User talk:Mike Reardon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Homeowner association

HOA is only one type of community association. Today is the first day I have seen this article. It does need help, and I might make this an effort. I represent homeowners and community associations. My interest developed from my own (bad) experience with an HOA. Since that time, I have come to realize that "property values" have nothing to do with community associations. Governing documents are written by developers who have no interest in protecting homeowners. They are usually badly drafted. Community association law and property management have become a big business, in an industry which is extremely lucrative and very poorly regulated. It is a recipe for corruption. Invariably, the homeowners suffer. A homeowner's only recourse is usually to sue - and then they pay for their own legal fees as well as those of their opponents, through "assessments". Condo and homeowner associations are unlike any other corporation. What other corporation sues its shareholders? Organizations that lobby for "associations" lobby for what is, in my opinion, one of the most corrupt industries existing in the US today. I can go on and on and on, but will spare you now. Suffice to say that associations provide the worst of government without any of the benefits. Until *real* governments become aware of just how big a scandal this is, homeowners will continue to be ripped off. I hate to sound so blunt, but I have seen this from just about all sides. I am trying to make a difference as I can, but it will take many many people saying "enough." Jance 03:13, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

The article probably needs to cite Shelley v. Kramer. I might add later.Jance 03:34, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

The following from Mike Reardon: Thank you for your thoughtful editing of this article. American homeowners need to be informed about the nature of HOA and Condominium associations, and the need for reform. I have been to the Massachusetts State House to testify in support of legislation that would bring some accountability to Homeowner and Condominium associations. I was motivated after witnessing my 92 year old neighbor driven from my community by repeat threat of fines. (He lived on a fixed income) His house was found in “violation” after the HOA changed their minds about what they had expressly authorized when he built his home years earlier. Although the law was clearly on my neighbor’s side, he realized that the years of litigation and the tens of thousands of dollars it would cost was more unaffordable than the fines. The conduct of HOAs are not ‘crimes’, and justice must be pursued or more accurately, purchased in the Civil courts. In addition, the HOA persecutes people in secret, so the rest of the community was unaware of what was even happening. My neighbor sold his home at a steep discount to a party who would satisfy the HOA and build a large ‘hanger’ on the back of the home (over $100,000). In Boston I saw first hand the lobbyists who want to maintain the status quo of complete absence of constraints imposed upon HOA and Condominium associations. The Community Associations Institute, in their own words, does not represent Homeowners Associations. They represent the service providers to HOAs; builders, managers and those who profit from the conflict so prevalent in these amateur volunteer run organizations, lawyers... It was astounding to witness such blatant self interest at the expense of the public good! I belong to a group of Massachusetts residents who are working to change the laws. It is nice to see that the AARP has finally woken up to the problem and are working to change the laws in all 50 states. There are many terrific advocates for HOA and Condominium association reform, and it would seem that an educated public is sympathetic to reform. The Community Association Institute (or CAI) continues to work hard at persuading legislators that “things are just fine” and disguising the issues. Many newspapers publish CAI member “Community Managers” advice columns that perpetuate the misconception that Community Service Providers give impartial advice. They do NOT. They are on the payroll of associations, and are subject to an enormous conflict of interest when providing “advice” to individual homeowners.

[edit] Communication with New Jersey Dept Community Affairs

The following is an excerpt from a communication from a representative of a state agency that oversees HOA associations:

"If anything things have gotten worse in New Jersey. Unless stopped by direct forceful State action, the attorneys and property managers quickly realize they can play into board members’ “power corrupts” mindset. Once the board-or even the Board president-decides that he/she is the ruler/dictator; the attorneys and property managers can really open up the money spigot. The problem lies in the difference between a true democracy with balancing players (two parties a free press and an independent judiciary) and what associations have (total concentration of all power and control of all resources in the board). Boards can even easily rig elections-and the only owner redress is court action that is very expensive. Try to get limits on board power- Make any significant decisions depend on a vote by owners; get guaranteed secret ballots, open fair elections-and by all means make sure you get owners’ rights to counsel fees for having to fight boards that ignore either general law or their own association governing documents. But to actually make sure it all works you need State enforcement by a State regulatory authority with only the people’s interests in mind. Here in NJ what passes for protection for owners is located in the entity that works with developers and builders. Naturally that agency sided with the lobbyists (most of whom are connected to builders/developers) opposing owner interests. So the agency gives me no support-it’s worse than having no enforcement because it gives the appearance that there is State protection and deludes people. I am not permitted to testify to legislators about owner concerns nor to speak to reporters. If this were with an independent State agency, the legislators and the press could hear first hand from a State official on the firing line about the problems. The poor owners in NJ have no Executive entity to support them against the powerful greedy lobby profiting off of the owners. Hope you can make sure that does not happen in MA."Good Luck

Thank you, although I am not in MA. The CAI is a plague. I will not subscribe to lobbies that promote laws and practices that are harmful to homeowners. Association law firms and property mangers need to be held accountable for unethical (and in some cases, criminal) practices. I never in a million years would have dreamed that associations could be as bad as they are. Until they are regulated properly, treated as the governments that they are (hence, subject to the US and state Constitutions), or totally restructured, there will continue to be unbridled corruption and misery. Sadly, there are only a handful of lawyers in my state that are willing to represent homeowners (not where the big bucks are). Homeowners invariably get screwed. I don't know what the answer is, but it is not getting better and at some point it will just blow up. It can't go on forever like this. It is too outrageous.Jance 03:11, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Following from CEMW: Careful with your POV. I am struggling to keep the article non-biased, but people who had a "bad past experience" are changing it to a negative POV. Do not let your personal agenda show through or you're no better than the unethical Board member you may have run into in the past.

==Following from Mike Reardon==: I have objectified the body of the article by eliminating the modifying clauses, good and bad, and leaving the factual information intact. You should post your pro-HOA information in the Benefits section, and allow the criticisms as posted by other editors to stand on their own merits. That the criticism section is so large as compared to the benefit section should speak for itself, and comes as no surprise to people who actually live in these communities (as opposed to those who make a living off of them).

[edit] Homeowners' association

In this edit, you removed (among other things) the sentence

"A homeowners' association (abbrev. HOA) is the legal entity which manages a common interest development. ".

Perhaps you consider that sentence to be incorrect, but now, the article does not start by telling what a homeowner's association is. It starts by describing who incorporates a homeowner's association. That is interesting information for someone that already knows what a homeowner's association is, but still Wikipedia should also cater for readers that do not know that.

Can you tell me what a homeowner's association is? If so, please add it to Homeowners' association.

I will try to make a start. Johan Lont 15:22, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

As I explained in your talk section, a HOA is far more than an entity that manages the development. It also facilitates the exit of the developer from the development. It is created by the developer for the benefit of the developer. This is often at the expense of the homeowner.Mike Reardon 20:17, 1 October 2007 (UTC)