HOA Regulator

Helen,

What you may not realize is that many individuals in Associations want less regulation.
States that are heavily regulated (CA and FL come to mind) have, I believe, more issues then those States that are less regulated.

Something to keep in mind is that Associations are formed and based on Contract law and Corporate law. These laws are civil laws. Civil laws are designed to be enforced by the parties involved and, if needed, the courts (by one party bringing another party to court to resolve the issue).

I am sad to hear that you believe that HOAs were given all the power. The only power an Assocaition has comes from the governing documents (CC&Rs, Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws). Those documents, mostly, can be amended by the membership. Therefore, if you don't like the power your Association has, gather support from amongst your neighbors and amend the governing documents to remove that power.

Unfortunately, many members don't want to become involved in the Association. There are many reasons why that happens. Regardless of the reasons why, by not being involved, those members are letting those who are willing to become involved make the decisions for them.

I'll use my own Association as an example. We just had our Annual meeting. At that meeting, out of 130 lots, 21 were represented in person, and 5 of those were existing Board members. This means that the other 109 lots were letting 21 votes decide how the Association would be ran. Our hardest document to amend is the CC&Rs. It requires 87 votes to amend. If those 109 individuals who didn't showup at the meeting, banded together they could rewrite all of the governing documents.

Therefore, I agree with you that "if we all came together" changes could be made. However, I believe that the changes should be made internally rather than externally.

Unfortunately in some associations there will never be a coming together and a homeowner's only choice is to put some external pressure on the association to force the BOD to abide by the laws of the state. I am all for some regulation. Iowa doesn't even have an open meeting law.

I have been trying to get my state legislators to pass, at the very least, an open meetings law. So far without success. Iowa's legislative session will begin again in January and I plan to contact them again. Sometimes change is slow but I feel I need to keep my issue on the legislatures' radar.

My association is very small and I have given up trying to get on the BOD. The BOD manages to recruit someone else to serve to keep me off. Some of these folks are new to the development and have no clue as to what the BOD is doing or has done that may be unethical or down right illegal. They get a one-sided view from current board members and base their opinions on that information alone. No one currently serving seems to have any objectivity or to explore issues from all sides. It's become an association of "you are either with us or you or not." If you are not, you get labeled a troublemaker and a kook and no one listens to you. So my point is sometimes one must seek some external intervention.

Florida and California may be extreme but Iowa has nothing for stand alone homes except their nonprofit corporation code. I am seeking a basic open meetings law to start. Saying to just take control of your association is oversimplifying things.

Banks have you tried getting your fellow homeowners to amend your documents to require open meetings?

Banks, I understand your point. I was also labeled a kook, not just privately but publicly at an annual meeting. However, the membership continued to read my newsletters and, over time (took three years), the membership started asking the same questions I was asking (in fact, it happened at the meeting where I was called a kook).

I was trying to form an HOA and a lawyer called me a threatened me with a restraining order if I didn't stop talking to my neighbors. He even sent me a letter stating the same on his nice business letter head. Who called the lawyer and told him I was trying to form an HOA meeting ? What is the big deal? I want to move from here.

Homeowners have complete and final discretion as to whether HOA membership is for them - it's a free marketplace to buy and sell homes.
Also, an HOA Board Regulation Board would not fill the void created because homeowners won't be bothered with being active in their immediate community's affairs. Third, a dues payer's vote holds the HOA board accountable....on the terms of the dues payer.

HOA boards are acting with accountability when they take legal action to maintain revenue collection (Liens, lawyers, etc). It's the only way the system works. On this forum, we, too, like HOAs when they're fair and constructive. There's nothing more frustrating than incompetent boards of directors or dues payers who don't want to pay for the neighborhood they enjoy.

I oppose a board that regulates HOA boards when dues payers get mad...especially since HOA boards are elected.

Argue if you want to, but this nation just had the LOWEST voter turnout in history. People were supposed to vote for folk in the state legislature, Congress, the city council and so on to make decisions that will impact your life now and in the future, as well as your children and beyond. If people won't get off their duff and vote for THEM (regardless of your party or no party at all), what else can you expect when people in a HOA don't take time to watch the watchers?

You don't say how large your HOA is, but every time I read "the same group has been in power for X number of years," I continue to ask where the hell are the other homeowners? You mean to tell me 3, 5, 7 or whatever number of people have managed to whip 50, 100, 500 homeowners into submission? The power is not with the board, it's with the homeowners who elect them (or not). Threat of being expelled? That might work if the homeowners vote you out - otherwise stay and be the thorn in everyone's side. It's your home and community too, and that should be worth fighting for.

Others have noted elsewhere on this site that HOAs are popular with local governments because the HOAs are responsible for common areas like streets and sidewalks - things the city or county would normally have to care for. Put all this in the hands of a HOA and still get to collect property taxes too? What a deal!

HOAs are mini-governments in a sense, and you're right that a lot of people don't really understand what they're getting into when they sign up, so I agree the seller needs to be held responsible for informing the buyer - whether the buyer pays attention or asks questions is another matter (you can't always protect people from themselves). And I also agree some areas are in need of state regulations regarding things like access to documents and open meetings. But in the end, it's up to the HOMEOWNERS themselves to decide what kind of community they want and then act accordingly. No one cares more for your home than you and given the time and trouble you went through to get it, why leave part of your quality of life in the hands of people you don't know from a sack of caca?

Some people say there shouldn't be any HOAs and perhaps that's where the government should move towards. But be careful of what you wish for - in some cases, no HOA may mean you'll have to put up with the pink house next door, the yard/mini landfill across the street and the people around the corner who throw really loud raves every damn weekend. For the city or county to help with those kinds of problems will mean more staff and resources, and therefore more tax revenue. If you're ok with that, bring it on.

I am thinking Helen has issues about how her "system" works but no understanding as to how the system does works.