By: M. Chapman
This blog aims to explore the moral or ethical challenges of balancing the rules and regulations of the HOA with the individual rights of the people should have over the property they own.
All HOA communities are guided by contracts and there exists a level in which the rules should be set at in order for the community to run proficiently. These rules are different from the rules that your library sets for its customers or the rules for how a corporate business should be run. In most cases, as a customer or employee, rules that are set up as guidelines do not intervene with the question of freedom, power or individuality. You are more likely to be protected by law and the constitution if any of your rights have been violated. However, in an HOA community, the rules that tend to be placed to help the community run proficiently do impose on the citizens or homeowners actual rights.
Issues between the HOA and homeowners are nothing new. It is a power struggle between the elected board of directors, who were elected by the homeowners to see that the association is run according to the rules set up, and the freedoms and rights of the homeowners. To find an intervention is the desirable goal, but there are always ethical questions to take into consideration before working with these two struggling forces.
HOAs were not created by chance. HOAs were created by citizens who wanted to separate themselves from the rest of society for reasons of security, protection, property/housing values and having other common interests. No matter what kind of HOA community is placed, it is always an exclusive community that sets its homeowners apart from other non HOA communities. What sets them apart from the rest are the sanctions that are placed on the homeowners. These HOA sanctions limit freedom, power and the individuality of every homeowner. Most intriguing though is the actual rights the homeowners are willing to give up.
The rights that the homeowners give up is a dualistic problem and an ethical one. However, one must keep in mind that there are homeowners that get along fine with this. The problem exists when liberties are felt to be infringed. In a sense, you have negative liberty and positive liberty. Everyone has the liberty to do what is right for themselves. A homeowner, for example, may choose to live in an HOA community for security, exclusiveness, and to maintain the value of their home. The yearly fee that is paid to the HOA by the homeowners is the investment they hope will protect their lifestyle. This gives the homeowner a piece of mind, that in the future he will be able to sell his house with minimal depreciation or even increased value. It can give the owner the feeling of safety at night in a gated community. There are however stipulations that try to preserve the homeowners rights to maintain this lifestyle. Sanctions imposed by the HOA informs members that they need to keep their home a certain color, landscaping a certain way, and can even go as far as sighting individual homeowners to keep their garages clean for health or for aesthetic reasons. When sanctions are put in place, and the homeowner trades certain freedoms, for relinquishing his individuality and power of free will, in needing security and maintaining his property value, this is known as negative liberty. Another example of negative liberty can be see by the way our society has given up some of our privacy since the tragedy of 9/11, in order to give our government more power to snoop out hidden terrorists.
On the other hand, there are homeowners that want the special amenities that go with living in HOAs. They want to retain some individuality, some power over the rights of their property and to be allowed to have some room for personal expression or personal tastes. This is known as positive liberty. However, positive liberties can infringe on other homeowners that do not want to see your messy garage or the big RV parked in your driveway that is blocking the view down the street. This becomes a conflict of powers between the groups of people who have needs and wants and for those who are sticklers to the rules.
With these clashing of ideas of how a group or even an individual's ideals are to be obtained, we question the levels of rights that homeowners are entitled to. Everybody has different opinions about the way things should be done. For the HOA and community to run effectively, there is a need for sanctions to be in place. The association has authority and control to make sure certain standards are fulfilled. Limited housing/property rights are established by the HOA's Board of Directors in order to preserve the architectural integrity, neighborhood values and to promote the concepts of the community. With homeowner membership, expectation and commitment to abide by the restrictions and other rules of the association is neccessary because it necessitates individual conformity for the good of the community. Although, the HOA's political principles appear Utopian by trying to provide the ideal community, we know that it is far from being completely perfect because of the different values and opinions homeowners have. However, applying restrictions can help to curb some of those differences. On the other hand, an HOA community can be perceived as being totalitarian because of the rules and penalties that are issued to those homeowners that step out of line or break the rules. Perhaps the HOA could be seen in a better light by promoting an egalitarian community, where no one receives more rights or lesser rights than what the specific HOA rules enforce.
It is just a matter of the homeowners having to make the choice of what they value the most before choosing to live in an HOA communty. But many people are impulsive, and seeing a beautiful house and property does not normally make a potential homebuyer think philosophically about the certain freedoms they will have to sacrifice for sercurity and stable home value. Not many people think about the big boat they are ready to purchase and where they will put it. Homeowners may not realize that certain mundane things that make their home personalized for themselves may not be acceptable to the HOA rules.
When disputes arise between the homeowner and the community, there are different levels of resolving the problem. Problems between neighbors usually can be resolve by simple mediation.
