Tag: legislature

CAI soundly thrashed by Arizona Senate

The Arizona Central CAI Chapter was dealt a sound thrashing today by the Arizona Senate. HB 2441, written line-by-line by CAI, and submitted to a way too friendly legislator, was overwhelmingly defeated in a 3 – 27 vote.

In a desperate attempt to remain influential in the legislature and before HOA boards, CAI proposed a bill that contradicted its years and years of opposition to HOA reform legislation. Among its hollowed arguments that were solidly and repeatedly reversed were: local democratic control of the HOA and unwanted government interference with HOA contracts. With respect to amending the CC&Rs — those documents handed down by developer attorneys and amended by CAI HOA attorneys for over 40 years — CAI proposed a 2/3 vote of the votes cast under a 50% quorum to amend the CC&Rs. (Read carefully: That’s 1/3 of all the members!)

And, to insure that local control remained in the hands of a minority — also known as an oligarchy — that the members could not have recourse to the courts to appeal any amendment to the CC&Rs. In an arrogant display of misguided power, at the same time that CAI proposed this bill, CAI was opposing the right of homeowners to take their HOA problems to an independent tribunal, the Office of Administrative Hearings.

Scott Carpenter, the CAI attorney who submitted the bill, proudly boasted in his Jan 10, 2011 enewsletter, “2011 Legislative Preview”,

 

I have always and will advocate for legislation that keeps control of community associations local – with the members and their elected board of directors.  I will disfavor legislation that usurps or trumps local control in favor of a one-size-fits-all approach that the legislature has used in recent years to address political signs, solar panels, real estate signs, parking and other issues.

 

Apparently, he meant “local control” even if by means a minority of the members. Apparently, he meant with the imposition of state law, a fiat, stripping homeowner contractual rights away from them. With HB 2441, he gave meaning to the above statement and was seeking the aid of the legislature to interfere in the CC&Rs contract. In the most despicable and un-American provisions of the bill, CAI sought to impose these minority rights on homeowners who would lose their private property rights under the CC&RS – without their consent. A contract that CIA always told them that they had agreed to, and was binding upon them.

 

Now, to serve CAI’s self-interests, majority rule was out, and contract interference by the legislature was OK! See the CAI lobbyist’s feeble attempt to justify the bill HB 2441. Read the criticism of the March version, susequent changes did not materially affect the essential problems with the bill. Go to

AZ bill to allow 1/3 vote to change CC&Rs violates your private property rights.

The CAI ‘Philosopher-kings’ are best to rule HOAs?

 Behold! 

This time of year when state legislatures are in session and advocates are seeking to restore lost rights and freedoms, across the land we hear the voices of the self-anointed HOA “philosopher-kings”  from CAI. These legal-academic aristocrats fervently believe that their superior knowledge, training and understanding are best suited to govern  HOA-Land.  That All — the people, the HOA boards, the agencies, the courts and the legislatures — should behold and obey their voices of wisdom.  

But the truth is, is that anyone attending a CAI conference, seminar, class, lecture or program, or who reads any of its printed materials, or hears its lobbyist speak beofre the legislature, will not encounter any serious discussion of the constitutional issues as set forth in the “Truth in HOAs” Disclosure Agreement. Rather, he will be treated to one of CAI’s “educational”, “indoctrination” or, as I call them, “recycling” programs, designed to teach attendees what is necessary to live happily under the authoritarian HOA regime. And not subject themselves emotional stress or financial loss.

While CAI maintains that it teaches the law as it is, it fails to educate attendees as to the negative side of HOA living — the loss of rights, privileges and immunities as a citizen of the US and his state. Nor does CAI inform the attendees as to its role in shaping HOA laws as a result of its intense lobbying efforts. CAI, therefore, is guilty of misrepresntation by half-truths. If those who are in the know do not object, what can be expected of those seeking to know, the attendees? And how can they know if they are not so educated and no warning or advisories notices are published by state agencies? (This was a defense by the common German citizens in response to why nothing was done to oppose the Nazis). This is not the conduct of the philosopher-king who believes that the truth was necessary for good government and good rulers.

 

 

Plato introduced the concept of “philosopher-king” in Book VI of his Republic where he discussed what type of government is best, and who is best to rule the people.  This concept placed high value on  learned persons who pursue true knowledge, and therefore those who know best should rule best.  The philosopher-king served as a basis for modern day utopian societies of technocrats running society; such as communism and the Community Associations Institute (CAI) that was initially created with all the “stakeholders” as part of the ruling body.  The stakeholders represented the various industries of interest participating in the governing of this hopefully altruistic organization. CAI was to resolve HOA problems and to lead the people to paradise on earth (my sarcasm).  (See Chapter 5 of Privatopia, , and Community Associations by Donald Stabile (2000), a CAI & ULI funded book).

Who is to be held accountable for continued HOA problems?

A Texas legislator bemoaned to the media the other day, “a decade and a half of lawmaker discussions with little progress.”  Another called HOAs “at least quasigovernmental,” and that “the scales are still tilted to HOA protections.” 

The Texas HOA Reform Coalition group wrote on March 19, 2011, 

But remember what legislators say in public and how they vote can be different when push comes to shove.  While legislators may feel more HOA reform is needed and say so publicly, in the end many legislators have other priorities they are unwilling to sacrifice in order to take a stand against the well-financed HOA lobbyists, lawyers, and more importantly the Texas builders who impose HOAs on subdivisions as a funding source.  (Texas House Committee Lashes Out Against HOAs).

