3 ms·
Agreed. The logical answer here is to limit the things HOAs can and cannot do rather than ban them outright. But that doesn't make for a good headline.
by afavour 1y ago
Agreed. The logical answer here is to limit the things HOAs can and cannot do rather than ban them outright. But that doesn't make for a good headline.
- wasjosh 1y agoOr how about if you don't want to join an HOA.... you don't join an HOA?
- immibis 1y agoExcept it's currently not optional because it comes with the house and it's with almost every house.
- LargeWu 1y agoIf the house is covered by an HOA, it's typically not optional. And in some areas it's very difficult to find housing not part of an HOA. I think somebody mentioned elsewhere in this thread that all new housing in Phoenix requires an HOA.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- ozim 1y agoLogical answer is to get reasonable people to vote when HOA is having vote. Don’t let Karen and her buddies run the meetings. People nagging about HOA seems like are not owners or not knowing how HOA works o r supposed to work.
- afavour 1y agoSame problem you have with any kind of local government: time. Busybodies with too much time on their hands will dominate. People who actually have lives to lead don't have the time to compete.