However, if the problem happens to be an ongoing one that involves the homeowner and the HOA, an alternative dispute resolution would be the first step to take. A dispute resolution facilitator can help mediate the problem. If the parties do not reach an agreement in the mediation, the next step would be litigation, bringing their case to court, leaving it in the hands of an arbitrator or even a judge to decide the resolution.
Some major issues such as placing a flag out on your property or parking an an RV in the driveway are addressed in the Arizona State Legislature. ARS titles under the Arizona Planned Communities Act dictate what the HOA's can and cannot do, thus limiting how much power they can have. For example, ARS title 33-1809 says, an association shall not prohibit a resident from parking a car only for employment. It further states that the only vehicles that the asscociation shall give leeway to are emergency vehicles, public service vehicles and vehicles that have an official emblem of that corporation. However, title 33-1808 says, a homeowner can put an American flag out front on their property as long as it is displayed in a manner consistent with the federal flag code. The association can dictate the size of the flag and how many can be put out front, but cannot prohibit the installation of a flagpole.
With these by-laws in place it governs the activities of the HOA, but it also allows HOAs to establish rules that do not allow RV's to be parked on the homeowner's property. Homeowners can make a difference in how their HOA's are governed by going to their state legislature to get certain laws added or changed. Sometimes, going to the legislature may not have to be neccessary. Just assuming an active role in the function of the association by attending meetings, voting, paying dues and inserting oneself into the actual governance of the association can produce positive results.
In the end, having complete freedom, power, and individuality would possibly turn into anarchy with most individuals and groups. These three ideas would need to have some limits put on them because of the different values people have. We have certain governing boards to help mediate freedom, power and individuality. These small governments are the brakes or stop signs which are in place to help people resolve their disputes and to help keep civility. Everyday people have the choice of how they want to follow their freedom, how to exert their power and how they want to express themselves. Sometimes having all three, such as in a HOA community, is impossible, when individuals have different ideas of what freedom and power is about for themselves. The balance is a common ground, and why you would want to live in an HOA community in the first place. Some common grounds that apply and make homeowners work together are the sense of being in your own community, safety, housing and neighborhood integrity, and a community to prosper in. Sometimes we have to balance what we value, we trade certain freedoms to obtain another desired freedom, in which case for most homeowners it is their value for safety and neighborhood's integrity.
All HOA communities are guided by contracts and there exists a level in which the rules should be set at in order for the community to run proficiently. These rules are different from the rules that your library sets for its customers or the rules for how a corporate business should be run. In most cases, as a customer or employee, rules that are set up as guidelines do not intervene with the question of freedom, power or individuality. You are more likely to be protected by law and the constitution if any of your rights have been violated. However, in an HOA community, the rules that tend to be placed to help the community run proficiently do impose on the citizens or homeowners actual rights.
Issues between the HOA and homeowners are nothing new. It is a power struggle between the elected board of directors, who were elected by the homeowners to see that the association is run according to the rules set up, and the freedoms and rights of the homeowners. To find an intervention is the desirable goal, but there are always ethical questions to take into consideration before working with these two struggling forces.
HOAs were not created by chance. HOAs were created by citizens who wanted to separate themselves from the rest of society for reasons of security, protection, property/housing values and having other common interests. No matter what kind of HOA community is placed, it is always an exclusive community that sets its homeowners apart from other non HOA communities. What sets them apart from the rest are the sanctions that are placed on the homeowners. These HOA sanctions limit freedom, power and the individuality of every homeowner. Most intriguing though is the actual rights the homeowners are willing to give up.
The rights that the homeowners give up is a dualistic problem and an ethical one. However, one must keep in mind that there are homeowners that get along fine with this. The problem exists when liberties are felt to be infringed. In a sense, you have negative liberty and positive liberty. Everyone has the liberty to do what is right for themselves. A homeowner, for example, may choose to live in an HOA community for security, exclusiveness, and to maintain the value of their home. The yearly fee that is paid to the HOA by the homeowners is the investment they hope will protect their lifestyle. This gives the homeowner a piece of mind, that in the future he will be able to sell his house with minimal depreciation or even increased value. It can give the owner the feeling of safety at night in a gated community. There are however stipulations that try to preserve the homeowners rights to maintain this lifestyle. Sanctions imposed by the HOA informs members that they need to keep their home a certain color, landscaping a certain way, and can even go as far as sighting individual homeowners to keep their garages clean for health or for aesthetic reasons. When sanctions are put in place, and the homeowner trades certain freedoms, for relinquishing his individuality and power of free will, in needing security and maintaining his property value, this is known as negative liberty. Another example of negative liberty can be see by the way our society has given up some of our privacy since the tragedy of 9/11, in order to give our government more power to snoop out hidden terrorists.
