The price paid for HOA claims of maintaining property values

March 26, 2006

HOA: About homeowners associations
Meghan Crosby, Cox News Service, middletownjournal.com (Ohio)

Community Associations Institute

One of the greatest advantages of living in a HOA is the maintenance of a neighborhood’s appearance, and, thus, its property values, according to Frank Rathbun, vice president of communications for Community Associations Institute in Alexandria, Va.

“The homeowners control their community. They vote for who represents them. They agree on rules, from architectural guidelines to fences and sheds. It’s the most basic form of democracy — homeowners representing their own best interest.”

“Most do enjoy living in HOAs. But some don’t. Not all people are made to live in community associations.”


Citizens for Constitutional Local Government

HOAs are unregulated mini-governments, according to George Staropoli, founder of Citizens Against Private Government HOAs in Scottsdale, Ariz. Staropoli, a business broker, is perhaps the nation’s most vocal critic of homeowners associations. He writes extensively against HOAs, has taken homeowner rights issues to state legislators and has a Web site — www.pvtgov.gov — where he challenges and monitors HOA legislation.

“They are private contracts, and local governments do not protect residents’ due process and equal opportunities of the law,” Staropoli said. “There’s no accountability, and they run as governments themselves.”

HOAs should come under the same protection of constitutional rights just like every other government entity, he said.

“When the board fines you, where do you go for your due process? You go right back to the same people who fined you,”

Staropoli said. He also said he has qualms with the constant monitoring of residents’ property by HOAs.

“It says that we, the board, don’t trust our neighbors, and we have to spy,” Staropoli said. “Is that how you generate a healthy, vibrant community?”

Texas Advocate asks: "Where's the US Constitution?"

The following is an excerpt from Beanie Adolph's testimony before the Texas House of Representatives Business and Industry committee hearing of March 21 that was considering a Texas version of UCIOA.

Is it proper for the state to create a form of local government that is not compatible with our American system of democracy?

Is it proper for the state to permit the existence of private quasi-governments that regulate and CONTROL the behavior of citizens without the same due process and equal protection clauses of the 14th Amendment?

When did "whatever the people privately contract" prevail over the protections of the U.S. Constitution?

And so we come to Act IV. The CAI is proposing its latest statute. This statute is so opposed to the freedom that is believed basic to our country that it defies reason that you are even considering it. The answer must be NO! a loud NO!. Freedom must be restored. Homestead protection must be restored.

I believe you take an oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution. Please be true to your country, to your state, and to your constituents and DENY this TUPCA proposal - and then AMEND THE PROPERTY CODE SO THAT HOA FORECLOSURE IS NO LONGER A THREAT TO HOMEOWNERS.

To view the complete statement, see Texas.

Open HOA Questionaire for CAI

Dear Editor of Common Ground,

As I wrote to the legislators, I now address these questions to CAI as a public interest organization that repeatedly lobbies every state legislature, and ask that it respond to these important issues in its upcoming May-June article, "Fear and Loathing Inside the anti-HOA Movement."

HOA reforms needed to guarantee U.S. Constitutional protections
Replacing democratic local governments with authoritarian private governments: Is this good public policy?

At the heart of the matter is the continued replacement of democratic local government, governments subject to the U.S. Constitution and 14th Amendment prohibitions, with contractual, authoritarian private governments that are not subject to the prohibitions of the 14th Amendment.

The two broad prohibitions within this amendment are the equal application of the law and the due process clauses that are not applicable to private agreements. Or are they?

I ask the legislators, the public interest organizations and policy makers to consider the following questions:

1. Is it proper for the state to create, permit, encourage, support or defend a form of local government of a community of people, whether that form of government is established as a municipal corporation or as a private organization that is not compatible with our American system of government?

2. Is it proper for the state to permit the existence of private quasi-governments with contractual “constitutions” that regulate and control the behavior of citizens without the same due process and equal protection clauses of the 14th Amendment; that do not conform to the state’s municipal charter or incorporation requirements; or do not provide for the same compliance with the state’s Constitution, statutes or administrative code as required by public local government entities?

3. When did “whatever the people privately contract” dominate the protections of the US Constitution? The New Jersey Appeals Court didn't think so. Does "constructive notice", the "nailing to the wall", that medieval method of notice, measure up to the requisite level of notice and informed consent to permit the loss of Constitutional protections?

4. Please state what, if any, are the government’s interests in supporting HOAs that deny the people their constitutional rights?



George K. Staropoli, Pres.
Citizens for Constitutional Local Government

March 16, 2006

This land is NOT your land!

This land is NOT your land!

This land was NOT made for you and me!

These are the new lyrics to the well known folksong.

On PBS this week in Phoenix, you heard a grand old tune as sung by the Minstrels, the successor group to the 1960s The New Christy Minstrels. This Land is Your Land was written in the 1930s by, and sung by, Woody Guthrie, and resurrected in the 1960s by Randy Sparks.

It was sung at the time of the Cuban Missile crisis when people on the East coast were being told to store food and water, and to tune in to an important broadcast by President Kennedy. (It was only after the fall of communism in Russia did we learn, from previously secret files, that the local Russian military commander in Cuba had final authority to launch nuclear weapons against America in the event of an invasion of Cuba. He did not need to get permission from Moscow.)

