How is it that HOAs boss people around in freedom loving USA?

spankoka

Super Anarchist
Interestingly, fish and game laws tend to make accessing a natural waterway on the side of the angler. As per youtube fishing rights videos, some people do not understand that their property rights end a the high water mark-"can you show me your deed to this ocean?".

 
Last edited by a moderator:

bridhb

Super Anarchist
3,785
1,128
Jax, FL
Interestingly, fish and game laws tend to make accessing a natural waterway on the side of the angler. As per youtube fishing rights videos, some people do not understand that their property rights end a the high water mark-"can you show me your deed to this ocean?".
People that own waterfront are very effective at getting local laws passed preventing public parking on public streets.  There is also a tendency for homeowners living adjacent to public access (with parking rights already removed) to plant vegetation blocking the access.  Happens all the time around here with accesses to the river and the beaches.

 

Happy

Super Anarchist
2,896
1,514
Tropical Oz
The same shit is happening in Australia, over-priced mini-mansion gated communities with endless rules, fees, board nazis, etc. The gates seem to need fixing 5-6 times a year, too.

For the last 20+ years I have owned places where I can swim naked, step out of the front door for a morning piss on the lawn naked, turn up my guitar amp and have a drummer round for a jam (not naked!), without bothering anybody other than my wife.

If someone came round complaining about my curtains I'd set the dogs on them, and bury their remains in the back paddock.

 

Fah Kiew Tu

Curmudgeon, First Rank
10,106
3,266
Tasmania, Australia
The same shit is happening in Australia, over-priced mini-mansion gated communities with endless rules, fees, board nazis, etc. The gates seem to need fixing 5-6 times a year, too.

For the last 20+ years I have owned places where I can swim naked, step out of the front door for a morning piss on the lawn naked, turn up my guitar amp and have a drummer round for a jam (not naked!), without bothering anybody other than my wife.

If someone came round complaining about my curtains I'd set the dogs on them, and bury their remains in the back paddock.
You must own at least a couple hundred acres then, more like 600. I say 600 because my family owns a 640 acre place and I know how far road noise travels.

Because in case your hearing is so fucked that you don't notice, noise travels a long way.

My little community in Tasmania is basically all 5 acre blocks. We had someone buy in, thought they were in the bush and could party to amplified music until all hours of the night. First time, they got a delegation representing all the neighbours politely informing them that this wasn't acceptable.

Second time, at 2310 about 6 people called the cops, who turned up quite quickly and the noise went off.

There hasn't been a third time. So far anyway.

I basically don't give a shit what people do as long as it doesn't disturb others. Make noise during the day, fine. Swim naked on the beach, don't care. Take a piss off your verandah by all means, why not, I do.

But make noise after 1800, expect push-back.

FKT

 

Happy

Super Anarchist
2,896
1,514
Tropical Oz
But make noise after 1800, expect push-back.

FKT
Absolutely.

We're on 6 acres on the side of a valley with about 30 properties, with no assholes that I'm aware of. My mate Barry on the other side of the valley has live music whenever he hosts a party, which he does often. He has the most awesome BBQ setup I've ever seen. 

Last Sunday I played there for a local sailor's 80th, about 50-60 people and an awesomely perfect hangi. We weren't stupidly loud, the music was musical-sounding, and we finished before sunset. The sky was just starting to get red, we did the old Fleetwood Mac instrumental "Albatross" to finish.

On the rare occasion that I get noisy at home, it's an hour or two in the afternoon. 

In the suburbs, you're more likely to have the neighbour who pounds out the doof-doof till 4.00 am. The cops come, the noise stops, ten minutes later the noise starts again, an hour later the cops come again, the noise stops, ten minutes later the noise starts again.....

 

kent_island_sailor

Super Anarchist
27,268
5,176
Kent Island!
People that own waterfront are very effective at getting local laws passed preventing public parking on public streets.  There is also a tendency for homeowners living adjacent to public access (with parking rights already removed) to plant vegetation blocking the access.  Happens all the time around here with accesses to the river and the beaches.
I can feel for the property owners to a point. I had a rental in Kailua when I worked out of Hawaii and we had an incredible beach that was mostly used by locals. Now apparently it has become very famous and turned into a total nightmare for the neighborhood with cars everyplace you can stick a car, people pissing on everyone's shrubs, trash everywhere, etc. etc.

You can get onto our beach here on the island from the water if you stay below the tide line, but non-residents have no access from the land side, we pay some kids to guard the entrance. We do not have the money, staff, or legal cover to run a public park.

