Do Homeowners' Associations go overboard?

[Monetto]

DENVER (Nov. 26) - A homeowners association in southwestern Colorado has threatened to fine a resident $25 a day until she removes a Christmas wreath with a peace sign that some say is an anti-Iraq war protest or a symbol of Satan.


AP / Handout
Homeowners association president Bob Kearns ordered the five architectural control committee members to require the wreath's removal. When they refused, concluding it was merely a seasonal symbol, Kearns fired them.

Some residents who have complained have children serving in Iraq, said Bob Kearns, president of the Loma Linda Homeowners Association in Pagosa Springs. He said some residents have also believed it was a symbol of Satan. Three or four residents complained, he said.

"Somebody could put up signs that say drop bombs on Iraq. If you let one go up you have to let them all go up," he said in a telephone interview Sunday.

Lisa Jensen said she wasn't thinking of the war when she hung the wreath. She said, "Peace is way bigger than not being at war. This is a spiritual thing."

Jensen, a past association president, calculates the fines will cost her about $1,000, and doubts they will be able to make her pay. But she said she's not going to take it down until after Christmas.

"Now that it has come to this I feel I can't get bullied," she said. "What if they don't like my Santa Claus."

The association in this 200-home subdivision 270 miles southwest of Denver has sent a letter to her saying that residents were offended by the sign and the board "will not allow signs, flags etc. that can be considered divisive."

The subdivision's rules say no signs, billboards or advertising are permitted without the consent of the architectural control committee.

Kearns ordered the committee to require Jensen to remove the wreath, but members refused after concluding that it was merely a seasonal symbol that didn't say anything. Kearns fired all five committee members.

thoughts?

[brickell]

yes they can go overboard. So can condo boards, city councils and the house of represenatives. This is clearly the case of one person with more power than they deserve.

[BTinSF]

The simple answer to your question is, "Of course they do". But that doesn't mean they aren't necessary.

I presently own two homes that are subject to Homeowners' Associations. One is a highrise in downtown San Francisco, the other a single-story home in Arizona. I spent 6 years on the HOA board in San Francisco, 2 as president. I can see both sides of the question.

Part of the problem is that in any association, 90%+ of the homeowners don't want the work or responsibility of serving on the board. I am in that category now for both the associations I belong to. I feel like I've done my time in hell. But you do have people, too often people have a need for the power they feel being on the board gives them, who get entrenched on boards due to the apathy of everyone else and who ultimately lose perspective.

You also can get some naive people who can't distinguish between serving on a homeowners' board and being in, say the US Senate. They think being on the board gives them a mandate to regulate any aspect of the members lives in which they take an interest. But, of course, it doesn't and these people can get in big trouble. In one of my associations, the board recently decided to contract with a waste company to pick up garbage throughout the neighborhood. Immediately, of course, some residents expressed a preference for another hauler and soon somebody pointed out that nowhere in the CC&R's did the board have control of garbage pickup. Now we have a situation where the hauler with a contract the board probably had no authority to sign might sue for breach of that contract--all because the board members weren't sufficiently familiar with (or simply didn't understand) their own CC&R's.

IMHO, HOA boards are wise to adhere to the principle that "he who governs best, governs least" but not many do because forcing other people to behave as you want and spending their money can be fun.

[BroncoCSU05]

if pagosa springs wasn't 6 hours away, i'd go down there myself and bitchslap someone

[BnaBreaker]

A homeowners association in southwestern Colorado has threatened to fine a resident $25 a day until she removes a Christmas wreath with a peace sign that some say is an anti-Iraq war protest or a symbol of Satan.

Okay, my quick answer to the question is yes. But more importantly, THESE PEOPLE ARE INSANE! :koko:

[hauntedheadnc]

if pagosa springs wasn't 6 hours away, i'd go down there myself and bitchslap someone

Did you have someone specific in mind, or were you going to just pull up, roll down the window, and yell until someone came over?

Let's all try to picture that, shall we? :whip:

[Dalreg]

Anyone know how to contact this lady? I'll donate money to the cause. As stated above some people consider these associations as an excuse to go on a power trip.

Maybe Mr. Kearns should be the one that we find and bitch slap!

