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

171–180 of 186 posts

Re: Florida lawmaker floats ban on HOAs amid growing backlash

#171

Post by scarface_74 »

NegativeK wrote: post #83
scarface_74 wrote: post #62

I lived in an HOA community for eight years and I have mixed feelings. So many things can go wrong without one - old cars in the front yard, political signs (I don’t care what your political persuasion is they are tacky), yard not being kept. HOAs suck. But so do people. As another poster said, there are shared responsibility parts in some neighborhoods like pools, gyms, tennis courts etc

I'd be super happy if the local government managed the infrastructure and shared spaces of our neighborhood. But they can't raise the taxes to do so, so HOAs end up being the smaller government that people say they want but, in practice, get zero participation from the residents and can turn into shit shows.

So taxpayers should be responsible for infrastructure that can only be used by owners of houses in the neighborhood?

Re: Florida lawmaker floats ban on HOAs amid growing backlash

#172

Post by RandomBacon »

firesteelrain wrote: post #170
BobaFloutist wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would assume the sale price of your property would be higher if it's part of a well managed HOA with 500k in reserves than if it's part of a dysfunctional, insolvent HOA, so the previous property owner kinda already got paid out for their contributions. It's like selling shares of a company with significant cash reserves before/after they choose to liquidate a chunk of them into dividends or stock buy-backs, I woul…

Unfortunately when a home is appraised, the solvency of the HOA is not allowed to be taken into account

Appraised for the mortgage company?

The potential buyer can still inquire and factor that in, right?

Re: Florida lawmaker floats ban on HOAs amid growing backlash

#173

Post by gwbas1c »

firesteelrain wrote: post #169
gwbas1c wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You pay the current owners as of the date of dissolution. The current owners bought into the HOA from the past owners, and thus assume future liabilities (or profits) from the HOA. Edit: If/when it becomes known that there will be some kind of a payout, people selling their homes will need to adjust the price and/or expect some kind of credit from the buyer at closing.

I actually went and looked at our governing docs. It says money goes back into the public coffers. Of course law can be changed

Your governing docs are not law.

I would hold a vote to change those ASAP.

Re: Florida lawmaker floats ban on HOAs amid growing backlash

#174

Post by firesteelrain »

gwbas1c wrote: post #173
firesteelrain wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually went and looked at our governing docs. It says money goes back into the public coffers. Of course law can be changed

Your governing docs are not law. I would hold a vote to change those ASAP.

You need a majority of the members to want to do it. All have to respond to the ballot. Past experience is that the members generally don’t vote even at the annual meeting.

Re: Florida lawmaker floats ban on HOAs amid growing backlash

#175

Post by firesteelrain »

RandomBacon wrote: post #172
firesteelrain wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately when a home is appraised, the solvency of the HOA is not allowed to be taken into account

Appraised for the mortgage company? The potential buyer can still inquire and factor that in, right?

No, it’s not public information

Re: Florida lawmaker floats ban on HOAs amid growing backlash

#176

Post by therealpygon »

firesteelrain wrote: post #168
therealpygon wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t believe this to be entirely the case, having served as President of a HOA for 10 years. HOAs are generally incorporated and hold said property. Should the Mandatory HOA be banned, the corporation could simply switch to private membership and offer access to amenities to those outside the community. If the residents don’t want that, they’d need to pay up. Condos, however, likely have different needs because of…

Check your governing documents. I just checked mine and it says that the assets all become public assets. Not private.

Upon what? The “dissolution” of the HOA? Assuming so which is common for an HOA, it is generally its own legal entity which is separate from the mandatory membership component.

What the legislator wants, and what can be done legally are likely to be two separate things. They could certainly repeal laws that allow for mandatory membership to be durable upon sale, and provide support for HOA bylaw enforcement, but a law “abolishing” HOAs entirely would likely be struck down a day later. That Likely runs afoul of the first amendment among other things. It would be like saying people can’t form private political groups or enter into private contracts; nonsense, as HOAs are often private non-profit corporations.

Re: Florida lawmaker floats ban on HOAs amid growing backlash

#177

Post by gwbas1c »

firesteelrain wrote: post #174
gwbas1c wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your governing docs are not law. I would hold a vote to change those ASAP.

You need a majority of the members to want to do it. All have to respond to the ballot. Past experience is that the members generally don’t vote even at the annual meeting.

That's because are so mind-numbingly dumb that no one is going to show up for an annual meeting unless there's actually something important to vote on.

Saying, "hey, show up and vote and you might actually get some money from it," will make people show up.

Re: Florida lawmaker floats ban on HOAs amid growing backlash

#178

Post by firesteelrain »

therealpygon wrote: post #176
firesteelrain wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check your governing documents. I just checked mine and it says that the assets all become public assets. Not private.

Upon what? The “dissolution” of the HOA? Assuming so which is common for an HOA, it is generally its own legal entity which is separate from the mandatory membership component. What the legislator wants, and what can be done legally are likely to be two separate things. They could certainly repeal laws that allow for mandatory membership to be durable upon sale, and provide support for HOA bylaw enforcement, but a la…

Yes upon dissolution or termination as it’s called. Says goes back to public upon sale.

“Upon dissolution, the corporation's assets, both real and personal, must be dedicated to a public agency or utility for purposes similar to those for which the assets were originally intended. “

Re: Florida lawmaker floats ban on HOAs amid growing backlash

#179

Post by jjav »

duxup wrote: post #146
propter_hoc wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I upvoted you despite entirely disagreeing with your premise. Yes - negotiate with the county to take over management of the playgrounds and lawn mowing. Yes - make the clubhouse and parking lots open, fee-based and voluntary, and controlled by a private corporation rather than an imposed, taxed service. Yes - return the excess money to the current homeowners, or use some of it to effectuate these conversions. Honest…

Cities or counties suddenly having to take over lots of road, playgrounds, sidewalks, street lights, and etc is going to be a big drain on their budget. Sure they could run with the HOA's money for a while but eventually they're going to have to pay.

That is the best possible solution. That's how it works in my neighborhood and it is the best answer.

This neighborhood has a few amenities like soccer fields, tennis courts, bike/walk trails and exercise stations. In the early days of construction there was some debate about a HOA but that was fortunately shot down pretty quickly as far too toxic.

Instead, there is a property tax assessment on all houses in the area that covers for the city to maintain these common areas. Sure we pay for that, which is fair. The areas are maintained, they are open to all which is great, and there is no nasty HOA meddling in how people paint their houses or what flowers they plant or what car they buy. Best of all worlds.

Re: Florida lawmaker floats ban on HOAs amid growing backlash

#180

Post by jjav »

firesteelrain wrote: post #80
gwbas1c wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What do we do with the $500k we have the operating funds and reserves collected over the past 40 years? Uhm, return it to the property owners? The real pattern is that HOAs have been abusing their power; or in other cases are required because municipalities don't want to do their job. As a result the lawmakers will, unfortunately, overcorrect.

What property owners is my point? Many are long gone and the (now) $175 a quarter we charge goes towards the common amenities. What would happen is we would have to surrender those funds to the State. So this would lead to a huge windfall for the State. States have rules for what happens when a HOA dissolves. That means the money goes right to the State including the sale of the common property.

> What property owners is my point? Many are long gone

This statement makes no sense. The property owners are the ones who own the properties, today. It is very clear cut who they are, it's even public record.

Post reply on HN