 

Fah Kiew Tu

Curmudgeon, First Rank
10,106
3,266
Tasmania, Australia
I can feel for the property owners to a point. I had a rental in Kailua when I worked out of Hawaii and we had an incredible beach that was mostly used by locals. Now apparently it has become very famous and turned into a total nightmare for the neighborhood with cars everyplace you can stick a car, people pissing on everyone's shrubs, trash everywhere, etc. etc.
Yeah I owned a house in a place like that back in the day. In summer on weekends people would literally park anywhere they could. I had one try parking across my drive, told them to move, got some lip, pointed out the big table drain and my beat up Land Rover. Either they moved their car or I did. They saw the point of that. After then I used to park the Landie in the drive right on the road front.

It was a great place to live except for the invasions. Doesn't take long before residents' parking permits come into force with big fines for parking and not displaying one.

Usual problem - too many people in a confined area and a small subset too selfish and entitled fucking things for everyone else.

FKT

 

hobie1616

Super Anarchist
4,190
1,809
West Maui
Climate change could cost condo boards billions. They aren’t ready for it.

The untrained, unpaid and unsupervised volunteer directors of the nation’s more than 350,000 condo and homeowners’ associations, armed with limited financial resources, are expected to deal with the unprecedented infrastructure challenges that climate change poses to their communities. And there is no reason to believe that they are up to that task.

More than 20 percent of the U.S. population lives in property administered by condominium and homeowners’ associations, nonprofits run by volunteers elected by the owners. These directors and officers are responsible for an estimated $7 trillion worth of private property and infrastructure, including high-rise buildings, private streets, parks, pools, sewer and water systems, lakes, garages, and many other building systems and amenities.

As condos and HOAs blossomed across the country in the last 50 years, little or no thought was given to the eventual effects of climate change, in terms of location or construction quality. The common-interest housing sector emerged in the 1960s as a way to put more people on less land, increasing developer profits and local property tax revenue. The model spread rapidly, and condos and HOAs are now the default options for new construction in many states, not just across the Sun Belt where they originated but in older metro areas as well.

Many locations are problematic from the outset. Developers often build in places that appeal to buyers but pose environmental challenges — such as on reclaimed wetlands or beaches next to rising seas, as in Surfside. Other developers place subdivisions at the top of artificial slopes that turn into mudslides in hundred-year storms, which now occur more often than they used to. Terrible disasters have struck neighborhoods built in areas that are prone to drought-induced wildfires. Local governments may approve these location decisions because they are great for sales and the property tax base, but they drop environmental issues right in the laps of condo and HOA boards.

Condo and homeowners’ associations were never designed or empowered to handle such conditions. These associations are essentially on their own, with virtually no support from any level of government. Although most of them operate well most of the time, paying for routine maintenance and repair has always been a challenge, long before climate change made things worse. For years, industry insiders have pointed out that although directors and officers are responsible for maintaining the property, most unit owners are notoriously unwilling to see their housing costs go up now to sock away funds for repairs in the future. Why, they ask, should they pay today so someone else can have a new roof long after they’ve moved out? Yet that is precisely what they are expected to do. Somehow, dozens, hundreds or even thousands of owners are supposed to overcome their self-interest and collective-action problems and commit to maintaining their private infrastructure in perpetuity.

 

Sol Rosenberg

Girthy Member
94,335
11,846
Earth
Climate change could cost condo boards billions. They aren’t ready for it.

The untrained, unpaid and unsupervised volunteer directors of the nation’s more than 350,000 condo and homeowners’ associations, armed with limited financial resources, are expected to deal with the unprecedented infrastructure challenges that climate change poses to their communities. And there is no reason to believe that they are up to that task.

More than 20 percent of the U.S. population lives in property administered by condominium and homeowners’ associations, nonprofits run by volunteers elected by the owners. These directors and officers are responsible for an estimated $7 trillion worth of private property and infrastructure, including high-rise buildings, private streets, parks, pools, sewer and water systems, lakes, garages, and many other building systems and amenities.

As condos and HOAs blossomed across the country in the last 50 years, little or no thought was given to the eventual effects of climate change, in terms of location or construction quality. The common-interest housing sector emerged in the 1960s as a way to put more people on less land, increasing developer profits and local property tax revenue. The model spread rapidly, and condos and HOAs are now the default options for new construction in many states, not just across the Sun Belt where they originated but in older metro areas as well.

Many locations are problematic from the outset. Developers often build in places that appeal to buyers but pose environmental challenges — such as on reclaimed wetlands or beaches next to rising seas, as in Surfside. Other developers place subdivisions at the top of artificial slopes that turn into mudslides in hundred-year storms, which now occur more often than they used to. Terrible disasters have struck neighborhoods built in areas that are prone to drought-induced wildfires. Local governments may approve these location decisions because they are great for sales and the property tax base, but they drop environmental issues right in the laps of condo and HOA boards.

