Independent tribunal adjudication of HOA disputes in AZ held unconstitutional

An Arizona appellate court declared that the independent tribunal adjudication of HOA disputes by the Off. of Admin. Hearings was unconstitutional. After four attempts, the Arizona CAI law firm of Carpenter Hazlewood Delgado & Wood had finally obtained its long sought victory. (See Gelb v. Casa Contenta HOA, CA-CV 09-0744, Ariz. App. Div. 1, Oct. 28, 2010).

If you followed my time line in the Merrit case (2008), Carpenter was desperately seeking to get OAH declared unconstitutional.  It started with Brown v, Terravita, but no decision was made.  Next followed Waugaman where Judge Downie decided it was unconstitutional, but applied the decision only to the HOA at issue.  Along came Merrit v. Phoenix Townhouses and a decision was quickly made to take the case up on the constitutionality question, wherein Carpenter sought the Downie ruling to be applied to ALL HOAs.  However, Merrit got out of the HOA before the appeal was made, making it a moot question without a concrete issue. However, the decision was not challenged except by me, and I was snubbed and denied any further filings in the case. (See The State of Arizona will not protect buyers of HOA homes! for the case study and court filings.)

At the same time as Merrit, perhaps Carpenter realizing this serious problem of standing to sue, raises the constitutionality question in Gelb at the superior court trial level (see ¶ 6) – just in case.  This was in Aug 2008, at the time Merrit was going on.  There was really nothing new in the Gelb decision as it reads from both Cactus Wren and Hancock, like with Downie in Waugaman, except the slap at the legislature trying to get around the courts that was made by Downie is missing.

 Question:    The HOA had won at the Office of Administrative Hearings.  Gelb was contesting the decision.  Why on earth would the HOA’s attorney challenge the constitutionality of the decision, which upon a win, would invalidate the OAH decision in favor of his client, the HOA????  Who was Carpenter working for????

FL attorney ridicules HOA Syndrome and homeowner sufferings

 
Shame on Ryan Poliakoff, a Florida attorney, and HOA activist and supporter.
  
He ridicules the suffering, and emotional and physical stress caused by unconscionable CC&R adhesion contracts, defended by the Poliakoffs and other CAI attorneys, and supported by pro-HOA statutes.  (Photo from Poliakoff article).

“So, let’s get this straight.  A kooky psychology professor famous for “cinematherapy,” a chiropractor and a politically-aware anti-HOA lawyer walk into a bar…

“In any event, if any of the maladies in the links above seem familiar to you, maybe you too are suffering from the dreaded HOA Syndrome.  I recommend you call your doctor.  But don’t get upset with me if she can’t stop laughing.  Maybe this post should be under comedy, after all.”

Note the failure to address statements made before various state legislative committees, among them Arizona, California, Texas and Florida’s own Rep. Robaina Hearings.  He should also read the comments to my Commentary,   
Psychologist defines the HOA Syndrome caused by oppressive HOAs

Shame on Poliakoff and those legislators who also see no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil — those who are active participants in the Unspoken Alliance of No negatives About HOAs.

 
Shame on Ryan Poliakoff!   He should be disbarred!
 

America Revisited – My Country Was of Thee

America Revisited

 

My country was of thee.

Now with no liberty,

whose loss I sing.

Land where your freedom died

 Constitution aside

where HOAs reside,

profiteers bring.

 

Government by the few

Is Constitution through?

Sadly I cry.

My private property

is mine no longer free.

Accepted as it be,

freedom will die. 

 

Private contracts decide

writ by a few who hide.  

It cannot be.

Aristocrats control,

the people lost their soul

gave up their noble goal,

this do I see.

 

HOAs override

democracy they hide,

of this I sing.

Legislators  agree

no evil do they see.

From sea to shining sea,

let freedom ring.

