Got a friend, big ham guy, after the third tower the hoa sent him a note to 
remove it. He did not get permission.
So he talked to them, well -- if it is one of the re-tractable towers.
So he bought a re-tractable one and then decided it was too much work/money.
So he joins board and approved his old tower.

I think the government operates to much like me friend. Not saying I wouldn't --
 But one can hope.

"How can these things be possible in a country that values liberty so highly?"

Trading liberty for security happens all the time. Paraphrasing some smart
person "he who exchanges liberty for security deserves neither".

You're all joking, right? Please tell me you're joking. How can these things be
possible in a country that values liberty so highly?

". . and Bob; I've been wondering when the 1st lawsuit against homeowners 
associations would be brought to light."

There are lots of them going on all the time.  But often the HOA's can drag it 
out and appeal and make individuals spend so much money that they can't keep 
it going.  The HOA actually uses your own money to fight you.

In one case, the residents were going to sue to have the HOA removed and one 
of their points was that there was actually no common area in the community 
(pool area, park, etc.).  The HOA then went so far as to put a park bench in 
the grassy median between the two traffic lanes on one of their roads and 
called that a common area.  Can you imagine a little old lady walking across 
the road to the median to sit on that bench...?  Does this qualify as a common 
area for the residents?  The HOA thought so.

LOL hcedmondson . . . you crack me up :)

. . . and Viking, I agree with you. I find these people who decide that their 
own ideals/philosophies are the only 'right way' to be and then seem *driven* 
to force their decisions on everyone else, pretty scarey too O...o

Actually, I'd say that type pretty much sums up our current government :-/ 

. . and Bob; I've been wondering when the 1st lawsuit against homeowners 
associations would be brought to light.  Is it you? ;)

We live on a golf course, and there is a lot of maintenance in the common spaces. I like the HOA for that. 

But I am lobbying to have the ability of an HOA to foreclose on someone's home for a few hundred or a few 
thousand dollars removed. They simply cannot be allowed to continue to do things like that.  Period. 

-Paul

I agree a deal is not a deal if either side welches. But some folks like the way
the 'hood they spent the majority of their life's energy buying into continue to
look a certain way. That's why steps are taken to prevent others from impairing
that look, whatever it might be. Those types of communities are clearly not for
independent minded folks like we seem to have here, myself included. My main
place is on 40 acres and I can do whatever the heck I want as long as it's legal.

It makes no sense to me to walk into a biker bar and yell "hogs suck", it's just
asking for a fight.

The point is, if you don't like your neighbors pink house, its your job to
accept it or move away. Its not your right to make them paint it the blah gray
"color" of all the other homes.

"If you buy a home with restrictive covenants and a HOA that enforces those
rules, you've exchanged your freedom of expression for security from your
neighbor's same freedom."

Well put.  Still scary.

"A deal's a deal."

The problem is that it's not.  The deal changes, often at the whim of a 
retired (i.e. lots of extra time) power-hungry anal-retentive jerk.

How about the deal that included RV parking next to the lady's house?  All of 
a sudden, the deal changed against her will to not include RV parking!  RV 
parking can cost a fortune, so those that had it and then lost it, their house 
value actually went down!

A deal is not a deal. When the constitution says Inalienable Rights, that does
mean that the U.S. Government is prohibited from restricting them--it also means
business and local governments are not--even if you sign something that says you
do. Often when you buy a house you don't know or hear about the HOA. Contracts
mean dick if they are unconstitutional. Sure some business people and most
lawyers don't believe this--but what do I care?

HOA's are not duly elected government bodies, but rather something that was put
together decades ago to manage common areas of Condo's. The some uppity
subdivisions (normally with gated communities) didn't want you to pain your
house bright Pink so they formed a home owners association... 

Today to pass a "Rule" an HOA's board basically has to look at each other and
decide--no vote necessary. To change the bylaws, requires a majority vote of the
homeowners. 

While it may piss me off if you paint your house pink, I have zero rights to
force you to change it. HOA's exist to force people to express themselves in a
conformist fashion. Quite frankly, all HOA's should be dissolved permanently or
alternatively, the home owners should have the right to opt-out and not
participate in them sine they are B.S. to begin with.

In my "uppity" neighbor hood (last one I lived in before moving here) we had no
home owners association but they wanted to create one. You need 4 board member
to be an official HOA otherwise you're considered a "club". Clubs have no power
over the home owners. So I agreed but also said we need to limit the board to 2
people--they all agreed and basically we had a President and a Secretary, thus
were a Club.

Then one of the ladies in the neighborhood said "So and so is putting up a shed.
We don't want sheds in our neighborhood because the next thing that'll happen is
people will be leaning their wheelbarrows against them and that won't look good."

After I literally laughed in her face, in disbelief, I said "You're kidding,
right? Oh well, its good thing we're just a club."

Where I live today, I moved in with knowledge of their being a HOA. They've been
quiet for the most part. But this year, one the anal retentive guy across the
street decided that he'd run for the HOA board (always unopposed) he decided
that our rules of 8 inch grass or shorter and no weeds in the yard, needs to be
enforced. So they sent out notices to most people--except the guy across the
street from him (another neighbor) that guy got a $25 fine and the fine said
that is increases $25/day until he cuts his grass. 

So, the issue here is that it had just rained for 3 days and the weeds (and
grass shot up)--most people didn't mow yet--but this guy gets a note on his door
to cut his grass. WTF?  Few things people do really anger me, but things like
this make me want to not only buy a gun, but use it.

