Yes, municipalities may have local ordinances and zoning restrictions. I’m less troubled by petty seeming rules being enforced at this level than at a higher level of government (simply petty, not reflecting racial motivations or anything like that). It presumably reflects the majority will of a fairly small community. If it doesn’t, and it really matters to a lot of the citizens, it won’t be that difficult to change through a grassroots effort. If you are in the minority, it applies to a small area which you can probably live outside of.
A common pattern I’ve seen is that the developer builds the amenities, and sets up the HOA to manage them, with the intent of eventually turning them over to local government control. The city doesn’t want to BUILD street lights, sewers and so on out on undeveloped land, but they will be willing to take them over once built. Of course, they will argue about them meeting their standards before they do so. I once lived in a townhouse complex that was in the process of turning the streetlights over to the city, one of the few HOA meetings I attended. The city claimed they had installed too many, and would only take them if they removed some. There was one guy there saying “Yeah, remove the one shining in my bedroom window”, and a lady all concerned that “her” streetlight would be removed. You can guess which of those two lights the city wanted to keep and which one they wanted to remove.
That was roughly the basis of my argument, except the property in question is technically mine and I would most likely be held accountable for any damages. My insurance agent came by and noticed the kids riding on it. I forget the exact term he used, but it was something along the lines of “irresistible temptation”, similar to having a trampoline in your front yard. Even though the kids are technically trespassing by being there, it’s my fault for taunting them with it. He suggested moving the fence up or planting a ground shrub, but the idea of having a slightly bigger back yard sounds more appealing to me. For the time being I just went to a dig site and got a half dozen big rocks, but now instead of having 12 year olds jump bikes there, I have 6 year olds climbing the rocks and having water ballon fights on them. Seems like a fence is a reasonable compromise, compared to going ‘legal-nuclear’ on the kids there or planting some ungainly bush I’ll have to water three times a week and let grow for years.
attractive nuisance
IANAL, but ISTM that there might be some sort of legal way around the HOA. For example, sue them for not allowing you to remove an ‘attractive nuisance’. If you are attempting to remove a dangerous situation and they are prohibiting you from doing so, then even though you may be sued in case of injury you should be able to sue them in turn for their actions.
If I were you, I’d just go ahead and build the damn fence, then provide a letter from your insurance company if the HOA gets uppity about it, which they may not even do.
That piece of your property constitutes an “attractive nuisance”, the same as an unprotected trampoline or unfenced swimming pool. You’re responsible for any accidents and injuries that happen because you’re expected to take steps to secure your property so kids can’t get to it.
That being said, you definitely want to talk to a lawyer to find out what you can do, or even whether the HOA can even block this legally. It’s not that you want to get into a pissing match with the HOA, it’s that you don’t want kids to get hurt on your property, and you don’t appreciate being forced into an untenable position by a greedy HOA that is more concerned about property values than about the safety of its residents. It helps if you have a written copy of their decision, or the minutes from that meeting.
You might also propose turning a small vacant lot into a park for kids, so they have a place to play safely. There was a small plot left over in my parents’ development after the rest of the lots were platted. The HOA agreed to use it as a playground so kids would have a safe place to play. IIRC, the developer paid for the playground equipment.
HOAs are a good system designed to keep the people who believe in HOAs away from the rest of us. They reap what they sow. Our laws are deficient in allowing members to sue HOAs in the public courts for getting what they asked for in the first place. Still, unkind, to act in the manner depicted in the OP’s cite when the guy was in the service though.
[sarcasm]
If this is a criticism of the US by a foreigner, then you obviously don’t understand American Exceptionalism. We are still better than you by our own definition, which is obviously better than yours.
[/sarcasm]
Montgomery Village hasn’t allowed trucks to be parked overnight in their driveways or garages since they were built in the 1960s. We have the same here and our bylaws actually cite MV as the reason. They have lifted it some since SUVs are technically trucks, it now says pickup truck. So they haven’t been fighting it for a few years, it’s been a few decades.
Covenants run with the land; i.e., restrictions, covenants, conditions, etc. in any recorded instrument gives notice to the public that the property in question is subject to those restrictions, covenants, etc. This is real estate law, not contract law.
My experience with HOA has been with condominiums, one of which I’ve lived in for 26 years and have served on the Board. A condo needs to levy assessments (and condos do it on a monthly basis) because the HOA is responsible for the maintenance and repair of all the “common elements” in the development. We don’t even have the amenities of tennis courts or swimming pool, but we do have a nice pond. Our monthly assessment is over $200, and this is mainly due to the fact that we have only 40 units. A larger development, with many more units, will have more people paying in. I know people who live in a condo development with all the amenities who have a smaller assessment. That is due to the larger number of units.
In a condo, the owner is responsible only for the interior portions of his unit; i.e., everything between the drywalls, inside of the roof (if the condo is a townhome), and the floors and ceilings.