This is just one recent example of the reasons that HOA problems have continued for over 47 years, since the introduction of the “game plan” by the Urban land Institute in 1964 (See TB#50: The Mass Merchandising of HOAs by ULI).  For  over ten years homeowner rights advocates have appeared before the state legislatures and presented their just and legitimate grievances in the states with heavy concentrations of HOAs — Florida, Texas, Arizona, California — for naught.  For over ten years advocates have “petitioned for redress in the most humble terms, our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury.”  (Decl. of Independ.).  Now this social and political cancer has spread to such states as Montana, Washington, Alabama, North Carolina, Nevada, Colorado, and Pennsylvania to name a few.

The cause of the continued protection of these private, authoritarian governments that deny constitutional protections for homeowners, and  are allowed to operate unaccountable to the state, can be laid before each and every state legislature.  They and the individual legislators — excepting those too few individuals who had attempted to bring about much needed reforms, but who have attained very limited results against the strength of “the system”  — cannot say in all honesty, “not me, him or them.”  It is each of them who are accountable for the repudiation of our democratic system of government, much in the same manner that the German people succumbed to the National Socialist Party with its strident corporate supporters and were led astray.  (See section 5 of,  HOAs in America: the illusion of democracy in a dysfunctional republic).

It is well beyond the time for state legislators to see the reality before them and to make amends to the  good people of their state.  Information abounds in these various reform groups and on their internet web sites, available to those who truly seek a just and legitimate state government, and a local government answerable as all state entities are answerable to the Constitution.  No more shall private contracts be used as a devise to subvert the Constitution and our democratic form of government for their own persona agendas.

FL supreme court upholds private contract over constitution

 

This decision sounds really exciting, but . . . . . Read the relevant part of the Florida Supreme Court opinion (emphasis added):

 

The Grand’s declaration, which was filed in 1986, adopts the terms of “the Condominium Act of the State of Florida (Florida Statute 718, et seq.) in effect as of the date of recording this Declaration” and does not contain “as amended from time to time” language subjecting it to future statutory changes to the Condominium Act. See Angora Enters., Inc. v. Condo. Ass’n of Lakeside Vill., 796 F.2d 384, 386 (11th Cir. 1986) (noting that express agreement by parties in the declaration of condominium regarding application of future statutes to the association may determine whether parties have a “constitutional protection against future amendments to the Florida Condominium Act which, absent such an agreement, might arguably impair a party’s contract obligation”).   Cohn v. The Grand Condo Assn., SC10-430, (Fla.  3/31/2011).

 

In essence, the court is saying, as I’ve always opposed, that the people have the right to determine via a private contract whether the supreme law of the land, and of the state, applies to them.  And by constructive notice alone, without explicit consent, the courts hold that you surrendered your rights! This is wrong!  This “opt out” is ridiculous!  And it is an essential defect in the HOA/condo legal scheme – private parties can draft and file a document, especially a declaration, that exempts them from the application of the Constitution and laws protecting the people. So, why bother to have a constitution anyway?

 

Another advance for The New America of HOA-Lands. 

HOAs in America: the illusion of democracy in a dysfunctional republic

In order to understand the public policy toward homeowner associations with its manufactured appearance of bona fide homeowner consent, we need to examine the political climate and value system within our society.

See short video paralleling the decline of Rome. 

1. The empty value system – anything goes

The Declaration of Independence provided the fundamental basis for the unalienable rights that no government may take away from the people. Unfortunately, contemporary political and judicial leadership has failed to retain and uphold our unalienable rights in a replacement value system of ethics and morality.

2.  The decline in the caliber of elected officials and the rise of political party ideology

 The political system has evolved to a point where the vast majority of elected officials in each party feel comfortable only in advancing ideas acceptable to their core supporters. The political system now rewards ideology over pragmatism. . . . What’s unusual now is that the political system is more polarized than the country. Rather than reducing the level of conflict the ideology increases it.

3.  Legitimate government and the illusion of justice

And speaking of justice, the necessary ingredient for the claim to the legitimacy of government and to be obeyed in conscience, Allen offers Machiavelli’s advice, “Because the [right] to rule is rather the appearance of justice rather than justice itself, the appearance of injustice defeats every [right] to rule.”

4.  The rise of authoritarian private HOA governments

“Therefore this Restatement is enabling toward private governance. The question of whether a servitude unreasonably burdens a fundamental constitutional right is determined as a matter of property law [meaning these servitudes], not constitutional law.” And, “What has been deliberately and carefully made ‘socially acceptable’ was, not too long ago, thought to be irresponsible — both financially and morally.”

5. The transformation of society and the acceptance of the New America of HOA-Lands.

 There are parallels between the acceptance and establishment of the HOA as an institution, and the influence and acceptance of Nazi doctrine in Germany before and during WW II. Both offered benefits and serious drawbacks, but only the pluses were seen and not the negatives. The rationale of the defenders of Nazism follow a similar pattern to that of the defenders of the HOA authoritarian, private government.

Mayer wrote that the “good” Germans went along “in the usual sincerity that required them only to abandon one principle after another, to throw away, little by little, all that was good.”

 

Read the complete article HOAs in America.