Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Florida lawmaker floats ban on HOAs amid growing backlash

tampabay28.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 186 posts

Re: Florida lawmaker floats ban on HOAs amid growing backlash

#131

Post by propter_hoc »

firesteelrain wrote: post #127
propter_hoc wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure - I understand these roofing, HVAC and landscaping expenses are associated to the common amenities? So if you spin out the clubhouse into a country club that members can opt to join, you can allocate the clubhouse an appropriate amount of cash. When you negotiate with the county to take over management of the grounds including the pond, you can negotiate to give them some of the reserve money for the future pond…

Right agree and I think I have tried to articulate that here and below. Florida law says what to do when HOAs are dissolved. Point is it will be extremely messy to suddenly dissolve hundreds or thousands of HOAs. Windfall for the State too because the money by default needs to go somewhere and it won’t go back to the homeowners (which ones btw current or past, law doesn’t speak to it). So it goes to the State based o…

I understand your point. Thanks for your thoughtful engagement.

Re: Florida lawmaker floats ban on HOAs amid growing backlash

#132

Post by beAbU »

dgrin91 wrote: post #97
RandomBacon wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who are you charging $175?

I think what GP is saying is that if I was a homeowner for 30 years, paid HOA fees all those years, then last year sold to someone else, who gets the HOA reimbursement then? I paid thousands over years and would presumably get nothing, while some other guy who just moved in all of a sudden gets a big check? That seems unfair.

Where I'm from we call a HOA a body corporate, and every home owner in the scheme has a % ownership in the BC. The title deed includes the ownership share. So if the house ownership is transferred, so is the share in the BC.

Size of the share is determined usually by the dwelling floor area divided by the sum total of all dwellings in the scheme.

So if you sell your house after decades of contributions, and then the BC is dissolved, then too bad, you sold your share in a going concern and lost your say in it's affairs.

Arguably you benefitted from the contributions from someone who came before you, and now someone will benefit from yours.

Re: Florida lawmaker floats ban on HOAs amid growing backlash

#133

Post by mschuster91 »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #16
mschuster91 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the issue is so bad, that 70% of your neighbors actually come to a meeting and vote against what you're doing, it must be something really bad. Two dangers with that. First, mandatory votes are ... difficult. They exclude a lot of people, particularly those that gotta work two jobs to make ends meet, thus giving more power to those people who have lots of free time (i.e. pensioners, SAHM busybodies). Second, tyr…

But that's exactly why you need the 70% (example number). The current situation is, that you have pensoners, SAHM, racists and others bothering with HOA and then bothering the neighbors. The HOA board might be full of them, or consist only of them, but they don't make up the (eg.) 70% of total inhabitants of whatever neighborhood (except maybe in some extreme cases). To get such a majority, even "the others" would ha…

> To get such a majority, even "the others" would have to be bothered by so much, that they would be willing to go out and vote

Forcing mandatory attendance for HOA votes won't work out, that's the thing. Too many cases of remote landlords, properties stuck in inheritance limbo, or even First Amendment issues (can you be compelled to make speech, aka participate in a vote?). Requiring a "70% of all owner shares" would flat out kill most HOAs, and requiring a "70% of present owner shares" perpetuates the status quo of giving disproportionate amounts of power to the usual suspects.

Re: Florida lawmaker floats ban on HOAs amid growing backlash

#134

Post by beAbU »

tallanvor wrote: post #26

The problem you'll run into is when the HOAs are responsible for common areas or shared infrastructure. In some places the HOAs are responsible for the roads and there may be a common pool, gym, or other amenities. You'd be better off preventing HOAs from doing petty things like requiring homes to be painted certain colors and requiring them to have their books audited yearly to ensure there's no fraud or abuse going…

Pretty wild that HOAs are not required to have audited books. Where I'm from HOAs are regulated by law, is registered as a legal entity, and therefore needs audited financials submitted to the tax man every year.

There is also a very powerful ombud created to mediate and resolve the kind of hoa horror story bullshit we often hear about online.

Re: Florida lawmaker floats ban on HOAs amid growing backlash

#136

Post by OutOfHere »

danaris wrote: post #126
OutOfHere wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's stopping them from charging you $3000 or even $10000 next year, or escalating progressively to these numbers? What's stopping them from adding ten new ridiculous rules? Nothing. It's about giving up your freedom.

The answer to that is always "you". Well, collectively. An HOA isn't a separate body with no stake in the properties involved—that would be a property management company or something similar. It's a body made up of the people who actually live there. So while they could potentially charge you $3000 or $10,000 in bullshit fines for something they decided you did, they (usually) can't realistically charge you $3000 for…

They can keep increasing the fees 10% every year which compounds pretty fast, certainly a lot faster than the pay raise offered by an employer.

Re: Florida lawmaker floats ban on HOAs amid growing backlash

#137

Post by techpineapple »

tallanvor wrote: post #26

The problem you'll run into is when the HOAs are responsible for common areas or shared infrastructure. In some places the HOAs are responsible for the roads and there may be a common pool, gym, or other amenities. You'd be better off preventing HOAs from doing petty things like requiring homes to be painted certain colors and requiring them to have their books audited yearly to ensure there's no fraud or abuse going…

Privatize it. If I want the road in front of my house fixed, I'll pay for it, I can get a pool membership, gym membership, or other amenities ad-hoc. Fuck the HoA.

Re: Florida lawmaker floats ban on HOAs amid growing backlash

#138

Post by bediger4000 »

I live in an old neighborhood (1890s) so I'm not very familiar with HOAs, but I assumed they were the ideal solution: small government, very local, voluntary, and not government at all, they're private. These are attributes I was told made for ideal situations. What (or who!) causes this mechanism to fail?

Re: Florida lawmaker floats ban on HOAs amid growing backlash

#139

Post by delichon »

josefritzishere wrote: post #135

We need a federal level HOA ban. They serve no productive purpose. When people defend HOAs that usually boils down to them feeling like they have some right to tell other people how to live.

Our HOA maintains the roads and the community water system. The county is unwilling to do either. Without the HOA I'd need a specialized vehicle to get through the mud to my driveway in the rainy season, and I'd have to haul in my water, because it's too deep for me to afford a well. So I'd probably end up living elsewhere.

Re: Florida lawmaker floats ban on HOAs amid growing backlash

#140

Post by LargeWu »

reactordev wrote: post #101
LargeWu wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HOA's are ultimately run by the homeowners themselves. It's right there in the name. If the HOA is such a problem, elect different people to the board and change the rules.

You can't because they don't have elections... It's up to the documents to determine when elections can be held and often these HOA's in FL make it so that once elected, they don't hold elections again for 25 years.

25 years is wild. No wonder HOA's have a reputation for boards with power trips.
Post reply on HN