When you sign up as a Paladin (click on JOIN) you will be able to download your membership certificate as a WORD document. Just add your name and date of membership.
As an extra, for those who remember the western TV series, Paladin, you will enjoy the CHAPs version of his business card.
Following up on my earlier post on Paladins, you can show your support for HOA reform legislation in your state. Add your name to the list of advocates already a member at Coalition of Homeowner Advocate Paladins (CHAPs) working to make things happen for all homeowners. All you need to do is join up to let everyone know you’re behind justice and the equal protection of the laws for all Americans, living in HOAs or not.
“The basic principles defining a Paladin are to defend and protect the innocent and uphold the law . . . . They would defend truth and justice against the unending evil approaches.”
Go to the Facebook group page Coalition of Homeowner Advocate Paladins (CHAPs). Read the About to learn more about CHAPs Paladins. Once accepted, you can then download your own WORD member certificate, worthy of framing.
We need more homeowner rights advocates speaking with a firm and emphatic voice to the legislators, to the media and to the public that we are knowledgeable, informed and intelligent people not to be toyed with!
We must become Paladins, warriors, especially before the state legislative sessions end. The various definitions of this term center on:
“Anyone who fights hard for something they believe in can be called a paladin; While the French word paladin means warrior . . . . As time went on, its meaning grew to include any chivalrous or heroic person; The basic principles defining a Paladin are to defend and protect the innocent and uphold the law . . . . They would defend truth and justice against the unending evil approaches.”
As Paladins we can proudly stand up to the self-serving, political agendas of too many legislators.
History: Paladins were initially known as the Twelve Peers of French Emperor Charlemagne who also had the title of Holy Roman Emperor (8th century AD). If you are familiar with the French epic poem, Chanson de Roland (“Song of Roland”), which I learned in my French class, Roland was Paladin.
“We must make the injustice visible” Mahatma Gandhi
I have cautioned homeowner rights advocates to be respectful of their legislators as they are the only game in town to bring about HOA reforms. But there come times to hold the legislators accountable for their abuse of discretion and power amounting to violations of the US and Arizona Constitutions, and failure to “establish justice, insure domestic tranquility . . . promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty.” (Preamble to the US Constitution).
Background
Many hours were spent in researching the facts surrounding this bill to determine the real intent behind its sponsorship and the true motivations for its support.
The AZ House GOV committee just passed this reincarnation of the failed HB 2374 by a 6-5 vote (Reps. Kavanagh, Payne, Blackman, Petersen, Rivero and Thorpe all voting in favor of the bill) with the assistance of Senator Borrelli who allowed SB 1094 to be used for a S/E replacement of HB 2374. Their reasons are completely untenable giving 1) the nature of the bill, the misleading assertions, convoluted language including double negatives, 2) unbelievable legislative intent “to clarify” a 1994 bill some 24 years later, and 3) the constitutionality of the proposed statute.
Before proceeding, it must be understood that in 2015 the Superior Court in Anderson v. SCRC held the Sun City rec center, SCRC, to be an HOA.[1] Now, 4 years later, this bill is an attempt to overturn this ruling.
In reading the bill several statements caught my attention. I will explore them one at a time.
First, there is the question of the purpose of “before January 1, 1974.” I cannot find any justification for this date, as prior dates are used to get around grandfathering problems to avoid litigation. Here the bill seeks application to ‘associations” prior to this date, under the same conditions found in today’s bill. However, Sun City was incorporated in May 1968 and SCW in Sept. 1979. Where does 1974 come from?
1. Nature of the bill et seq.
SB 1094 is an attempt to avoid my position that the original Sun City bill, HB 2374, violated the AZ Constitution being a special law for a particular entity, the 2 Sun Cities. The heart of the bill has now become permitting the “voice of the people” to be heard to reject or uphold the PUD statutes in question. In what I referred to as cute, slight-of-hand manipulation to confuse the public, the bill permits a vote of the HOA members to decide whether or not their rec center should be an HOA or not. Say what??
The bill is cleverly worded with convoluted statements containing double negatives[2] or wording amounting to a double negative. “This chapter [regulating HOAs] does not apply [to] a nonprofit corporation . . . that does not have authority. And then adds an illogical approval by the membership to not accept –to reject — the law. It seems designed to cause confusion. Read Subsections C and D carefully.
