Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| 04/24/25 09:30:12 | [ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4 ] |
| Subject: Lori, I am coming to know those things which I was unaware | |
|
Author: Butch Huber |
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: Tue, Sep 15 2009, 17:42:38 In reply to: Lori 's message, "Butch in re: HOA" on Tue, Sep 15 2009, 13:24:58 This neighborhood, for instance, apparently didn't start out under the City of Mt. Juliet. Apparently it started under the County and then wanted to be in the city and was annexed. Yes, I do realize it is a corporation, with its authority to exist granted from the State, and not the city. I was mistaken there, and should have known better. The Federal Government grants it the right to exist as a non-profit, which is sets up a really weird set of conditions in and of itself for several reasons I won't go into right now. The developer requested to set up a PUD in order to put more houses on the same amount of property, and was granted the right to have a PUD. Included in that PUD was I am rather certain as master development plan. I am not sure the neighborhood can change anything without updating the master development plan. Whether or not I signed a contract when I moved into the neighborhood or not doesn't make the existence of HOA's a proper way to handle the things they are intended to handle. There are a lot of land use Attorneys, those guys who have actually passed the bar, who would tell you that HOA's are nothing more than contract zoning, and contract zoning is illegal in this state. To me, that just proves that government doesn't have to run by its own laws, only we have to follow the law. Your statement about HOA's not being a part of government couldn't be more correct, and that is the entire matter. Governments are playing a game. They are saying, "If you will donate a certain amount of land to the city, if you will develop common areas and amenities, we will give you approval of your PUD", only they don't say it that way. There is a behind the scenes thing going on whereby developers figure out what they think the City commission will say "yes" to, meaning, how big of a bribe to I have to offer to get approved, and when the bribe gets big enough, the commission says "yes". It happens here, it happens everywhere. Just because it happens everywhere doesn't mean it is right. Then, once approved, the homeowner's association makes sure that people keep their grass mowed, don't leave trash laying around, keep their homes in good shape, etc. This takes a load off the city infrastructure and puts the costs on the backs of those who live in that community. What they charge in essence is a tax, but they are calling it a "Fee". If the homeowner's association isn't doing a good job in my opinion I still have to pay the fee. There are so many convoluted things associated with a homeowner's association, including class and race discrimination, I don't even know where to start. It is of no matter that I live in a neighborhood with an association, the government approves them, there is a need for housing, some of the best subdivisions are being built with them, and that is where people move, it still doesn't make it right. Even corporations have responsibilities, The home owner's association doesn't have the right to take the position that they have the right to remove the basketball nets, backboards and poles, because they are directors of a corporation, and then not at the same time accept responsibility to enforce the rules on people who are here illegally and who are doing harm to the community. You can't have it both ways. The association thinks nothing about sending me a nasty letter whenever someone complains about my old car in my driveway or something they don't like about how I am doing things, (I sat a swing set in my front yard one day for a couple hours to deal with something in my back yard and someone called me complaining!) But they won't deal with thugs? I realize that I am not a lawyer, I never have said I am a lawyer. There is a law library downtown. I may actually one day go to law school. But for now, I am just trying to figure out how the homeowner's association gets the right to removing an amenity. For those who don't think this is a very serious issue, keep in mind, if they can remove one amenity they can remove any amenity. Suppose they just decided one day that the pools aren't worth the money that goes into them. If we let this pass it sets a precedent. They would have a leg to stand on if we let this pass. [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] |