                                

                                 George K. Staropoli

                      Oct. 21, 2010

 

 

 The national homeowner rights advocacy  patriotic  song.   Recite same as America (My Country Tis  of Thee). 
  
 

 

Unrecognized, de facto government: the State of Frankland should have written CC&Rs

 
And you thought that unrecognized de facto goverments, like HOAs regimes, were a figment of my imagination.

The State of Franklin was set up in 1784 out of the westerly portion of the colonial state of North Carolina. Shortly after the War of Independence the original colonies were asked to pay for the war efforts and create a country with a sound financial policy. Since the taxing the population was difficult and cash was in short supply North Carolina ceded the western portion of the state to the federal coffers. Before the Congress could accept the offer North Carolina withdrew the offer. The citizens of the region decided that federal rule in the meantime was probably a good idea since North Carolina as a state had given this remote region little support in its fight with the Indians or protection from criminal refugees. They saw other benefits as an independent state in terms of taxation, representation and an understanding attitude toward local problems. Representatives of the North Carolina counties of Sullivan, Washington, Greene, and Davidson accepted the offer of cessation to federal territory. The state of Franklin existed for only four years to finally merge with the new state of Tennessee. 

http://www.next1000.com/family/GRUBB/sullivan.tenn.html

Attempt at statehood
  
The State of Franklin, known also as the Free Republic of Franklin or the State of Frankland (the latter being the name submitted to the Continental Congress when it considered the territory’s application for statehood[1]), was an autonomous United States territory created in 1784On May 16, 1785, a delegation submitted a petition for statehood to the Continental Congress. Seven states voted to admit what would have been the 14th federal state under the proposed name Frankland. The number of states voting in favor of statehood, however, fell short of the two-thirds majority required to admit a territory to statehood under the Articles of Confederation. Late the following month, the government again convened to address their options and to replace the vacancy at Speaker of the House, which had been held by the late William Cage. Addressing the vacancy, Joseph Hardin was elected to the Speaker of the House position. Then, in an attempt to curry favor for their cause, delegation leaders changed the proposed name to “Franklin” (after Benjamin Franklin), and even initiated a correspondence with the patriot to sway him to support their cause. Franklin politely refused, writing:

I am sensible of the honor which your Excellencey and your council do me, but being in Europe when your State was formed I am too little acquainted with the circumstances to be able to offer you anything just now that may be of importance, since everything material that regards your welfare will doubtless have occurred to yourselves. …I will endeavor to inform myself more perfectly of your affairs by inquiry and searching the records of Congress and if anything should occur to me that I think may be useful to you, you shall hear from me thereupon.[4]Franklin’s letter to Governor John Sevier, 1787

Independent Republic

After the failed statehood attempt, the now de facto independent republic was ‘officially’ re-named Franklin.

 Up to this point, the government had been assembling at Jonesborough, mere blocks from the competing (although idle) North Carolina seat of government. Because of this, Greeneville was declared the new capital. The first legislature to meet there did so in December, 1785. At Greeneville, they finally adopted a permanent constitution, known as the “Holston Constitution”,[5] a decree which was modeled on that of North Carolina with few changes.

The new legislature made treaties with the Indian tribes in the area, opened courts, incorporated and annexed five new counties (see map below), and fixed taxes and officers’ salaries.[6] Barter was the economic system de jure, with anything in common use among the people allowed in payment to settle debts, including federal or foreign money, corn, tobacco, apple brandy, and skins (Sevier himself was often paid in deer hides). Citizens were granted a two-year reprieve on paying taxes, but this lack of currency and economic infrastructure slowed development and created confusion.