[Chicago103]

Okay, my quick answer to the question is yes. But more importantly, THESE PEOPLE ARE INSANE! :koko:

Ditto! A symbol of Satan?! Is that just the standard exuse that dumbfucks use when they see something they dont agree with or doesnt make sense to them? Why cant idiocy be outlawed in this country? Or better yet just enforce free speech laws and everything will be fine. A board president firing all members of the committee? Is that a common power that board presidents have? Sounds like this guy is just someone that has an otherwise petty boring life and being board president fullfills his Neopolianic complex.

[tackledspoon]

See, the funny thing about this thread is that you ask a general question and then give a single article about a very specific instance. This particular homeowners' association went overboard and I'm sure plenty of others have, but I'm sure there are a few decent ones too. This article doesn't say anything about homeowners' associations in general.

[Chicago103]

See, the funny thing about this thread is that you ask a general question and then give a single article about a very specific instance. This particular homeowners' association went overboard and I'm sure plenty of others have, but I'm sure there are a few decent ones too. This article doesn't say anything about homeowners' associations in general.

Even though I often believe in a fair amount of government intervention on the federal and local level (and I do think HOA's are govermments) when it comes to HOA's or COA's I believe in the phrase ""he who governs best, governs least". Unfortunatly alot of these so called "conservatives" have the exact opposite view that I do, they hate paying taxes for anything that could possibly benefit anyone besides themselves on the federal, state or local level and yet when it comes to their own little world they support almost gestapo like HOA boards that they love to serve on. To some of these people a dictatorship is justified as long as it has the label "private" on it, anything with the word "public" no matter how benevolent is just an afront by pinko commie liberal elites.

[urbanlife]

yes, which is why when I once owned a condo, I stayed far away from these people. They had to hunt me down when they needed residents to vote on something. And people were more divided on ideas that our past couple presidential elections.

[edluva]

taken together, HOAs have helped dictate LA's political and physcial landscape for most of the city's relevant history. They've banned subways, elected congressmen, swayed councils, determined developments, etc.

[perss2000]

Reason seems to have prevailed after all.....

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/11/28/peace.wreath.ap/index.html

DENVER, Colorado (AP) -- A subdivision has withdrawn its threat of $25 daily fines against a homeowner who put a Christmas wreath shaped like a peace sign on the front of her home.

Homeowner Lisa Jensen told The Associated Press on Monday that the board of directors of the Loma Linda Homeowners Association had apologized, called the incident a misunderstanding and had withdrawn its request for the wreath's removal.

Jensen was ordered to take the wreath down when some residents in her 200-home subdivision saw it as a protest of the Iraq war. Bob Kearns, president of the board, also said some saw it as a symbol of Satan.

The homeowners' association demanded Jensen remove the wreath from her house, saying it doesn't allow flags or signs that are considered divisive.

None of the three members of the board in the scenic town 270 miles southwest of Denver was available for comment late Monday. Kearns and colleague Jeff Heitz both had their phone numbers changed to unlisted numbers Monday. Tammy Spezze, the third board member, did not return a call seeking comment.

Jensen, a past association president, said she was overwhelmed with hundreds of calls of support and offers to help her pay the $1,000 fine that would be due if she kept the wreath up until after Christmas.

"We would like to thank everyone who has contacted us with moral support and offers of financial support. We are grateful to hundreds of complete strangers who felt so moved by this story they contacted us," she said.

"It seems whenever someone tries to say 'Peace on Earth' it is met with so much resistance," she said. "The incredible amount of support we have received over the last couple of days really is proof to us of how many people believe in peace and in our right to say it."

[AZheat]

I used to be opposed to Home Owner's Associations until I moved to Phoenix. It's true that they can get too powerful and come up with ridiculous rules but that's not typical from what I've seen. I live in a neighborhood with an HOA and you don't see yards with weeds, cars on blocks, ridiculous paint colors on houses, etc. If you don't want to live in an area with homeowners or renters who let their houses and yards totally go to hell and there's nothing you can do about it you'll begin to appreciate the positive side of HOA's. One trashed out property can bring down the value of a whole neighborhood and that's something to consider.

[Dalreg]

Yep I will take the trashed yard over the gestappo any day. I didn't buy my home to make money I bought it so I can live the way I want to.