A condo also has “limited common elements,” which are for a specific unit’s use, but is not owned 100% by the unit owner, such as sheds, patios, etc. Let me digress a minute to explain the difference between a condo and a townhouse, legally speaking. I said I live in a townhouse which is a condo. In a townhouse which is not a condo, the owner owns his part of the building but has no title to any other real estate in the development. The owner is granted easements over various portions of the land, for access, primarily. In a condo, each unit owner has an interest in all the common elements in proportion to the number of units he owns to the total.
For example, in my development, I own a 1/40th interest in all the common elements. Assessments are based on that interest.
If one owner does not pay his or her assessments, this burdens every other owner. The unit owner we foreclosed owed over $15,000. At $200 a month, you can imagine how many months she was in arrears. We tried to work out a deal, but she reneged on that. If an owner does not make a timely payment of the assessments (10-day leeway usually), a fine is assessed. Often we forgive the fines so we can, at least, get the assessments.
I’ve been on the Board, and it’s not fun. We have to attend monthly meetings, consider all the various variances owners seek, and manage the property. We (and most condos do) hire a professional manager. The monthly assessment is based on the annual budget the manager provides. The Board has the duty to either approve it or change the assessment, but the manager usually knows what the development needs. In addition, by law, a certain reserve must be maintained (in our case $20,000). Reserves are needed for roof repairs, wood repairs, repainting, etc.
In a condo development, the entire development should have a uniform appearance. If someone wants to build a deck that differs from the others, he needs approval from the Board.
rbroome:
The developer owns the property, of course. It is just vacant land, usually, when the developer purchases the property, or it could be an apartment house. It doesn’t matter. The developer must acquire 100% of the property. When it sells a unit, the sale contains the by-laws and Declaration of Condominium Property, or Master Deed (or whatever other name the state provides) setting forth all the covenants, restrictions, etc. This Declaration provides how the by-laws can be amended, usually by a 2/3 vote of all the owners at a meeting at which a quorum is present. The Board can do a lot of things, but some important matters, such as amending the by-laws, must be done by the Council (the unit owners).
In our development, it has been difficult to get unit owners to sacrifice their time and effort by being on the Board. If you are unhappy on how the Board is governing the property, then don’t re-elect them at the next annual meeting (required by law), that is if you bother to attend an annual meeting. When it comes time to have our annual meetings, we have a difficult time to get even a quorum, and, in most years, we would not have a quorum except for proxy votes. It has been my experience that those who complain the most about the assessments and how the Association is being run don’t even bother to attend annual meetings.
I just had to get back to certain statements that really irk me, having been a board member for several years for the condo I live in. One week, the board members spent hours each evening inspecting all the buildings, along with the construction company owner, for wood rot and other wood damage and brick damage that had to be repaired prior to painting of the units. The only thanks we got was “Why the special assessment?” You’re too busy to spend time on a board but then complain about the actions of the board? You’re not talkng about a condo HOA, but in a condo HOA, board members are hard to come by. Just attend an annual meeting and express your desire to be on the board.
Johny L.A.
A distinction must be made between HOA of condos (which, as others have said, is a necessity) and neighborhood HOA. In a condo, all the unit owner owns 100% is the inside of his unit. The maintenance of the outside of the building and all other property outside his unit is the responsibility of the HOA. A condo owner doesn’t even own a yard he can maintain since the outside of his property is part of the common elements. A condo owner doesn’t even paint his house, since that is the responsibility of the HOA.
Before we can discuss HOA, we must distinguish between the condo and the neighborhood HOAs because, although similar in some respects, they are different in many respects. They are absolutely necessary in a condo.
In the OP, although it wasn’t stated, it appears that this was a neighborhood HOA. We had to foreclose a condo unit which was over $15,000 in arrears of assessments, and then lost it all anyway because a mortgage, which was a prior lien, had a non-assumption clause. (We couldn’t just pay the monthly mortgage payments until we sold it.)
Voting out a HOA Board can be really, really hard.