That was another America, another era, long gone away where principles and character mattered. Now it's, "What's in it for me?"

Today, your land belongs to the HOA Board that is controlled by the special interest lobbyists, CAI, who have created and fought vigorously to repress your freedoms and rights. They spew grandiose platitudes in the name of a better America, but their personal agenda is one of a profit making bonanza. We don't need authoritarian governments, whose premise is that you can't trust your neighbor and that he must be watched vigilantly, and misinforming the people in order to make their "better America" happen.

We need,

This land is MY land, not your land!

Arizona Speaker Pro Tempore: I don't trust homeowers and won't restore rights enjoyed by other homeowners

See two important news videos demonstrating the homeowners' fight for US Constitutional protections taken away only if they live in an HOA. See Arizona's Speaker Pro Tempore, Bob Robson, continue to deny these rights and defending the undemocratic, authoritarian private contractual governments known as HOAs.

In Arizona, there are 5 senior citizen HOA subdivisions sold under the Robson Communities umbrella that contain some 32,000 families who were never told that they had surrendered their homestead exemption rights, and still are unaware of this loss. The bills being stalled would restore these rights taken away from this class of citizens by statute in 1996.

View videos

AZ Speaker Pro Tempore views on protecting HOAs

Greg Mocker of local Phoenix CBS TV asked those hard questions of Arizona Speaker Pro Tempore and Rules Committee Chair Bob Robson. And Robson answered that he will protect these private contractual governments because he doesn't trust the average homeowner who will turn into a deadbeat as soon as we restore the equal application of the laws to HOAs -- the homestead exemption and due process protections guaranteed by the Constitution, except in private government HOAs. What Rules Chair Robson had also said is that he will protect these private organizations and deny homeowners the protections of the 14th amendment.

Why is he supporting HOA principalities allowed to operate outside the American system of government? Why isn't our American system of democracy good enough for HOAs? Why is the House promoting authoritarian governments that do not protect those cherished rights and freedoms guaranteed for all Americans?

Is the Speaker Pro Tempore making policy statements for the House leadership? These are precisely the statements and attitudes that make HOAs state actors.

We are witnessing the Tyranny of the Legislature, where one person is allowed by the leadership to control the fate of millions of good people in Arizona. House Rule 37(3) allows the representatives to submit removal requests to place these bills on the active calendar. Where is the vote? Why this highly unusual tactic of not allowing a floor vote by all the Representatives? Because the votes are there to pass these bills on the floor, that's why!

Here are excepts from Robson’s interview:

“Rules should not be changed”. (To pass these new bills. Greg's retort: What about in 1996 when you took away these rights?)

”I don't feel comfortable with certain aspects of this . . .” (the homestead exemption bill.) Well, it's a single sentence change and his responsibilities lie in the area of questions of constitutionality and nothing else as governed by the House Rules. It is not his call -- it’s an abuse of discretion and authority!! Placing everyone under the same laws cannot be seen as being unconstitutional. But removing them as in 1996 is unconstitutional.

"Without the homestead exemption you have a situation where people can let there dues lapse ... "(this is outright protection of private organizations without any governmental interest to offset the unequal application of the laws. Further, it looks down with disdain and distrust upon the good people of Arizona who are living in HOAs.

"The quality of life will definitely be distorted ..." Is he now the Guardian and Official Protector of the Quality of Life? What audacity by the Speaker Pro Tempore. Shame on him!


Homeowner rights advocates must not allow these statements to go unanswered and be accepted as, “That’s the way it is. Get used to it!”

The United HOAs of Arizona becoming a reality

With the actions by the Arizona House Leadership to not allow substantive HOA reform bills from being voted on by the entire House, Arizona is moving one step closer to becoming The United HOAs of Arizona¹. This deliberate refusal to hear these bills can only be interpreted as wholehearted support to permit the HOA principality², that authoritarian, private contractual system of government, to continue its denial of the constitutional rights of homeowners -- rights that they would be entitled to under a municipal government.

HOAs, as Robert H. Nelson wrote in the closing chapters of his new book, Private Neighborhoods and the Transformation of Local Government, will replace existing local municipal governments as these HOAs take on more and more governmental functions under the protection of state legislatures. And with this transformation in American governance, the US Constitution becomes a thing of the past, obviated and replaced without any amendments as required by the Constitution. And the War Between the States becomes a footnote in history as the one and only attempt to preserve the Union.

Americans must not let this happen. Americans must put a stop to what was described as "the emergence and acceptance of a quiet innovation in housing" (from the book subtitle by Donald R. Stabile, Community Associations), because it is really a backdoor subversion of the American system of government.

Homeowners in Arizona can do their part by insisting that the Arizona House leadership move these HOA bills to the Active Calendar for a floor vote.

Notes:

1. See United HOAs of Arizona, George K. Staropoli, August 2004, http://pvtgov.blogspot.com/2005/08/united-hoas-of-arizona.html
2. See The HOA Principality, George K. Staropoli, January 2005, http://pvtgov.blogspot.com/2005_01_01_pvtgov_archive.html