[Stephenapolis]

Some of these HOA's are run by mini-Stalins. They have their own agenda and nobody should stand in their way. ;)
Fortunately most are not this way. But the ones that are give the rest a bad name. I know people that have had nothing but good come from their HOA's. As to keeping rules and regulations about how a property looks, a city can and should do the smae thing. When I was a homeowner my community had very clear do's and don't's on what is acceptable. From length of grass to vehicles in your driveway. You were given a warning and a timeframe to fix any infractions, and if there was an issue the city was good at looking into the problem and assiting in a fix.

[village person]

^You know, it seems like municipalities should be responsible for the very things HOAs are meant to do and should eliminate the need for HOAs altogether. Afterall, I'd rather have elected officials telling me what I can and can't do than my neighbors.

But there is a fun, new kind of justice for such abuses of power. Mr. Kearns already has a wonderful little wikipedia article (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=120677&page=4) about himself. :haha: It doesn't get any better than that!

[seaskyfan]

A friend who lives in a condo on Seattle's Capitol Hill was told by the HOA that her car was too ugly to park in the underground garage.

She staged a coup and is now the head of the HOA.

[fflint]

According to my property law professor, more than 50 million Americans live with these kinds of CCRs, and the courts haven't yet decided how to handle disputes between homeowners and their associations. Right now they generally treat these CCRs as enforceable contracts, but some courts want to treat these associations as private governments subject to Constitutional authority--meaning some courts would prefer not to enforce restraints on free speech like flag flying, peace wreaths, etc. It's all up in the air. It won't be forever, though.

My guess is this particular association's interpretation of the rule against signage and advertising as including a holiday wreath wouldn't hold up even under basic contract law, so they dropped it.

[Chicago103]

According to my property law professor, more than 50 million Americans live with these kinds of CCRs, and the courts haven't yet decided how to handle disputes between homeowners and their associations. Right now they generally treat these CCRs as enforceable contracts, but some courts want to treat these associations as private governments subject to Constitutional authority--meaning some courts would prefer not to enforce restraints on free speech like flag flying, peace wreaths, etc. It's all up in the air. It won't be forever, though.

My guess is this particular association's interpretation of the rule against signage and advertising as including a holiday wreath wouldn't hold up even under basic contract law, so they dropped it.

I am not a law student but I am of the opinion that HOA's are governments subject to federal, state and municipal laws that supersede them. To me even city hall's authority is above that of a HOA.

[brickell]

The question is not if they are subject to the laws. Everybody is. It's whether they can create their own rules, which, if not unlawful, are borderline unconstitutional.

[glowrock]

An even bigger problem is that HOA's have essentially been FORCED upon most people looking to buy a house or condo. There are nearly NO new developments (or even developments in the last 10 years or so) that don't have an HOA associated with them, meaning anyone looking for a new or recently-built home is shit out of luck unless they build a custom home out in the country somewhere... :(

Aaron (Glowrock)

[Chicago103]

An even bigger problem is that HOA's have essentially been FORCED upon most people looking to buy a house or condo. There are nearly NO new developments (or even developments in the last 10 years or so) that don't have an HOA associated with them, meaning anyone looking for a new or recently-built home is shit out of luck unless they build a custom home out in the country somewhere... :(

Aaron (Glowrock)

If you want to buy in a highrise like I do and currently rent you basically must be a part of a HOA, but I view them in highrises as a necessary evil. In terms of non high rises your best bet in a place like Chicago would be to go to the traditional urban neighborhoods with single family homes, in some of the outer neighborhoods of Chicago there is small infill housing here and there were there is a vacant lot or teardown. Next door to my grandma's house there used to be this big two flat that was torn down and it was replaced by two new bungalows, the same thing is happening in vacant lots accross the neighborhood and those are not attached to any HOA.

Some conservatives love to bitch about the freedoms restricted by zoning laws but I would take the restrictions of a big city city hall over your typical HOA any day. In just about any place in this big city of Chicago that is not under the control of HOA's you have far more freedom over your property than your typical suburban subdivision under a HOA.

[zilfondel]

Idiotic. I'd burn down Kearns' house if I was the lady.

