Tag: legislature

HOA advocates must deal with reality for success

In a study I did in 2009 on Bar complaints in total, using its reports, only 15% of the complaints submitted 2005 –2008 resulted either in a Bar sanction, or a Supreme Court finding of a violation of law – 9% for the SC and 6% for the Bar. Of all the cases involving the HOA attorneys, I am aware of only 2 cases that resulted in “guilty” findings – one brought by a court appointed Receiver and one by a judge.

The State Bar’s real name is, The Benevolent and Protective Order of Attorneys (BPOA).

Complaints filed against an attorney must follow the same process as in civil court: cite the laws and Rules of Conduct broken, and supply concrete evidence of wrongdoing.

In the past I posted copies of the Arizona AG’s response to requests for help, as well as ADRE’s “not my job” response.  Both agencies said, “Go tell it to the Legislature.”

Arizona Attorney General will not prosecute for HOA justice

ADRE: Licensed AZ R.E. agents can do as they please in HOAs — Not My Job

 

 

Will legislators stop CAI attorney acts of bad faith?

As a concrete example of a lack of good faith by HOA attorneys, that smells of aiding and abetting the board to get around the letter and intent of the law, is the newly effective Arizona statute permitting the videotaping of board meetings. Just 2 weeks after the signing of the bill into law, and still 3 months away from its effective date, the CAI member attorneys at Carpenter Hazlewood (CHDW) began their campaign against this open meeting law. They began by offering suggestions as how HOAs can adopt what CHDW considered reasonable rules. No board came forward and said, “How do I beat this law and protect the board?” as far as I know. (Such actions by a board would in itself be a violation of its duties of good faith to the owners as a whole).

Returning to the example at hand, Carpenter Hazelwood, through the management firm of AAM, the board informed the members of the Tatum Highlands CA board’s “reasonable” restrictions that, as usual, are one-way against the homeowner. Note that the HOA government is restricting free speech by not allowing dissemination or publication of the videotapes. Now, why would anyone videotape the meeting if not to distribute it for others who did not attend the meeting? What is the board afraid of? Some hanky-panky goings on?

It is quite clear that CAI does not act in good faith with respect to either the letter or intent of the laws. Rather than adopting the CAI Central propaganda that calls for creating harmonious, vibrant communities, which the homeowners can be proud of, its minions seek total advantage for the HOA.

State legislators must face up to reality of acts of bad faith by CAI attorneys and put a stop to this madness in no uncertain terms!

Read the complete Commentary here.

 

Making substantive HOA reform legislation happen

A few years ago I produced the Rules of Engagement designed for advocates to combat the undue influence of CAI and other pro-HOA activists who had controlled the legislative playing field for years. Simply put, the Rules call for challenging, confronting, and exposing the issues with the facts based on fundamental principles. The Rules have proven successful, at least in Arizona and with CAI Central where they have been applied.

 

Once our opponents realize that they no longer control the playing field, as they must pause and defend their positions, they will become less outspoken in the media and be more circumspect in what they say and claim. This leveling of the playing field is a direct result of advocates having demonstrated the validity and strength of their positions. Its a basic necessity that the legislators, the media, and public be educated.

 

However, CAI and its paid minions still have a strong influence in the legislatures that must be overcome – I call it “walking the halls of the legislature and whispering in the ears of the legislators.” They are paid lobbyists and we are just citizen advocates. California and Florida have strong Evil Empire contingents, with other states having varying degrees of opposition. You know the strength of your opposition.

 

To overcome the opposition in the legislature, advocates must clearly understand and accept the fact that no legislature in any state is a friend of homeowner rights advocates. History has shown that to be the case, loud and clear. What has occurred is a relatively small number of legislators taking on the cause of the homeowner against the political party leadership opposition to reforms. I say again: the political party leadership is opposed to substantive HOA reform legislation.

In order to make a difference and obtain substantive legislative reforms, homeowners must find a legislative champion with courage, perseverance and political abilities to successfully fight our cause and make reform legislation happen. And these legislative White Knight champions, in order to be successful, must find outspoken support from the people and the media.

 

Advocates must find a media personality or reporter who can overcome the opposition from its editors and media owners to sally forth and expose the goings on and opposition from legislators. They must make news and force the opposition to defend its positions in public, using the statements and arguments of the advocates.

 

And, in order to accomplish the above, an advocate champion, preferable with many followers, must speak out with unassailable facts and arguments in the media, on the internet, and wherever he can have his voice heard. The best approach is to base these reform arguments in fundamental principles of democratic government, justice and in basic American values and beliefs. Remember that “maintaining property values,” or “no government interference,” or “HOAs are the voice of the people” are not fundamental values.

