember that this is America. And in America a defective product or a highly favored goal of a select few must still be subject to the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and laws of the land. And if not, then another method, a more just, fair and legitimate method needs to be found. And that method has existed here in America since 1787 with the adoption of the Constitution of the US, and it's called civil government, not private government.

There is no reason for mandating the governance of a subdivision to a private group without governmental oversight and regulation, while not providing for those basic protections of our rights. No reason whatsoever. And the "battles" in the legislature over the past 5 years in Arizona has been precisely over out rights as Americans.

Click this link for more inoformation on author, George K. Staropoli