4 ms·

HOAs aren't contrary to the American love of freedom--they are a result of it. The ability to create HOAs is the direct result of our broad freedom of associati

HOAs aren't contrary to the American love of freedom--they are a result of it. The ability to create HOAs is the direct result of our broad freedom of association. If you don't like HOAs... then don't move into a neighborhood with an HOA. If you have to live in a neighborhood with an HOA and you want to change the way it runs, then change the way it runs. Convince your neighbors to make a change. Run for a seat on the board. You'll be surprised how easy it is to get elected. If you can't convince your neighbors to make the change you want, then you'll just have to live with the crushing oppression of the democratic process. What's the alternative? Banning neighborhoods from associating without giving HOA members a say in the matter? That wouldn't make us more free, it would just transfer control out of the neighborhood and up to the City/County/State, where your control over your own neighborhood is transferred to people who don't live in the neighborhood. Does that make us more democratic? It is my sincere wish that each and every person who champions an HOA ban is rewarded with a neighbor who repairs roof leaks with tarps and tires, puts junk cars on cinderblocks in their un-mowed front yard, and keeps a rooster--enjoy your "freedom", brother!

zamadatix 4y ago
> That wouldn't make us more free, it would just transfer control out of the neighborhood and up to the City/County/State, where your control over your own neighborhood is transferred to people who don't live in the neighborhood. Does that make us more democratic? It can and we have decided this many times. As example - nationally it's why a neighborhood can't decide to be "whites only" anymore. "Just convince your neighbors" wasn't working out everywhere so people convinced enough it was better worth deciding once instead of by location. Of course it leaves more nuance than "all powerful HOA or ban" when it comes to voting on how society should be allowed to work. E.g. people can want building codes to protect general health and safety, especially in context of needing to provide emergency services when things go wrong without wanting to specify how often you need to paint the garage door. An example more relevant to the useful portion of HOAs would be wanting to allow them for community pooling for better street cleaning/clearing or a community bus stop for the kids while not wanting to allow them for what color the fence is (coming back to the GP).
amanaplanacanal 4y ago
Honestly the rooster is the only thing there that would actually bother me, and in my city they aren't allowed.

zamadatix 4y ago

> That wouldn't make us more free, it would just transfer control out of the neighborhood and up to the City/County/State, where your control over your own neighborhood is transferred to people who don't live in the neighborhood. Does that make us more democratic? It can and we have decided this many times. As example - nationally it's why a neighborhood can't decide to be "whites only" anymore. "Just convince your neighbors" wasn't working out everywhere so people convinced enough it was better worth deciding once instead of by location. Of course it leaves more nuance than "all powerful HOA or ban" when it comes to voting on how society should be allowed to work. E.g. people can want building codes to protect general health and safety, especially in context of needing to provide emergency services when things go wrong without wanting to specify how often you need to paint the garage door. An example more relevant to the useful portion of HOAs would be wanting to allow them for community pooling for better street cleaning/clearing or a community bus stop for the kids while not wanting to allow them for what color the fence is (coming back to the GP).

amanaplanacanal 4y ago

Honestly the rooster is the only thing there that would actually bother me, and in my city they aren't allowed.