Hacker News Reader

Comment by ashtonkem | Hacker News Reader

If we’re talking about California, “mob rule”[0] isn’t the right framing. This isn’t a majority of citizens suppressing the rights of people to build on their own property, it’s a minority using asymmetric political involvement to get their way.

The recent lawsuit against UC Berkeley is a great example. A handful of cranks angry about UC Berkeley admissions abused an environmental review process to impose their will on their town. Not the will of the majority, but rather the tyranny of the most rich and petty.

0 - I prefer the term “tyranny of the majority”.

View on HN

Another example is HOAs. They have devolved into instruments of tyranny.

Indeed. Not getting a HOA was a hard requirement for us.

The fascinating thing about HOAs is that they’re all done under the guise that they “improve property values”, but I’ve never seen any evidence that this works. From my geographic location it seems like non-HOA factors drive prices (supply, demand, neighborhood location and nearby amenities like transit and shopping), not whether or not the neighbors flower bed matches the “neighborhood character”[0]. From what I see it just seems to let petty tyrants control their neighbors; the property value argument seems like a transparent excuse.

0 - You see this phrase a lot in zoning discussions and it makes me feel like I’m taking crazy pills. As if neighborhood character is a concrete thing that can be pointed to and protected, rather than a constantly changing and emergent result of the humans living in a place.

HOAs manage commons in a condominium covenant

Some people like not worrying about stuff and having rules in place.

It’s all about the freedom to choose

For my house I decided not to buy in an HOA - missed out on some amenities for sure.

Not only in condominiums. In suburbia they also manage commons, but also impose rules on what you can do with your house and on your land. You likely need permission for color changes, there might be limitations on what can and cannot be planted in your front yard. You might get fined if your house doesn't fixes when the HOA decides they are needed or when you repeatedly don't bring your garbage in quickly.

I'm not sure what to make of the choice part here. Once an area is under an HOA it's almost impossible to dissolve the HOA. Anecdotal evidence from my own HOA which my wife was president of for many years shows that only very few people get involved. The people who do get involved tend to be of the type who want to overreach. When my wife was president she probably spent more time trying to bring the other folks involved in the HOA back to what's reasonable. Fortunately management companies also help with this. I'm afraid that without management companies most HOAs would devolve into attempts to build a miniature fascist state that only would be stopped by prolonged court battles.

The choice part comes in that people choose to buy/rent into an HOA - they don’t just spring up on you unannounced

Partially true. You're right that they don't spring up unannounced, but there is something distressingly feudal about a property contract by (probably long dead) founders binding future owners in perpetuity without any possibility for redress or change. Personally I think it would be much better if current home owners could create or destroy a HOA if they felt that it no longer met their needs, rather than tying it to the lot forever.

Also, depending on your state it can be very hard to avoid a HOA. If you're buying a home in California, Colorado, or Florida you've got a 2/3 chance of buying into a HOA, with the numbers getting worse over time. 2/3 new homes being made now have a HOA, so pretty soon you won't have an effective choice when buying.

> In suburbia they also manage commons, but also impose rules on what you can do with your house and on your land.

Not all HOAs have infrastructure to maintain. I know a few people in neighborhoods with HOAs that don't have private roads or facilities for the HOA to manage, it's just purely there for property value.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com