Tag: government

TN firehouse adopts HOA philosophy — a business entity

If you haven’t heard, a Tennessee firehouse let a house burn down because the owner didn’t pay a subscription fee, above paying his general taxes.  The firehouse is operating as a business:  revenues  = expenses.  But, they are a public government entity and not a business!

CAI, in its efforts to avoid having HOAs declared a de jure public entity, and subject to constitutional restrictions, has confused the issue by treating the HOA as a privately contractual business.  As I have explained many times (See in general, Understanding the New America of HOA-Lands), government is more than a business, simply based on their objectives —  making a profit vs serving the people.  The HOA legal scheme as a fascist style of constitution — the state comes first above individual liberties and freedoms, and the objective of the state is corporation/business based.  The same as we see with the firehouse.

 The purpose of our government is clearly stated in the Preamble to the Constitution, and by the Social Contract (see Understanding) whereby man surrenders his natural rights to government in exchange for protection of their unalienable rights against harmful factions in society, to provided for a smooth and organized functioning of society by setting rules and regulations, by caring for those facing hardships, and by punishing offenders of the society’s rules (criminal acts). 

This incident is just but one incident of the blurring of the lines between institutionalized private HOA governments and public government.  Our elected representatives are confused about the purpose of government. Government cannot be done away with under dogmatic ideological cries of “government intrusion”, but is necessary for justice, to protect our freedoms, and in no way can be seen as evil while subversive — opposing  Constitutional government — HOAs are praised and mandated.

Comments on CAI opposition to FHFA ban on HOA transfer fees – Notice 2010-N-11

Community Associations Institute, CAI, distributed its Oct 10, 2010 release in opposition to HOA transfer fee ban by the Feds — disguised as a generic appeal for the desperate need for property transfer fees to help mismanaged HOAs.    That’s “mismanaged” and mis-educated by the national educator of HOA boards, homeowners, government and everybody else — CAI.

It’s surface argument, designed to create fears in the minds of unknowing readers, is that the transfer fee gives HOAs much needed income, and the ban will take away what is a right of the private business HOA. The proposed Fed regulation would ban mortgage lenders from dealing with property sales subject to transfer fees.  Implied is that the HOA, like public government, must not be allowed to fail.

Here are a number of questionable statements from the national educator, controlled by lawyers.

1.  For HOAs to comply with the ban on fees in order to get mortgage lenders, CAI claims that the CC&Rs would need to be modified by the “standard” 2/3 vote, a near impossibility.  Well, not so. Most HOAs just take this on as a board decision, defending themselves by declaring that the CC&Rs allow the board may charges fees.  Period.  And if the CC&Rs were modified to include the new transfer fees, what’s the problem?  What say you, CAI?

2.  That these fees have been helped to fund reserve accounts is another CAI claim.  I say, What reserves?  I say, What “reserves for bad debts” standard AICPA procedures has been taught by CAI and used by HOAs to protect against income shortfalls?  None!  (See Using Bad Debt Accounting in HOA Budgets).  So, poorly managed HOAs by boards with defective and incomplete education resort to “socking it to them,” the sellers who will receive no consideration for the fee,. It goes to the HOA and the seller receives no benefit, except for the “payoff” to be able to sell his home.  Furthermore., some HOAs have been advised to stick it to the buyer by placing this payment as one that the buyer must pay into the sales agreement.  WOW!!  Where does the HOA get the nerve to impose on third-parties a cost of buying into the HOA, when there is no contract beyond buyer and the HOA?

3.  And CAI offers the “carrot” to existing homeowners, as if they are not subject to the fee.  CAI states that it will help “financially strapped community associations keep monthly assessments low.”

4.  With this release, CAI continues to promote the New America of HOA-Lands with its authoritarian, undemocratic private governance operating outside Constitutional protections for homeowners.  See Understanding the New America of HOA-Land.

5.  CAI should be investigated for a pattern of activity that supports subversive local governments that deny constitutional protections, sold under questionable methods —  the lack of informed consent and information about life in HOAs.

Ref:  

Notice of Proposed Guidance on Private Transfer Fee Covenants (75 FR 49932) 

Notice 2010-N-11 10/15/2010

Understanding the New America of HOA-Land

I assembled several of my publications into this eBook format (5.5 x 8.5 PDF) to present a comprehensive view of the substantive issues relating to the HOA – planned community legal scheme.  The first 3 booklets represent 16 pages, and the “American Political Government” booklet  is a more detailed presentation of some 45 pages.