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2006/US/11/28/peace.wreath.ap/story.peace.wreath.ap.jpg

[themaguffin]

Well i guess that O'Reilly was right, there is a war on Christmas, but somehow I don't see him rushing to cover this story...

[Chicago103]

I used to be opposed to Home Owner's Associations until I moved to Phoenix. It's true that they can get too powerful and come up with ridiculous rules but that's not typical from what I've seen. I live in a neighborhood with an HOA and you don't see yards with weeds, cars on blocks, ridiculous paint colors on houses, etc. If you don't want to live in an area with homeowners or renters who let their houses and yards totally go to hell and there's nothing you can do about it you'll begin to appreciate the positive side of HOA's. One trashed out property can bring down the value of a whole neighborhood and that's something to consider.

Protecting property values is something that sounds good on paper but in practice it can become a very arbitrary thing because where do you draw the line? It often gets pity to the point that its no longer about property rights it just becomes about people not liking certain colors, certain types of fences and ornamentation, and even cars that they deem "ugly", I mean come on. It just becomes a dicatorship where people want to impose their tastes on other people, a city government may prevent you from building a McMansion on a vacant city lot or do some mega expansion on your house but to me a much bigger restriction on freedom is someone telling you what type of fence to have, what color to paint your house, the number of people you can have in single family detached homes, how many pets you can have, what decorations to put up and the size of the flag you can fly. People talk about the dangers of regulating morality, well this is the regulation of taste.

Also its about carving america into tiny enclaves of homogenaity that care about nothing but themselves, this especially applies to gated communities with HOA's, people that have contempt for the larger community and in some cases want to have as little to do with it as possible. Oftentimes the most petty and aggressive HOA board members are wannabe dictators with pathetic lives that dont have what it takes to attain positions of true power elsewhere and they compensate for this inferiority complex by telling their neighbors how to live and besides in many of these exurbs there is little else to bring meaning to their lives anyways.

[brickell]

It just becomes a dicatorship where people want to impose their tastes on other people, a city government may prevent you from building a McMansion on a vacant city lot or do some mega expansion on your house but to me a much bigger restriction on freedom is someone telling you what type of fence to have, what color to paint your house, the number of people you can have in single family detached homes, how many pets you can have, what decorations to put up and the size of the flag you can fly. People talk about the dangers of regulating morality, well this is the regulation of taste.


Maybe it's different in Chicago, but many municipalities, big and small, absolutely have laws regulating fences, house colors, how many and what kind of pets you can have, what you can put in your yard, where you park etc. Coral Gables in Miami area is the most strict I've seen. You can't park a pick-up in your driveway. Every place I've ever lived though has regulated fences, driveways, yards, etc. . .

[Chicago103]

Maybe it's different in Chicago, but many municipalities, big and small, absolutely have laws regulating fences, house colors, how many and what kind of pets you can have, what you can put in your yard, where you park etc. Coral Gables in Miami area is the most strict I've seen. You can't park a pick-up in your driveway. Every place I've ever lived though has regulated fences, driveways, yards, etc. . .

I am not sure about regulations on fences, but I have seen all kinds of fences on residential lots in Chicago, the most standard being the simple metal chain link fence though. In terms of pets, sure you cant have cattle or anything crazy like that but I do know there is no regulations on the number of cats and dogs like they do in some subdivisions, nor would I think the city would want to enforce such rules. Thats the beauty of living in a big city I guess, laws regulating petty things you have inside your house are very impractical from an enforcement standpoint, and where the police are busy dealing with gang activity in certain high crime areas who has time to care?

[richb]

Don't forget that in most types of developments like condos, you have to have a homeowners association. How else does common area maintenance upgrading and remodeling get done? Thats the reason most of these boards were started in the first place.
A good board that takes good care of the property at a reasonable price can make for a excellent place to live, where a bad one can devalue the property as much as having the neighbor with the junk cars.

You can tell alot about a board by the physical condition of the property. A development from the 70's that still has the original roof etc is a board with big problems. They are most likely run by the cheapskates in the buildings who don't believe they have to replace anything (somehow they always manage to live in the condos without the leaks and such). Its not a bad thing if you are a cheapskate but if you aren't life can be rough (probably because you are the chump with the leaking 70's roof over you).

