Category: Opinion

On p. 102, Part 1, Ch. 4, of Robert Nelson’s book, Private Neighborhoods, the author quotes my 2000 address to the Arizona Legislature’s Interim HOA Committee, the “jump-off” event for the following 5 years of homeowner rights advocacy in Arizona.

The author also refers to HOANET as “a group of dissaffected unit owners”, while stating’

“George Staropoli called on the state legislature to adopt a ‘homeowner’s bill of rights’ that would be incorporated automatically in the founding documents of every neighborhood association and provide for ‘legal sanctions against the abuse of these rights by the board of directors'”.

The author then misstates my proposal as if it were a matter of consumer choice for individual associations to choose as they please. He then offers: “Many Americans have in effect chosen a dictatorship.”

Below is an excerpt from my statement of Sept. 7, 2000:

Statement Prepared for presentation to the
Homeowners Association Study Committee Of the Arizona State Legislature
September 7, 2000

Good morning Mr. Chairman. Good morning ladies and gentlemen of the Committee. Once more I reluctantly find myself before the committee to speak against my neighbors and other citizens of Arizona. I don’t relish being here; however, circumstances and events have brought me here.

As in the times of 1776, a small, principled and dedicated group of citizens are seeking a redress of their grievances. They first looked to the existing government, the HOA Board, and having failed to obtain satisfaction therein, must seek other means of redress – a radical change in the concept and legal structure of the homeowner association and its controlling document, the CC&Rs. What is needed is an inclusion of a homeowners Bill of Rights and the removal of such onerous provisions that make the homeowner nothing more than an indentured servant, living at the suffrage of the board – pleased if the board is benevolent; living in fear if the board is oppressive. To quote from the Declaration of Independence,

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

“That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government . . .”

Continuing my quote,

“In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble of terms; our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury”.

The people of Arizona only wish to be able to present their case before this Committee in a fair and just manner. However, sadly I feel that, because of the composition of the committee they are being asked to justify their grievances before their oppressors; they are being put directly into a trial situation with their “oppressors” sitting in judgment. The homeowners, Arizona citizens in good standing, who find these truths to be self-evident, are being called to justify their complaints without the committee calling for the perpetrators to answer for these repeated acts against them.

Today we seek the replacement of the homeowners association form of totalitarian government as set forth in the CC&Rs. We seek, among other changes to the CC&Rs, the inclusion of a homeowners’ bill of rights, restoring those rights that every American is entitled to and should enjoy in today’s society.

“What Are Private Governments Worth?”, Amanda Agan & Alexander Tabarrok, Regulation, Cato Institute, Vol. 28, No. 3, Fall 2005

This is a very insightful question to ask and to answer, raising important public policy issues and providing direction for policy makers. To paraphrase, “Do the property value benefits of HOAs measure up to the protection and support received by state governments?” What is the government’s interest in promoting and encouraging these private governments?

For more see … Values.
View the Regulation article at Cato

October 9, 2005, Los Angeles Times Real Estate section

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

TAPES ARE ON THE UP AND UP

If a common interest development were a governmental entity there would be no problem with what can and cannot be done in a public meeting.

What’s wrong with the one that’s been around for over 200 years? The US Constitution. Why must there be special constitutions for these de facto private governments? Just because these CID governments are not recognized doesn’t mean that they do not operate daily as the de facto governments over these territorial communities.

CIDs must be brought under the laws of the land that regulate governments and protect the rights of all citizens.

George K. Staropoli
Scottsdale, Ariz.

In regard to a move by one HOA to oust its board, Arizona’s Representative Chuck Gray told the Arizona Republic that “The homeowner’s ability to take control of their association mirrors the function of all government . . . . Prior to Aug. 12 residents needed two-thirds homeowner approval to force a recall election. [Now just a majority.]

Any bill that can be used to motivate homeowners into action against abusive boards does a service to all of us. But, don’t believe that this bill was a major victory over the forces of evil. No, it’s just one skirmish in a broader battle for rights and equality and against a legislature that refuses to recognize the broad constitutional wrongs being perpetrated on the people.

Under the mantra that citizens have the right to form private governments, and not be held accountable at all, to the state or under the 14th Amendment — as all municipalities are — the state perpetrates a gross injustice on homeowners. In other areas, where consumers actually sign a contract, the state has stepped in under its police powers to protect consumers — truth in lending, truth in advertising, protected classes of people, etc. But for some reason, not here with HOAs where the consumer has not even initialed the governing documents, nor explicitly signed away his constitutional rights, this gross injustice is allowed to continue.

Even in spite of media article after media article across the country, this injustice is allowed to continue. This failure to hold HOA boards accountable under the laws, as municipal governments are held accountable, reflects this injustice and the continued protection of the HOA private form of government by state governments.

It must stop today!

“[I]n the future, more complete forms of private secession may become possible. For example, if neighborhood associations become more numerous, the political pressures for substantial rebates from property taxes – for relief from the current system of ‘double taxation’ – are bound to grow.”

Private Neighborhoods and the Transformation of Local Government, Robert H. Nelson, (Urban Institute Press 2005).

The view that planned communities are equivalent to principalities is strongly presented in the book. Six chapters are reviewed from Parts V, Creating HOA Constitutions, and VI, Neighborhood Asociations in American Life, that include chapter titles of: Neighborhood Legislature, Freedom of Neighborhood Association, A Democracy of Property Owners and Neighborhood Secession.

To obtain the complete Commentaries on Private Associations and Local Government, download Secession (PDF).

For additional information, see the Ned Peirce Commentary in the Arizona Capitol Times, or United HOAS.