 

(As an important aside, one function of government is to maintain an orderly society by establishing justice where one faction does not dominate a weaker faction. See The Federalist Papers, #51. Who else can do this in the absence of legitimate public government? Vigilantes? Reliance on the goodwill of your HOA board that has no legal obligation to do so?).

 

Reform legislation can happen! Following the above guidelines will help make it happen, sooner rather than later, or never. Your state and your situation are not any different from all that that has gone before you across the country. As George Santayana wrote, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Truth In HOAs Poll update: 9% would surrender their rights to HOA

Aug. 15, 2011 results

The initial response after 1 day to my Truth In HOAs Poll of July 12th was a 98% vote of NO, they could not agree to the Disclosure Agreement. Only 1 YES vote was recorded. Understanding that this may reflect an anti-HOA audience, I allowed the Poll to remain open this past month (and will remain open) to record any change in attitude by the respondents, noting that pro-HOA polls sponsored by CAI and RIM have recorded a 70% “satisfied with their HOA” response.

The Truth In HOAs internet poll is freely available to all on the internet by simply visiting my Commentaries blog, and as notified by my numerous email list posts, my responses to homeowner inquiries, and links provided in my comments to many online media articles. It s not a telephone calling from a pre-selected list.

Within 2 weeks the YES votes for both categories dropped somewhat to 95% with a split between “YES, I would sign” regardless and “YES, I would sign, but I want property value protections.” Today, a month later with a small increment in respondents, the YES responses come to 9% and the NO response to 91%. The split in YES votes shows an small widening with the unconditional YES dominating.

It’s hard to believe that there are some people who have no concern for their rights. This 9% represents “hard-liners or “true believers.” The results are unmistakably clear as homeowner rights advocates have been shouting for years – the support for a valid consent to be governed by the courts and state legislatures is based on a false and misguided view of the authoritarian, private government HOA regimes that are unaccountable to the legitimate and legal constitutional public government.

The HOA supporters, including CAI, do not have clean hands! It’s well beyond time to stop this mockery of the Constitution and mockery that HOAs represent the true voice of the people. And, the state legislatures well know that there are existing statutes that permit “private communities” to exist yet be accountable to Constitutional public government as a state entity, and retain the perceived benefits of restricted amenities, “ordinances,” community “taxes,” etc. (See a Proposal for the Muni-zation of HOAs).

I invite any and all online media, and those public interest organizations who fight for individual rights, to duplicate this poll for their viewers. Let’s get to the whole truth by publishing this poll, or stop telling your viewers that you tell the truth!!!

It should be noted that another marked rebuttal to these “satisfied” polls was a recent Phoenix CBS affiliate, KPHO, poll on whether or not an HOA Syndrome – a PTSD resulting from living in an HOA, diagnosed by Dr. Gary Solomon – was real. The KPHO internet poll results showed a 69% response that the HOA Syndrome was alive in HOAs. (See HOA Syndrome survey: YES, it exists!).

Please freely distribute this commentary/email to interested parties and your local media.

Exercises in futility – demanding the HOA to comply

Over the years I’ve heard many, many stories that were, unfortunately, exercises in futility. These stories followed the same basic pattern, except the names and places changed. A homeowner in a dispute with his HOA exchanges emails/letters/calls with the board or HOA attorney or manager, one or all, citing blatant violations of the governing documents and/or state laws.

The responses from the board or its hired hands repeatedly deny any wrongdoing or failure to comply with its legal obligations. The HOA responses often include extreme positions and interpretations of its obligations, and ludicrous defenses of its position. Further exchanges only serve to increase the anger and frustration of the homeowner with a good possibility of additional attorney fees for answering his emails.

The bottom line is that the homeowner must sue to get the HOA to meet its obligations under the law – no state agency is going to get involved. These exchanges only serve as evidence of the board’s bad faith actions and flagrant violations of its obligations. And that’s all they are good for. Showing them to the media, and if they air the story, has no legal effect on the HOA. Showing them to your fellow neighbors gets you nowhere as many have discovered.

Unless these exchanges are geared to possible and eventual legal action, they are otherwise exercises in futility.

Possibly, only possibly, can these documented exchanges become useful when sent to your state representative demanding legislation for state enforcement of HOA board violations. Homeowners must demand substantial penalties and fines against the board and individual board members, if warranted.

The continued presumption by state legislatures that the HOA will act in good faith and obey the law and governing documents has been disproven time and time by the HOA’s wanton abuse of the laws. This desired response by the legislature will only happen when a sufficiently large volume of documented complaints are received from many homeowners.