The year 1786 was the beginning of the end of the small state. Franklin was placed in a precarious position by not having been admitted to the United States. Because it shunned North Carolina’s claims of sovereignty over it, Franklin did not have the benefit of either the national army or the North Carolina militia. North Carolina offered to waive all back taxes if Franklin would reunite with its government. When this offer was rejected, North Carolina moved in troops under the leadership of Col. John Tipton and re-established its own government in the region. The two rival administrations competed side by side for many months. Loyalties were divided among local residents.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Franklin

  

HOA Syndrome reaction: you knew what you were getting into

Professor Gary Solomon held his seminar describing a collection of physical and emotional disorders collective named, the HOA Syndrome.i In the Las Vegas FOX5 News coverage of the eventii, Solomon said “dealing with a homeowners association is enough to cause physical and emotional harm, including stress, anger, fear and paranoia.” He added, “Harass the neighbors enough, keep them in line and set them up with fine after fine after fine.”

It may be a surprie to some, but this is not new stuff. Viewing these same symptoms from a legal standpoint, Donie Vanitizian, JD, wrote about Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in her 2002 book, Villa Appalling!iii Part II of this 519 page book is devoted to these issues and the causes of these issues. Examples include:

“Toxic Turmoil – “Because there is no viable means for homeowners to express their frustrations with the conditions under which they are forced to live, they are plagued with acute stress. . . . With no government agency interested in their plight or the problems created by these developments in general, homeowners are left to their own devices.” (p. 225).

 Vanitizian goes on to say that, Homeowners very foolishly trust that board members automatically have a ‘conscience.’ They don’t. Homeowners blindly look to the association as a ‘figurehead’ that somehow oversees that justice and truth prevail. It doesn’t.” (p. 233).

As expected, denials came from association managers who are at the heart of the HOA Syndrome, as HOA boards defer the operation of the HOA to these persons. In a statement by one manager, speaking about the homeowners, we see the truth of the matter when the manager states, “Homeowners shouldn’t complain because they knew what they were buying into. You know what the expectations are.”  This a frank admission of the oppression and intimidation caused by HOAs that produce anxiety, fear, emotional stress, and the obvious loss of one’s home and financial conditions. Does this person really believe that Americans are demented and masochistic, relishing injuries to be inflicted upon them? And freely, openly, and willing accept these conditions while giving their home as collateral to the survival of the HOA, and forgoing any semblance of due process protections for the greater glory of the HOA? Really!

I ask this manager and all managers, especially those trained by the national HOA “educator” Community Associations Institute, CAI, “How come you by this falsehood?” This attitude reflects a “You’re damn right we consider the harsh, unjust strict enforcement of arbitrary rules as the way of life in an HOA.” Most of these so-called professionals do not understand the origins and intentions of the profit-seeking individuals who created this legal scheme, where these authoritarian and draconian methods were necessary for the survival of this new, untried approach to housing in 1964. And is still carried forward today where state legislators see no evils with authoritarian, private governments protected by state legislation — no enforcement by means of penalties for HOA board violations, but the homeowner can lose everything — and operating outside constitutional protections. The HOA, for some unstated government interest, must survive and the Constitution can be denied when necessary!

So, what do HOA boards and managers have to fear if they are unethical, violate state laws, and are grossly unjust and arbitrary in their dealings with their members? A slap on the wrist, maybe, if the homeowner is principled enough to spend his time and money just to get the HOA to do what it’s supposed to do. Apparently, our government doesn’t think that the compliance by private government HOAs with their statutory and contractual obligations is not a matter of general public concern. Apparently, they, too, believe in a masochistic and demented American population who cherish living under such conditions and need no protections.

Welcome to the New America of HOA-Lands.iv


References

 i  See “Psychologist defines the HOA Syndrome caused by oppressive HOAs”, HOA Constitutional Government, October 7, 2010.

ii  See “Professor: Homeowners Get Ill From HOAs”, Fox5 News, Las Vegas, October 1, 2010.

iii  Villa Appalling! – Destroying the Myth of Affordable Community Living, Donie Vanitizian and Stephen Glassman (Villa Appalling Publishing, Inc 2002).

iv  See Understanding the New America of HOA-Land, George K. Staropoli (StarMan Publishing 2010).