Thanks, this is really not something I have personal experience in, growing up in a rather rural area, and now living stuffed into an outer borough of an unnamed metropolis…
I can 100% agree on condominium and common area care, rules and upkeep. There is no way around having rules for the treatment of a small, private commons, and indeed, the democratic processes of HOAs are more desirable in this case that a dictatorial developer.
That’s pretty much the limit of it for me though. I do think these arrangements should be very severely limited, in what they can regulate beyond commons, and I think that the one time solution and civic engagement of having laws that limit their powers is just as valuable as, and perhaps more efficient than the ongoing civic engagement of making sure your neighbors aren’t making crazy rules, creating back-room alliances and playing out petty disagreement through the board. It also seems like local laws and zoning would take care of the rest, including running businesses and creating unsafe, polluting conditions, or disturbing the peace. It’s not just that I don’t think that the restrictions cant necessarily always be guarantee to improve property values, I also don’t agree that this is a reasonable basis for giving invasive regulatory power to a group of locals.
I hear your argument that if you don’t like the idea of HOAs, don’t join one, but I think this is a little of a cop-out. Without regulatory restrictions on their formation, ubiquity or powers, they could potentially make avoiding them while also living within striking distance of important centers of commerce impractical. To me, leaving them unchecked represents the creeping notion of all things as a financial investment, rather than tools of survival, comfort and expression. Forcing people to choose to opt out of that system creates a cultural, philosophical and political barrier between people that I think just doesn’t need to exist.
