3 ms·
Yes and no. HOAs can be a PITA and petty and I err on the side of less governance but some people are recalcitrant, stubborn and just set in their ways. It's
by mc32 1y ago
Yes and no. HOAs can be a PITA and petty and I err on the side of less governance but some people are recalcitrant, stubborn and just set in their ways. It's a damned if you do and damned if you don't.
HOAs are usually clear in their rules, so if you want to live in a predictable neighborhood you can choose to live in one. IF you want more laisses faire neighborhoods you can pick one that does not have an HOA.
- mcny 1y agoExcept when most of the city lives in an HOA, it is very difficult to convince the city to spend money in public works. Less public spending => lower taxes => less money for public spending
- firesteelrain 1y agoLogic doesn’t make sense - it’s less for cities or counties to worry about because code enforcement and upkeep is outsourced to a certain extent
- jjav 1y ago> HOAs can be a PITA and petty and I err on the side of less governance but some people are recalcitrant, stubborn and just set in their ways. Recalcitrant about what? About using their own private property in a way they want (that doesn't violate city/state law)? Well yes, they sure should be. It needs to be illegal for any HOA to have any say about that.