Further confusing is the redefinition of “Association” to include associations not operating as a de facto HOA to elect to become an HOA and be regulated. Say what?
Each of the 3 sections discussed is a statement that the rec centers, now “harmlessly” disguised as “associations,” are exempt from the PUD Act and regulation by the state, unless an illogical vote by the membership approves obedience to the law — we want to be an HOA — as ruled by the court in Anderson.[3] (This aspect of the bill is covered in more detail in (3) below).
The PUD enabling act of 1994 is a short 2-page, 6 sections Act, of which I have a copy and have read.[4] It does not contain any statement of legislative intent. Its version of 33-1802, Definitions, remains essentially intact, for our purpose here, after 24 years. SB 1094 claims to uncover an error, an oversight into the legislative intent and seeks to clarify it and set it straight. This defense is without merit, plain and simple!
The bill in its new form remains an unconscionable support of a special law for a special, miniscule application for just 2 HOAs: Sun City and Sun City West. Furthermore, by issuing this “legislative intent” the Sponsor claims that it speaks for all the Arizona legislators aside from the 6 House GOV committee Representatives who supported SB 1094
SB 1094 does not escape the constitutionality challenge that it is an invalid delegation of legislative authority to private persons, flying in the face of long held doctrine declaring such acts as unconstitutional. This unconstitutional delegation was dealt with in McLoughlin v. Pima County (CA-CV 2001-0198, Div. 2, 2001) concerning zoning restrictions determined by the people. In its discussion the Court quoted from several cases, and for brevity,
“However, it is a well-established theory that a legislature may not delegate it’s authority to private persons over whom the legislature has no supervision or control.”
The bill declares that a rec center (after redefining what an HOA is) is not subject to HOA regulation unless a majority of the owners want it to be as described in (1) above. The people, the homeowners, are making law! That’s a mockery of the law! It is an unconscionable bill that turns the Constitution on its head and grants more freedom to the independent HOA principalities.
It is a very astute political ploy and a surprising acknowledgement of the political and social dynamics at work within HOAs.[5] The legislative mantra, here and in other states, is that the homeowner is free to vote on amendments under the governing documents. The wording of this bill shows that the legislators know better and understand that overthrowing the HOA board is a very high barrier to overcome.
The underlying misleading picture ignores the fact there is general apathy and indifference to homeowner participation, just like with the voter outcome in our general public elections. In short, the likelihood of an approval of an amendment is very small, especially when there would be no lobbying by the HOA board to support the vote. Why didn’t the sponsor construct the bill to seek a positive response by the membership for approval, rather than allowing the law to be changed by the highly likelihood occurrence of a default vote — people not voting. It’s a rigged bill to overturn the Anderson ruling by the court.
Good ol’ fashioned politics at work “here in River City.”
Legal Disclaimer
The information contained in this written or electronic communication, and our associated web sites and blog, is provided as a service to the Internet community and does not constitute legal advice or opinion. We perform legal research and case analysis services, but we make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained in any report, finding, recommendation or any communication, or linked to this web site and its associated sites. No document prepared by HALRIS or George K. Staropoli is to be considered a legal document to be filed in a court or in a legal proceeding. Nothing provided by HALRIS or George K. Staropoli should be used as a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. George K. Staropoli and no person associated with HALRIS, AHLIS, HOA Constitutional Government or Citizens for Constitutional Local Government are attorneys nor are employed by an attorney.
Notes
[1] Anderson v. Recreation Centers of Sun City, 1CV 2015-012458, Maricopa County (2018).
[2] “Double negatives are two negative words used in the same sentence. Using two negatives turns the thought or sentence into a positive one. Double negatives are not encouraged in English because they are poor grammar and they can be confusing.” Your Dictionary.com.
[3] Supra n. 1.
[4] See Enabling Act.
[5] See The HOA-Land culture (2019). “We must make the injustice visible” Mahatma Gandhi.
HOA political dynamics: authoritarianism & totalitarian democracy
First, allow me to clarify some important concepts and definitions that I have employed to help in understanding my positions and views.