The cover reads:

“What you need to know about the political and social effects of HOAs on the American way of life.”

“Accepting authoritarian government over democratic government.”

Table of Contents

1. HOAs as an established institution

2. Proposal for muni-zation of HOAs

3. Is there an ideal HOA “constitution”?

4. American political governments

5. George K. Staropoli

Supplemental ebook material (not included):The Foundations of Homeowners Associations and the New  America.

 

Other publications and information can be found at the Citizens for Constitutional Government web site, http://pvtgov.org.

Do homeowner regulations go too far?

  So his homeowners association levied fine after fine and put a lien on his home though he’d coughed up nearly $50,000 to pay fines and other related costs. Eventually, his home was foreclosed because Darius still owed $24,591.

On Aug. 15 – after losing his one-story home and two days before he would be evicted – Darius’ next door neighbor heard an explosion about 2:20 a.m. Patti McCallister ran outside, saw Darius’ home burning and called 911.

Firefighters found Darius’ badly burned body lying on the floor of his living room in the back of his home.

Do homeowner regulations go too far?     By Matt Tomsic
Matt.Tomsic@StarNewsOnline.com

Sep 3, 2010

 

My Reply:  

HOAs will continue to have serious problems because:

1.  They are based on an  undemocratic authoritarian legal scheme that does NOT place the individual rights and freedoms of the members first, as does our Constitution, but the monetary goal of maintaining property values.

2.   Consequently, this un-American private government  exists outside the Constitution and its protections of the people.  All the legal court battles are attempts to restore those lost rights.

3.   The misleading claims of agreement by homeowners is superficial and would not stand up to judicial scrutiny for the valid surrender of one’s rights.  The mere filing of CC&Rs with the county clerk is sufficient to legally bind lot owners, sight unseen, and is a mockery of both Constitutional and contract law.

4.  Then there is the unspoken alliance of local governments, state legislatures, consumer protection agencies, and public interest firms who shout “individual rights” and “no government interference”, but see no problem with private government interference.  And that also includes CAI.

5.   Community Associations Institute (CAI) was formed back in 1973 to address these problems with the HOA legal scheme, yet these problems continue to exist in spite of all that “education” provided for board members, managers, and legislators.  Would you hire a training firm with that record?  State and local governments seem not have a problem and hire “the failure to get results” CAI.

6.   CAI is on record in its amicus brief to the NJ appellate court in the Twin Rivers case, cautioning the court about the “unwise extension of constitutional protections to homeowners” in HOAs.   The common law synopsis of court decisions regarding covenants takes a decided editorial opinion rather than a neutral summary of the cases when it states, for example, that if there’s a difference between servitudes law (covenants) and constitutional law, servitudes law should apply (§ 3.1, comment h).

6.  The media, even in this article, takes the premise and presumption that the  HOA unquestionably has the right to act, and that its motives are pure and for the benefit of the community.  None of the above substantive issues are ever delved into.

In order to avoid another 40-odd years of continued injustice and discontent, government authorities and legislatures must address the above issue of substance, and stop their participation in the unspoken alliance of “No negatives about HOAs”.

The Unspoken Alliance: “No negatives about HOAs”

The Arizona Republic ran the article, HOA, Laveen man fight over historic flag. 

The HOA called the flag debris and said it broke neighborhood rules.. . . The flag’s a favorite emblem for the ‘tea party”‘movement.

 Reply Comment:

This is a solid First Amendment violation of the right to speak freely on politcal matters.  Supreme Court has upheld such rights. Any deed restriction or covenant that is against public policy or is unconstitutional is invalid and unenforceable. Long held law, thank goodness!

Now, you would think that the HOA attorney, Delgado. another member of the CAI law firm of Carpenter Hazlewood, would know that.  Wouldn’t you think so?   It is interesting that the media always fails to mention this affiliation with CAI, as many of these attorneys lecture on how to live happily in an HOA.  And they are supported by your local town government through the HOA Academy and Leadership Centre programs. 

Are the media and local supporting governments part of the unspoken alliance of, “No negatives about HOAs”?  

How about your Attorney General?  Your consumer protection agencies?  Your real estate department?  The Realtors?  Heard or read anything of substance against HOAs?  Gee, maybe I’m delusional and there are no serious issues of substance after all.