Condo and homeowners’ associations were never designed or empowered to handle such conditions. These associations are essentially on their own, with virtually no support from any level of government. Although most of them operate well most of the time, paying for routine maintenance and repair has always been a challenge, long before climate change made things worse. For years, industry insiders have pointed out that although directors and officers are responsible for maintaining the property, most unit owners are notoriously unwilling to see their housing costs go up now to sock away funds for repairs in the future. Why, they ask, should they pay today so someone else can have a new roof long after they’ve moved out? Yet that is precisely what they are expected to do. Somehow, dozens, hundreds or even thousands of owners are supposed to overcome their self-interest and collective-action problems and commit to maintaining their private infrastructure in perpetuity.
The Best Americans need More, and to get it, they need to make loans to both developers seeking to make more people live closer together (because that’s the way it is done up north), and to the suckers who want to buy from those developers. By the time the big bills come due, both the developers and the Best Americans, (hallowed be their names) are long gone. There is only one answer for those left owning such property: find a new property so that the Best Americans can make just a little bit More. 

 

Bus Driver

Bacon Quality Control Specialist
Climate change could cost condo boards billions. They aren’t ready for it.

The untrained, unpaid and unsupervised volunteer directors of the nation’s more than 350,000 condo and homeowners’ associations, armed with limited financial resources, are expected to deal with the unprecedented infrastructure challenges that climate change poses to their communities. And there is no reason to believe that they are up to that task.

More than 20 percent of the U.S. population lives in property administered by condominium and homeowners’ associations, nonprofits run by volunteers elected by the owners. These directors and officers are responsible for an estimated $7 trillion worth of private property and infrastructure, including high-rise buildings, private streets, parks, pools, sewer and water systems, lakes, garages, and many other building systems and amenities.

As condos and HOAs blossomed across the country in the last 50 years, little or no thought was given to the eventual effects of climate change, in terms of location or construction quality. The common-interest housing sector emerged in the 1960s as a way to put more people on less land, increasing developer profits and local property tax revenue. The model spread rapidly, and condos and HOAs are now the default options for new construction in many states, not just across the Sun Belt where they originated but in older metro areas as well.

Many locations are problematic from the outset. Developers often build in places that appeal to buyers but pose environmental challenges — such as on reclaimed wetlands or beaches next to rising seas, as in Surfside. Other developers place subdivisions at the top of artificial slopes that turn into mudslides in hundred-year storms, which now occur more often than they used to. Terrible disasters have struck neighborhoods built in areas that are prone to drought-induced wildfires. Local governments may approve these location decisions because they are great for sales and the property tax base, but they drop environmental issues right in the laps of condo and HOA boards.

Condo and homeowners’ associations were never designed or empowered to handle such conditions. These associations are essentially on their own, with virtually no support from any level of government. Although most of them operate well most of the time, paying for routine maintenance and repair has always been a challenge, long before climate change made things worse. For years, industry insiders have pointed out that although directors and officers are responsible for maintaining the property, most unit owners are notoriously unwilling to see their housing costs go up now to sock away funds for repairs in the future. Why, they ask, should they pay today so someone else can have a new roof long after they’ve moved out? Yet that is precisely what they are expected to do. Somehow, dozens, hundreds or even thousands of owners are supposed to overcome their self-interest and collective-action problems and commit to maintaining their private infrastructure in perpetuity.
Our little 12 home court has an HOA.  Sadly, some of the neighbors are less than neighborly and we wound up (at the advice of an attorney) securing D&O (Directors and Officers) Insurance to protect the elected officers from being held liable/responsible and getting sued.  Yeah, that was brewing.

In our litigious society, that seems prudent.

 

hobie1616

Super Anarchist
4,190
1,809
West Maui
Our little 12 home court has an HOA.  Sadly, some of the neighbors are less than neighborly and we wound up (at the advice of an attorney) securing D&O (Directors and Officers) Insurance to protect the elected officers from being held liable/responsible and getting sued.  Yeah, that was brewing.

In our litigious society, that seems prudent.
D&O and liability insurance are a must have for any organization.  Otherwise, some dickwad sues for some BS reason and your house gets encumbered by the shyster lawyer you have to hire to defend yourself.

 

Mark K

Super Anarchist
47,621
1,860
I honestly don't understand this phenomena. I've heard of a neighborhood where you can't put a for sale sign in front of your house, you hang a wreath on the door like it's Christmas if you want to sell. 
  It's quite simple, to preserve property values. Property values are affected by the condition of the neighborhood. A good google search might be the history behind the saying "there goes the neighborhood" 

 
fuck-there-goes.jpg


 

Latest posts




Top