In the cases of the new single family home subdivisions. They happen because today, towns will not take care of ponds, retention areas, wetland areas, entry signs and landscaping, open areas and buffer zones but still require they are built so they have to be maintained by somebody. Its not so bad if you think about it because the user (the homeowner of that subdivision) is the one that pays, its not all the town taxpayers. Why would I need to pay the maintenance on the entry sign on a someones elses subdivision when my subdivision doesn't even have one etc. Most suburbs have very small budgets so that cannot deal with much more then what they do already.

The problem with homeowner associations is that they grow in scope, you go from basic maintenance to every little problem in the building or neighborhood. If nobody wants to do it or it is so political , the residents should get a management firm to manage the property. A third party can shed new light on a lot of problems.

[Xelebes]

I have never seen an HOA in Edmonton... though I think I have seen COA's or something.

[AZheat]

Chicago103,
You do bring up some legitimate concerns about HOA's and I agree with alot of what you're saying but let me give an example of how they can be positive. When I first moved down here and was looking at houses I remember one particular house in Tempe that didn't have an HOA and really looked nice from the photos on the realtor's website. It was really close to my job and appeared to be in very good shape so my realtor was wondering why it had been on the market for such a long time. When we drove up to the front of the house it looked really nice but the house to the right of it had a piece of junk car sitting on blocks in the middle of the yard. There were weeds all over the place and to top it off there was a big window in front where they'd put one of those rebel flags to use as a curtain. I didn't even bother going inside the house. I wouldn't want to live next door that pig. That's the sort of thing I'm talking about. The guy who was trying to sell his nice house was having a hard time doing it because of his redneck slob of a neighbor. It seems to me that the answer is to limit the authority of HOA's and not let them turn into a little dictatorship. Their only purpose should be to protect homeowners from neighbors who let their own property get run down which affects the whole neighborhood.

[Chicago103]

Chicago103,
You do bring up some legitimate concerns about HOA's and I agree with alot of what you're saying but let me give an example of how they can be positive. When I first moved down here and was looking at houses I remember one particular house in Tempe that didn't have an HOA and really looked nice from the photos on the realtor's website. It was really close to my job and appeared to be in very good shape so my realtor was wondering why it had been on the market for such a long time. When we drove up to the front of the house it looked really nice but the house to the right of it had a piece of junk car sitting on blocks in the middle of the yard. There were weeds all over the place and to top it off there was a big window in front where they'd put one of those rebel flags to use as a curtain. I didn't even bother going inside the house. I wouldn't want to live next door that pig. That's the sort of thing I'm talking about. The guy who was trying to sell his nice house was having a hard time doing it because of his redneck slob of a neighbor. It seems to me that the answer is to limit the authority of HOA's and not let them turn into a little dictatorship. Their only purpose should be to protect homeowners from neighbors who let their own property get run down which affects the whole neighborhood.

The problem with that is people are idiots if they let the condition of one bad apple to spoil their impression of the whole neighborhood and especially the house they are going to buy. Now considering people are often a collective bunch of idiots in regards to this it affects the housing market and a house can lose its value based on a bad apple in the neighborhood. So that puts people in a dilemma, people like me dont particularly care too much about a bad apple house in and of itself but it is in my economic self interest to care about such things, so basically we are pressured to alter our lives because of masses of idiots that unfortunatly affect the free market society.

[Exodus]

I used to be opposed to Home Owner's Associations until I moved to Phoenix. It's true that they can get too powerful and come up with ridiculous rules but that's not typical from what I've seen. I live in a neighborhood with an HOA and you don't see yards with weeds, cars on blocks, ridiculous paint colors on houses, etc. If you don't want to live in an area with homeowners or renters who let their houses and yards totally go to hell and there's nothing you can do about it you'll begin to appreciate the positive side of HOA's. One trashed out property can bring down the value of a whole neighborhood and that's something to consider.People should have a right to paint their house any damn color they want. They paid or are paying for it. As for the other shit mentioned, that's why cities have ordinances.:rolleyes:

[AZheat]

I guess I'm supposed to feel oppressed or something since I live in a neighborhood with an HOA but I don't. I like living in an area that's well cared for. It's interesting that so many people on this forum criticize people for not being socially responsible for driving gas guzzling vehicles, not using mass transit, wasting natural resources, etc. but here you are defending a homeowners right to infringe on his neighbors by living like a fucking pig.:D

[crisp444]

Coral Gables in Miami area is the most strict I've seen. You can't park a pick-up in your driveway.

