|
|
| |
Mark Hanna in Washington wrote:
"The additional problem seems to be a lack of will by the homeowners to force out those Directors who are no longer serving the community good."
Here in my HOA, and many others that I know about or have heard about, not being able to "force out" directors isn't always because of homeowners' "lack of will." It's because the boards of directors have "cabals" in place that can swing the vote any way they want to. (sigh)
"If you joined an association in a state that doesn't support such a provision, I recommend you conform rigidly or get out at your earliest convenience."
And where would an HOA homeowner go? These days, there isn't much for sale in housing other than in an HOA. So, while a homeowner can sell and move, he may be moving into an HOA which is worse than the one he just left. :-(
Posted Jan 20 2008 8:38PM CET
|
| |
|
| |
Jan Jackson
Florissant, Colorado |
| |
|
|
| |
Errant HOA Boards are only part of the problem. Every association I've lived in (California and Washington) had a provision either through the law or the governing documents to force a director out with a majority vote. Up to and including the board president, and no other reason or cause is required.
The additional problem seems to be a lack of will by the homeowners to force out those Directors who are no longer serving the community good. If you joined an association in a state that doesn't support such a provision, I recommend you conform rigidly or get out at your earliest convenience.
Posted Jan 18 2008 11:15PM CET
|
| |
|
| |
Mark Hanna
, Washington |
| |
|
|
| |
"Trickle-down" does not work! There are too many "drips" along the way :>)
Posted Jan 14 2008 1:26AM CET
|
| |
|
| |
Sharon Stephens
Montclair, California |
| |
|
|
| |
And, in my opinion, the proper party for 'appeal' in the injustices going on in some of these communities is actually their creators - the cities, and getting some redress and regulation at the state level by them since they have been the state entity primarily profiting from this communal land ownership.
Looking for solutions, perhaps, means addressing the actual perpetrators and source - giving neighbors 'fining' and 'seizure' rights over other citizens and neighbors, in my opinion also, was at it's outset an unconstitutional transfer of governmental powers, and the states needs to hold it's municipalities in using some of those excess revenues to assist with the solutions, and also being the most practical. Since the City of Phoenix ordinances themselves are even less stringent than the City of Scottsdale, and economic circumstances of the residents within those two cities even much different statistically - then the local municipal governments would be the best suit to provide impartial reviews, again, since even as bad as some of them have become, there definitely are those for whom the trade off in full property enjoyment and ownership rights are worth the esthetics, and perceived benefits of this shared ownership - especially those in condos and 'active livestyle' type retirement communities.
But fear that much more than bills regarding solar panels and the like will be needed to make them liveable and affordable for an increasing segment of the population as the ownership 'risks' have become more and more public.
Posted Jan 14 2008 1:07AM CET
|
| |
|
| |
Username withheld
Phoenix, Arizona |
| |
|
|
| |
Believe it or not, although from most and many of the postings here, and also with the enormity of the property thefts which are now going on both with the mortgage lending scams by some unsavory predatory lenders, and with the state of the HOA nightmare to date in the losses homeowners have experienced in getting effective laws with enough teeth in disclosure, licensure, regulation and accountability of Boards and their advisors who are actually the 'principals-in-fact' with the homeowners assets and property rights to leverage against them (not agents at all in most of these communities), and then even more of the abuses that have occurred throughout the state courts - there are STILL, believe it or not, a few ethical attorneys and judges who still do hold with 'the Rule of Law,' the state and federal constitutions.
They are getting rarer by the day, but many are also on the front, as are other former legal professionals, who are apalled at what has happened to our court and justice system, and are also fighting for changes in order that the public can be better served, and to weed out those who have damaged the public's trust. Since the public outcry has gained strength and momentum at least in the past 20 years - to have a Judge of the caliber of former Arizona Chief Justice John Molloy who has become an advocate for legal change, shows that there are still some within it that realize that justice denied has had major ramifications in both our high crime rates, and national cohesiveness and morale.
There are many raised where 'liberty and justice' were still the hallmarks of this nation, who have not lost that American spirit, who have worked within the system itself and experienced first hand it's flaws.
Here's hoping more average Americans and experienced warriors join in this year to come. This presidential election has been the first where even such concerns and the future of our nation, and disgust with what has occurred with both political parties has become one of the citizenrys major focus - more important even than the War in Iraq and 'jobs and the economy,' to those candidates who have been astute enough to have been listening. Candidates do say almost anything, and promise whatever will get them elected, that is a given. It appears the American people are becoming fed up with 'promises' and what to see 'action' and 'accountability.'
Am hoping also this dissatisfaction with the party structure and status quo will have a trickle down effect at the state and local levels also, as more Americans are speaking up and out about the 'abuses' of all levels of government at the present time.
Posted Jan 14 2008 12:48AM CET
|
| |
|
| |
Username withheld
Phoenix, Arizona |
| |
|
|
| |
Sharon,
You have not only suffered greatly under these fascist regimes called "homeowners associations," but you are also publicizing what happened to you -- even planning to write a book !! GO GIT 'EM, GAL !!! :-)
For me, the answer to these hell holes is not "reform." I believe the answer is to do away with them -- completely and permanently. I don't believe anything else will work over the long term.