While the CC&Rs and declarations contain abundant boiler plate, each is a separate legal agreement and as such the HOA can be viewed as a village. The conglomeration of master planned communities or HOAs developed by the same developer can be seen as a clan. All stemming from the HOA “bible,” the 1964 Homes Association Handbook.[2]
In an earlier editorial on civic responsibility,[3] I questioned the allegiance, the loyalty, and the obligations of HOA members. Was it to the US Constitution or to the HOA “constitution,” the governing documents? I answered that it appeared to be the HOA first and foremost – secessionist — creating division within the country.
This was followed up by the editorials[4] where I examined the attitudes, beliefs, and values of the HOA members themselves. I focused on the aspect of long-term indoctrination by the HOA School of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda, my categorization. The question yet to be addressed was: What role did the members play themselves in terms of a predisposition to accept authoritarian, private governance?
By serendipity, or by destiny, I just received an email discussing authoritarianism and totalitarian democracy.[5] It argued that Americans were accepting authoritarian control, which seemed to be a cause for the behavior of cult-like, dogmatic member acceptance of the HOA board’s (BOD) actions and attitudes. It seems that the more predisposed to authoritarian control the more the member acted as a diehard, dogmatic, true-believer in the BOD.
“There are a lot of Americans who do not care for democracy. They do not mind [failing] to follow the Constitution, or that [it] poses a danger to democracy.
“These “authoritarian followers,” as social science labels them, are also highly ethnocentric, thus frequently racist, nationalistic, deeply partisan, and threatened by “the other.” . . . Other testing shows these people are also highly defensive.”
The HOA legal structure and scheme is basically authoritarian in nature: strong central power, limited political freedoms, no accountability, and under the rule of man, not law.[6] The authoritarian nature of HOA-Land is masked by a thorough indoctrination[7] that the real estate subdivision is a democratic community (although the HOA is not a municipal entity but a private nonprofit association) because the members are allowed to vote, as meaningless as it is.
But the HOA is truly a totalitarian democracy. To paraphrase the founder of fascism, Benito Mussolini, “All within the HOA, nothing outside the HOA, nothing against the HOA.” The marketing and promotion of the HOA model of governance has been conducted in a very smooth manner: no negatives, “carefree living,” playing to the emotions and desires of the members, misleading statements to induce buying, and empty promises of “maintaining property values, ”etc.
Here’s are some of J. L. Talmon’s views of totalitarian democracy as found on Wikipedia (my emphasis):
“A totalitarian democratic state is said to maximize its control over the lives of its citizens by using the dual rationale of general will (i.e., “public good”) and majority rule. An argument can be made that in some circumstances it is actually the political, economic, and military élite who interpret the general will to suit their own interests.
“A totalitarian democracy . . . retains full power of . . . the right of control over everything and everyone. Maintenance of such power, in the absence of full support of the citizenry, requires the forceful suppression of any dissenting element except what the government purposely permits or organizes
“It is [the member’s] duty and responsibility to aid his compatriots in realizing [this right of control]. Moreover, any public or private activities that do not forward this goal have no useful purpose. Citizens of a totalitarian democratic state, even when aware of their true powerlessness, may support their government.”
Getting back to HOA-Land, it becomes disturbing that the application of authoritarianism and totalitarian democracy philosophy seems to fit quite well. Too well at that! But these views of HOA-Land are a valuable enlightenment because it takes HOA-Land out of the hands of the propagandists, out of the shadows, out of the darkness of Plato’s cave.[8] It reveals reality.
References
[1] “In short, CAI has been setting itself up as the national private authority, a sort of Board of National HOA Governors,” CAI manifesto: CAI’s plan for HOA-Land in America, 2016.
[2] See my 2006, Analysis of The Homes Association Handbook.
[3] Civic responsibility vs. HOA member responsibility.
[5] Verdict” email from Justia.
[6] “Authoritarian” can be defined as “a form of government characterized by strong central power and limited political freedoms. Individual freedoms are subordinate to the state and there is no constitutional accountability and rule of law under an authoritarian regime.” Wikipedia.
[7] Supra n. 2.
[8] “In the Allegory of the Cave, Plato distinguishes between people who mistake sensory knowledge for the truth and people who really do see the truth.” (See Philosophyzer).
HOA Constitutional Government 