If you buy a home with restrictive covenants and a HOA that enforces those
rules, you've exchanged your freedom of expression for security from your
neighbor's same freedom. A deal's a deal.

neilrh,

"Democracy in action!!"

The problem with this is that if 51% of your neighbors have a different 
opinion than you, then they are in control of your personal property.

Democracy is great for common services the government (at various levels) 
provides, and safety issues, etc., but I don't think it's right when it comes 
to what you do on your own property.  Yes, you run the risk that someone 
paints their house a color that's not your favorite, or puts in landscaping 
that's not your preference, or whatever, but shouldn't we have that freedom 
with the houses we buy?

It is possible to help plastic grass keep its appearance by "fluffing" it on a 
semi-regular basis.  The only problem with it is don't walk on it in bare feet 
(or plastic footwear) during summer!!

Though I know there was one guy who got in trouble with his HOA in CA for 
turning his front yard into a "desert garden" - all cacti and other low water 
plants.  The HOA insisted he put all the grass back.

neilrh, it's not always as easy as it sounds.

Two recent scenarios that scare me:

1)  Older person buys a house in an HOA senior neighborhood that's advertised 
as having RV parking on the property.  Everything is great, there's an RV 
space next to the house, and lots of other neighbors have them too.  Then 
someone gets into the HOA board and he doesn't like RV's.  He starts using HOA 
money to lobby, send out flyers, and uses the newsletter.  He specifically 
visits the households of elderly non-RV-owners and convinces them that 
property values will go up, RVs are bad, etc.  He achieves 50% (even extending 
the voting deadline several times until he achieves 50%) and now RVs are no 
more.  No grandfather clause, so elderly people that have had their RVs in 
their RV spots for many years had to get rid of them and started getting 
fined, liens, etc.  The HOA then quickly changed the requirement to change the 
rule again to 2/3.  Some residents get together to fight and hire a lawyer who 
agrees that they're being railroaded, but HOA has too much money.

2)  Many people in this economy can't afford their mortgages anymore and stop 
paying their HOA fees.  Complex starts emptying out due to foreclosures, and 
to cover expenses, all the other residents have to pony up the difference so 
their fees skyrocket.

I've seen both of these within the past year.

We have an HOA over our neighborhood (9yrs) and so far, I like it.  They take 
care of the landscaping and maintenance of such and it's a beautiful 
neighborhood.  

I didn't like their decision to allow the useage of plastic grass, as I think 
it looks awful; especially after a year or so wear; but I do understand why 
they allowed it given our water concerns out here.  

We didn't hear a peep when our solar panels went up and apparently there's 
been a ruling at the federal level that prevents HOAs from causing trouble 
about solar panels, given they are properly installed.  Went along with the 
Federal credits for such I think.

I even *used* the HOA one time when we had solar tubes installed for garage 
lighting.  The installer used black tubes and roof protection on our light 
colored roof, and it looked really bad, especially given that they were in 
plain sight from the front of the house.  He was suppose to match the color 
and when we pointed that out, he gave a bunch of excuses trying to get out of 
it.  So I talked to his manager and told him it would most likely get us in 
trouble with our HOA . . . and the short or it was, he fixed the problem :)

HOAs can definitely get out of line. I've had to live with one and served on
one. Their core function is developing operating and capital budgets as well as
collecting and spending cash. Secondarily, they arbitrate CCR issues as they
arise. Enforcing CCRs is probably the most unpleasant task since it gets into
more subjective areas (No Fred, you may not light 40 Lava Lamps on your deck at
night). The money thing is tough too, but at least it's objective. I think the
time frame to do something this drastic should be longer than the TX story talks
about. Around here, if you don't pay your property taxes the county has to wait
2 years before they can start proceedings to sheriff-sell your house. And, even
if you lose it at the auction, within 1 year you can get the place as long as
you pay up the past due taxes and auction expenses. After the first time it gets
as far as auction, you must then stay current as you lose your 2 year window;
they can auction it at any time. Don't know as I would endow a HOA with more
collection power than the county has.

The story 

"HOA foreclosed on Frisco home of soldier while he was in Iraq"

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/DN-
soldierforeclose_26met.ART0.State.Edition2.2a11a6c.html

We just had a case here in the DFW area where a HOA foreclosed on a house for 
the past dues. The husband is oversea's in the service. His wife had let the 
dues slip last year. Basically they sold the house for ten cents on the dollar 
and now she's out on the street. It was all done before the story hit the news. 
Welcome home honey!

HOA's are regulated
- you voted for the board, or neglected to vote for the board.
- if don't like the rules, vote them out/run for office yourself.

Democracy in action!!

Bob says:  "Is there a reason we don't regulate Home Owners Assoc? They should 
only have a say in common areas not personal property."

I agree with you.  I have seen several home owners associations that are 
totally out of control.  They are often run by people with too much time on 
their hands who use their power to forward their own personal agendas.  
They're hard to fight because they can use your own money to fight you legally 
and they change the rules.  This is often accomplished by lobbying (again, 
with your own money) and using scare tactics to push their agendas.  I've seen 
them get 50% to push a rule through, and then immediately change the necessary 
percentage to 2/3 to make it next to impossible to get the decision reversed.  
Lots of just plain corruption too.

I guess you can tell how I feel about them.  But I'm sure there are lots of 
well-functioning associations too who actually do serve and protect the 
neighborhood according to the needs of the community.  But the bad ones I've 
seen are plenty for me to have vowed not to live in a neighborhood governed by 
one.