I was asked to help a friend in getting some new blood elected to their HOA Board, because I had successfully run several citywide political campaigns in a city of about 1/3-million people. Their HOA Board was basically dominated by the management company (which got an increased fee each year, and had non-bid, sweetheart contracts for services, often with shell companies owned by the operators of the management company or their relatives). The Board & the management company worked together to keep out anybody who would question this cozy arrangement. The rules were incredibly biased in their favor, and new ‘rules’ seemed to appear constantly. Some examples:
[ul]
[li]We were prohibited from pushing campaign flyers under the doors to each unit. But ‘official’ communications from the HOA Board could be done that way, and done by paid employees. Oddly enough, these were usually signed by the same Board members who happened to be up for re-election this time.[/li][li]Postings on the ‘Community Bulletin Boards’ in the buildings had to be approved by the management company; none of our flyers were ever approved. But announcements of our opponents events like “Party to honor x for his 10 years service on the Board” were approved. And were held in the building meeting rooms; the same rooms that we were not allowed to use for meetings.[/li][li]We were not allowed to stand by the doors and offer flyers to residents entering the building, but current Board members were allowed to stand there and ‘greet’ residents (while wearing their Board namebadges).[/li][li]We were told by the Board that our campaign flyers could only be sent to residents by mail (expensive). But then the management company refused to provide a mailing list, citing concern for the ‘privacy’ of residents.[/li][li]They refused to allow us to either put announcements, buy advertisements, or submit letters to the editor in the Association Newsletter. But before the election there were a lot of ‘puff pieces’ about the current Board members, and their devotion & service to the community. (Oddly enough, mostly about the ones running for re-election this time.)[/li][li]There were lots of sudden ‘requirements’ for proxy votes that appeared after we started to turn in our proxies, somehow these always resulted in our proxies being invalidated. So we did a lot of work encouraging people to attend the Annual Meeting in person.[/li][li]Then the time of the Annual Meeting was suddenly changed to the middle of the day during a weekday. This made it very hard for younger, working people to attend the meeting, but didn’t bother retired people much. Guess which group was supporting us, and which was mainly supporting the current board.[/li][li]Vacancies on the Board were filled by appointment of the remaining Board, no announcement of the vacancy or anything. Some well-liked, long-time residents were placed on the ballot, then after winning the election, they resigned before ever attending a meeting, and were replaced by previous Board members who had not run for re-election.[/li][li]Biggest item: the lawyer hired by the HOA re-interpreted the rules to say that all proxy votes not returned by the due date would be voted by the management company. Guess who they voted them for.[/li][/ul]Really not much chance of winning an ‘election’ like this.
Here, several HOA’s have tried to enforce restrictions on political signs during elections. They have been challenged in Court, and nearly always lose. The Courts say that participating in elections is to be encouraged, and that prohibiting political signs is “inimical to the public good”.
They are allowed to have reasonable restrictions on the size of signs and how long they can be displayed, just like many cities do. HOA’s often see that as a loophole, and try to put unmeetable restrictions. Then there is another round of court battles, and they lose again. (And the residents pay the cost of these legal fees.)
So then the HOA tries to use intimidation – if anyone puts up a political sign, they let them know the HOA Board will go out of its way to ‘get’ them.
I think that is a most unusual case. In my condo development we encourage new blood to be board members and officers, but get few takers. We’ve had several different management companies in recent years because we’ve been unhappy with some. Last time we tried to save a few bucks, but you get what you pay for. We changed management companies at the last annual meeting. The management company offers an annual budget which must be approved by the board. It usually contains an increase in their fees as most budget items are increased, due to cost of living expenses rising.
One of the advantages of having a professional management company is that it has connections with various companies to do the landscaping, painting, wood work, pond control, etc.
Each unit owner gets one vote. If somebody owns two units, he or she gets two votes, of course. All our units are the same size.
The proper penalty for abuse of the legal system is outlawry (i.e. being placed outside the protection of the law). That would clear the decks for a few of the soldier’s buddies to drop in for a profound philosophical discussion of the error of the HOA’s ways.
How could they enforce this? Can a HOA really regulate something like this?
Home owners’ associations are America’s newest and lowest-level of government. Since they are so new, they have very few restrictions to protect members. My aunt’s association’s board has threatened to resign en masse if they are forced to allow an audit.
If they are quirky, picky and odd, so are many people. Most especially those who choose to participate in meetings.
There are many seemingly normal, friendly, intelligent and decent people who degenerate into power-abusing loons as soon as they acquire a bit of authority.
Besides HOAs, another prominent example is school boards.
Some areas you don’t get a choice. We are moving to South Florida in a few weeks and every neighborhood there has an HOA. Those that don’t are in terrible shape. However, most of them seem to be of the sane variety. If you are shopping for a home, just take note of all the little things. For example in the neighborhood we are renting in, I noticed that cars were parked on the street and in the grass, but the landscaping was all nicely maintained. That indicates to me that the HOA is sane. It turns out that indeed they pay for all landscaping and other simple services to keep the place looking good, but otherwise but out. If you see a “perfect” neighborhood, be very, very careful if you value your rights.
Why didn’t they just let the board resign? If they’re acting like babies, I wouldn’t want them around anyway. I say call them on their bluff.
Just a funny aside.
Our HOA is pretty damn reasonable. As long as you mow every few weeks, don’t leave abandoned cars out front, and a few other just being a considerate neighbor kind of things, its all good. And even if you break the rules, they will cut you some slack for a long time.
The funny part is our bylaws are something like one page long. You can tell the developer just grabbed some random HOA rules from somewhere and did some cutting and pasting. In that fairly short list of things you must do and things you can’t do, it states that we are NOT allowed to have oil derricks or quarries in either the front or back lawns 
Sounds like a good probable-cause basis for concluding that it needs an audit, and that the people with access to the money ought to be advised to bring their toothbrushes and whatever other personal effects are allowed in jail.