Many people choose to live in neighborhoods with an HOA and I don’t see why they should be forbidden to do that. “I know what’s good for you better than you do” ought to require a high burden of proof.
Nowadays most of them are created by land developers, which often maintain complete control for many years after the first houses are sold in the community. Nothing grassroots about them when they are founded and run by a private company.
Not necessarily. I know a guy who lives in a rural area and still somehow managed to find a house with an HOA, because he wanted access to shared amenities. Beyond that, HOA rules would ideally be like an agreement that I won’t be a bad neighbor to you if you won’t be a bad neighbor to me. It does seem like HOA boards attract petty people, but only the very worst will get in the news while the normal ones quietly do their thing.
(Also, it appears that the lemonade stand in the article wasn’t actually violating the HOA rules.)
I still have compassion for those who live a HOA and then go on to complain because choosing to live there is a complex decision involving many factors. In some parts of the country, there might be no options to practically avoid a HOA.
“I know what’s good for you” is precisely the ethos of the HOA. I’d have less compassion if housing wasn’t such a tight commodity. In that case, it’s a choice. But I think in the current market it doesn’t always feel like one.
I don’t think an outright ban is the right answer either.
All fine and dandy until HOAs are all that’s available and you’re paying $100s per month to one of the handful of major developers in the country that built the neighborhood and coincidentally still controls the HOA. Ever been to Florida?
Many people choose to live in neighborhoods with an HOA and I don’t see why they should be forbidden to do that. “I know what’s good for you better than you do” ought to require a high burden of proof.
Isn’t that kind of the definition of what an HOA does?
Technically an HOA is grassroots community derived governance to establish and maintain shared interests related to the neighborhood.
Nowadays most of them are created by land developers, which often maintain complete control for many years after the first houses are sold in the community. Nothing grassroots about them when they are founded and run by a private company.
If this is what they actually were, I would be for them.
This is almost never what they actually are.
I am 100% positive there are some shrinking.number of good HOAs out there.
This, also You only hear about bad HOAs
Not necessarily. I know a guy who lives in a rural area and still somehow managed to find a house with an HOA, because he wanted access to shared amenities. Beyond that, HOA rules would ideally be like an agreement that I won’t be a bad neighbor to you if you won’t be a bad neighbor to me. It does seem like HOA boards attract petty people, but only the very worst will get in the news while the normal ones quietly do their thing.
(Also, it appears that the lemonade stand in the article wasn’t actually violating the HOA rules.)
I still have compassion for those who live a HOA and then go on to complain because choosing to live there is a complex decision involving many factors. In some parts of the country, there might be no options to practically avoid a HOA.
“I know what’s good for you” is precisely the ethos of the HOA. I’d have less compassion if housing wasn’t such a tight commodity. In that case, it’s a choice. But I think in the current market it doesn’t always feel like one.
I don’t think an outright ban is the right answer either.
All fine and dandy until HOAs are all that’s available and you’re paying $100s per month to one of the handful of major developers in the country that built the neighborhood and coincidentally still controls the HOA. Ever been to Florida?
Fuck no, who would willingly go there? Being born there, stuck there, I get it. But traveling/vacationing? My God
Worst drivers I’ve ever dealt with were in FL.