You can't park a pickup truck in your driveway, but that doesn't stop people from parking their BMW's and Mercedes' in their green lawns. :shrug:

[fflint]

People should have a right to paint their house any damn color they want. They paid or are paying for it. As for the other shit mentioned, that's why cities have ordinances.:rolleyes:
People have that right, and if they wish to retain it they shouldn't contract it away when they buy a home.

[AZheat]

I can agree with some of the points about what color to paint your house but I think there should be some reasonable limitation. I've lived in two HOA neighborhoods and I thought they were reasonable about most things but I also think they go overboard on the paint selection. Both HOA's have specific colors you have to choose from and although there is a large selection I agree that this is going too far. After all, they're not paying my mortgage payments, I am. However, if my next door neighbor wanted to paint his house some bizarre shade of neon purple I'd be upset about it. This gets into an issue of personal taste and I'm honestly not sure how it should be handled or if it really should be addressed at all.
What I do support is the efforts by HOA's to make people keep their property appearance looking good and that includes weeds, junk laying around the yard, trashed out cars on the lawn, etc. I don't feel that's unreasonable at all and this is something that HOA's do tend to enforce and city ordinances don't seem to get the job done. I think we've all agreed that HOA's can really go overboard and get into areas that should be none of their business. My basic point is that I feel I have certain obligations as a homeowner to keep up my property for the general good of the neighborhood and if I don't do that there should be some course of action to make me do it.

[brickell]

I am not sure about regulations on fences, but I have seen all kinds of fences on residential lots in Chicago, the most standard being the simple metal chain link fence though. In terms of pets, sure you cant have cattle or anything crazy like that but I do know there is no regulations on the number of cats and dogs like they do in some subdivisions, nor would I think the city would want to enforce such rules. Thats the beauty of living in a big city I guess, laws regulating petty things you have inside your house are very impractical from an enforcement standpoint, and where the police are busy dealing with gang activity in certain high crime areas who has time to care?

I can guarantee that even in chicago, you aren't allowed to build a 20ft tall fence in your yard. I find it hard to believe that Chicago or Cook county doesn't regulate pets. A person with 20 dogs is a health issue. Dade county goes so far as to ban pitbulls. I've heard cook county is considering the similar.

[Chicago103]

I can guarantee that even in chicago, you aren't allowed to build a 20ft tall fence in your yard. I find it hard to believe that Chicago or Cook county doesn't regulate pets. A person with 20 dogs is a health issue. Dade county goes so far as to ban pitbulls. I've heard cook county is considering the similar.

Ok, there are regulations, but they are sane regulations. I am sure you cant build a 20 foot tall fence in your yard nor have 20 dogs in your house.

However some HOA's have crazy rules, one of which my parents are in violation of. In my parent's subdivision you cant have more than two pets (cats and dogs) well they have two cats and one dog. They live in a 2,000 square foot house, dont you think its a little absurd to have such a regulation for houses that are of good size? Also I can understand pet and human occupancy maximums in a highrise building but in a single family detached house I think there should be more leway in what you can do. There also was an example in suburban Chicago where a Hispanic family was chased out of a subdivision because they had kids sharing bedrooms. To me the only standard that should be used in overcrowding is that which experts say is a health hazard, not because some uppity people dont like people who live in more crowded conditions than them.

[Attrill]

In Chicago you need to get a permit to build a fence over 6' tall (it's pretty easy, I made one phone call and got a permit for an 8' fence in the mail 3 days later).

Almost all municipalities have common sense laws to deal with issues that affect the property value of a neighborhood (trash, abandoned cars, aggressive animals, livestock, etc.). Many HOAs are set up to cater to people who can only tolerate living with people who share their ideas of what a good neighborhood is (i.e. house color, lawn maintenance, mailbox size, etc.). The larger population of the city/town they live in isn't half as uptight as they are, so they need to group together to go beyond the municipal legislation governing the upkeep of property to create another level of regulation addressing mundane issues. That is something that is appealing to some people, and too restrictive (and unpredictable) to others.