On the other hand, there are homeowners that want the special amenities that go with living in HOAs. They want to retain some individuality, some power over the rights of their property and to be allowed to have some room for personal expression or personal tastes. This is known as positive liberty. However, positive liberties can infringe on other homeowners that do not want to see your messy garage or the big RV parked in your driveway that is blocking the view down the street. This becomes a conflict of powers between the groups of people who have needs and wants and for those who are sticklers to the rules.
With these clashing of ideas of how a group or even an individual's ideals are to be obtained, we question the levels of rights that homeowners are entitled to. Everybody has different opinions about the way things should be done. For the HOA and community to run effectively, there is a need for sanctions to be in place. The association has authority and control to make sure certain standards are fulfilled. Limited housing/property rights are established by the HOA's Board of Directors in order to preserve the architectural integrity, neighborhood values and to promote the concepts of the community. With homeowner membership, expectation and commitment to abide by the restrictions and other rules of the association is neccessary because it necessitates individual conformity for the good of the community. Although, the HOA's political principles appear Utopian by trying to provide the ideal community, we know that it is far from being completely perfect because of the different values and opinions homeowners have. However, applying restrictions can help to curb some of those differences. On the other hand, an HOA community can be perceived as being totalitarian because of the rules and penalties that are issued to those homeowners that step out of line or break the rules. Perhaps the HOA could be seen in a better light by promoting an egalitarian community, where no one receives more rights or lesser rights than what the specific HOA rules enforce.
It is just a matter of the homeowners having to make the choice of what they value the most before choosing to live in an HOA communty. But many people are impulsive, and seeing a beautiful house and property does not normally make a potential homebuyer think philosophically about the certain freedoms they will have to sacrifice for sercurity and stable home value. Not many people think about the big boat they are ready to purchase and where they will put it. Homeowners may not realize that certain mundane things that make their home personalized for themselves may not be acceptable to the HOA rules.
When disputes arise between the homeowner and the community, there are different levels of resolving the problem. Problems between neighbors usually can be resolve by simple mediation.
However, if the problem happens to be an ongoing one that involves the homeowner and the HOA, an alternative dispute resolution would be the first step to take. A dispute resolution facilitator can help mediate the problem. If the parties do not reach an agreement in the mediation, the next step would be litigation, bringing their case to court, leaving it in the hands of an arbitrator or even a judge to decide the resolution.
Some major issues such as placing a flag out on your property or parking an an RV in the driveway are addressed in the Arizona State Legislature. ARS titles under the Arizona Planned Communities Act dictate what the HOA's can and cannot do, thus limiting how much power they can have. For example, ARS title 33-1809 says, an association shall not prohibit a resident from parking a car only for employment. It further states that the only vehicles that the asscociation shall give leeway to are emergency vehicles, public service vehicles and vehicles that have an official emblem of that corporation. However, title 33-1808 says, a homeowner can put an American flag out front on their property as long as it is displayed in a manner consistent with the federal flag code. The association can dictate the size of the flag and how many can be put out front, but cannot prohibit the installation of a flagpole.
With these by-laws in place it governs the activities of the HOA, but it also allows HOAs to establish rules that do not allow RV's to be parked on the homeowner's property. Homeowners can make a difference in how their HOA's are governed by going to their state legislature to get certain laws added or changed. Sometimes, going to the legislature may not have to be neccessary. Just assuming an active role in the function of the association by attending meetings, voting, paying dues and inserting oneself into the actual governance of the association can produce positive results.
In the end, having complete freedom, power, and individuality would possibly turn into anarchy with most individuals and groups. These three ideas would need to have some limits put on them because of the different values people have. We have certain governing boards to help mediate freedom, power and individuality. These small governments are the brakes or stop signs which are in place to help people resolve their disputes and to help keep civility. Everyday people have the choice of how they want to follow their freedom, how to exert their power and how they want to express themselves. Sometimes having all three, such as in a HOA community, is impossible, when individuals have different ideas of what freedom and power is about for themselves. The balance is a common ground, and why you would want to live in an HOA community in the first place. Some common grounds that apply and make homeowners work together are the sense of being in your own community, safety, housing and neighborhood integrity, and a community to prosper in. Sometimes we have to balance what we value, we trade certain freedoms to obtain another desired freedom, in which case for most homeowners it is their value for safety and neighborhood's integrity.
No comments:
Post a Comment