Y’know, the Pilgrims came to America to escape the HOA back home. When they got here, they set up their own HOA.
Each American colony began as an HOA. And as they grew, each village, county, etc. had its own HOA. If you didn’t like the HOA where you lived, you could move somewhere more to your liking.
HOAs are the essence of self-government. A community determines its own standards.
It’s interesting and encouraging to see communities develop their own methods of self-government in the midst of overbearing “official” government entities. For too long we have permitted our communities to be overrun by the “I’m going to do whatever I want and you can’t stop me” types (such as several posters in this thread), and those who are able have joined communities willing and able to govern themselves.
Rather than create or remain in communities with likeminded people, troublemakers muscle their way into communities where they’re not wanted, disturbing the peace, safety and tranquility. They move into quiet neighborhoods and bring their noise with them. They move into clean areas and bring their trash with them. They move into safe communities and bring their crime with them. They move into morally upright schools and bring their depravity with them.
Rather than contribute to a good community, they leech off those who make it good, and leach away the goodness. And when a community objects, their objections are overruled by “official” governments. They force their way in, and then they destroy.
When we choose to live together, we must either sacrifice a bit of freedom or else live in perpetual turmoil with one another. Such perpetual turmoil inevitably leads to ever harsher restrictions necessary to maintain the peace. (”Never let a crisis go to waste!”) Those who demand infinite freedom with no concern for their neighbors are choosing a road that leads to less and less freedom. They talk about loving freedom even while their misuse of it depletes their own and others’ freedom.
If a community of people cannot govern themselves - or if they are PREVENTED from doing so by a court, etc. - they must and will be governed by a superior government. Like little children squabbling incessantly over their toys, their mother has to come take the toys away. And it won’t matter who’s at fault when the tyrant steps in. We’ll ALL lose freedom because of a few troublemakers who have no respect for the standards of the community they’ve joined.
Sorry, you have diversity standards and HOA’s confused. HOA’s don’t say anything about communities having the same fundamental values. HOA’s speak specifically to what you can do with your property, and as such is an infringement on your freedom to own property - which was an absolute novelty in governance introduced by the founders.
Gone forever are the days where you would apply for membership to a church, which used to be the center of a community. That is over.
Forced diversity is now a legal minimum. Like minded people are no longer allowed to live together in quiet enjoyment of their shared values. Boy Scouts took MAJOR hits for not allowing gays as leaders on one hand, and then suffered legal liabilties for gay leaders molesting a boy in the 70’s or 80’s on the other.
Dude, you CAN’T win that fight any more. Your freedom of assembly is permanently abridged. That’s not ever coming back. All I’m talking about is the ability to build a deck without getting a sign off from both neighbors, and having the design approved by three unqualified do-gooders AND THEN going and paying the city for a permit.
I’m trenching into one of the last available fallback perimeters at this point. Nobody is safe from predator legal action at this point. Even Al Gore felt the flames a bit in Oregon recently, but his case got kicked by the DA.
All I want is the ability to not have to get somebody’s approval to improve my asset, to which I have clear title (which I don’t, since the HOA has the exclusive ability to put a lien on it if the note is paid off).
You have Constitutions and Covenants very mixed up. Also, keep in mind that actual OWNERSHIP is the issue here. OWNERSHIP and CITIZENSHIP are very different things. The idea of ‘fundamental rights’ being very different.
The very first ownership associations were SLAVE OWNER ASSOCIATIONS, and there was no concept of fundamental rights involved with economic assets like slaves.
The Civil War was, in a small part, a revolt against the idea of ownership trumping fundamental human rights. Ownership took a second place to fundamental rights, but it remained superior to the idea of the rights of the collective.
HOA’s seek to form a collective ownership out of a community of individual owners, and ask you to CEDE your INDIVIDUAL RIGHT TO OWN PROPERTY to the collective’s right to control it for the putative purpose of better preserving the average market price of houses in the neighborhood.
Preserving the value of your own property has sufficient benefits and penalties. If that isn’t sufficient, I’ll start a petition and go to court with it. Better that than ask somebody to give up their abilty to own their own home.
In my case I knew the CC&Rs were trumped by state law so I complied where I could and still installed grid tie PV electric. I imagine I still could be sued for it, but given the level of non compliance in my tract, anyone who does is a sitting duck.