As regards what you are calling "absolute and unaccountable power," our Colorado legislators could be poster children for that. They just recently introduced a new HOA bill which will do exactly that. Once it has passed both Houses and signed by the Governor, judges will take it and run with it.
And yes, the HOA attorneys (often CAI attorneys) are the secondary cause (after the legislators) of the ecological and financial disasters homeowners suffer.
You also wrote, "What may appear to be a board of accountability is in fact only a rubber-stamp group that gives credibility to the president's decisions, who in turn gives credibility to the management company, with the attorney dictating to them all."
Absolutely! And the poor homeowner ends up looking like the "troublemaker" they claim him or her to be.
You also wrote, "In a toxic atmosphere, with no freedom of speech allowed there is a deliberate effort by the powerful to force the powerless into submission. Voltaire expressed this beautifully when he said, It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong." Having had my freedom of speech taken away from me by a District Court judge, I understand -- from first-hand experience -- just how "dangerous" being "right" is.
You also wrote, "...we must do something to make changes in the law for those already living under the unconstitutionality and oppression in these little gulag-type communities." Absolutely! And I am in the process of doing that right now. Ramping up with a Constitutional Amendment petition signed by We The People to prohibit In the totalitarian-structure of a homeowner association (HOA), the board of directors can be allowed absolute and unaccountable power, and, this flaw-in-the-system has been repeatedly ignored in the offices of city and state governments, supported by often corrupt attorneys, and acknowledged in the courts by judges, who seemingly are not familiar with, or worse yet, ignore the laws that are in place to regulate homeowner associations.
Until changes can be made in The Davis-Stirling Law, and Corporation Code, and how association covenants (CC&Rs), and By Laws are written by the attorneys -- who have found a never ending cash-cow in homeowner association law -- the HOA Board will remain as what appears to be the absolute center, and in control of the association on a daily basis.
And, herein lies the dangerous potential for abuse:
The office of a board president is well insulated from reality and accountability by the attorneys, who are paid by association dues to protect the board -- not the homeowner, even though they are intended third-party beneficiary's in the association -- and, a management company, along with a board that the president is largely responsible for setting up, and thereby can also control. This authoritarian structure is especially dangerous under these conditions because it allows for a toxic-faith system that encourages free reign and no accountability by the board members.
When an authoritarian ruler picks his board, under the guise of what is suppose to be a democratic form of voting -- heavily influenced by the board president and his cohorts --he will pick minion-types who are easily manipulated and easily fooled, and perhaps easily brainwashed in to the process of a dictatorship. What may appear to be a board of accountability is in fact only a rubber-stamp group that gives credibility to the president's decisions, who in turn gives credibility to the management company, with the attorney dictating to them all.
This illusion of accountability becomes more dangerous than those organizations that blatantly disregard accountability.
These type of board members then become co-conspirators of the dictator, and permit the toxic leader to reign, and even to persecute others without interruption.
Then, if a practice is called into question by a homeowner, such as selectivity of the covenants, misspending and mismanagement, and even criminal behavior the now well-established persecuting board members justify the behavior by supporting each other in their decisions with a majority of approval in their practices, backed up by the management company and the attorneys, with retaliation against the complainer assured in this sort of regime.
There is no regulatory government office to record a complaint against an abusive board, or, to make an appeal to justice in the world of Corporation Code, and The Davis-Stirling Law when these dictatorships go astray. The homeowner is left to fight in the courts against the attorneys -- who uses the homeowner's own money from the association reserve funds -- chalking up thousands of dollars using the corruption of the law in the courts.
A healthy society allows for freedom of expression. It is when members of a society cannot express themselves without fear of repercussions that problems arise.
In a toxic atmosphere, with no freedom of speech allowed there is a deliberate effort by the powerful to force the powerless into submission. Voltaire expressed this beautifully when he said, It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
In an HOA, this phrase could be aptly applied as "It is dangerous to be right when the board president is wrong."
If a dictator-type board president feels that a homeowner is wrong -- for whatever the reason; it may just be the homeowner speaks out against the association structure -- the board president will set up a process, a hearing of sorts, to examine the question. (Please understand, I am not saying homeowners are never wrong, rather I am saying there is too much room for abuse in this all-too-often flawed process.) The hearing may appear fair and unbiased but in actuality, in a dictatorship it will be tainted by an obvious conflict of interest that comes from the reality that those in charge of making the decisions in the hearing process are appointed, and consequently rewarded in some way for going along with the board president.
In turn, the board president is rewarded in some way by the attorneys, and management companies, often with such things as vacations, luncheons, golf games, and perhaps even monetary kickbacks -- with no legal repercussions for bad behavior -- which makes for a false sense of rightful authority, or entitlement.
And, in this flawed system do authoritorian style boards often continue to harass and intimidate homeowners to keep them silent, and, into believing they have no way of fighting back.
Your also wrote, "...we must do something to make changes in the law for those already living under the unconstitutionality and oppression in these little gulag-type communities." Absolutely! And I am in the process of doing that right now. An amendment to our Colorado constitution which would prohibit any government entity from EVER being able to legally mandate that any group of homeowners MUST be organized into some sort of a legal "group."
Jan Jackson
Colorado HOA News
Posted Jan 13 2008 4:08AM CET
|
| |
|
| |
Jan Jackson
Florissant, Colorado |
| |
|
