In my continuing quest for world domination, I joined my homeowner association (HOA) board to help oversee the $1+ M construction project we’re undertaking to repair the rotted beams that were improperly sealed when the condominium was built 15 years ago (with a 10 year of statute of liability).
So, I was quite interested in this article on ‘privatopia’, and whether HOAs represent the end of the American Dream.
“Once the statute of limitations for suing the developer — usually one to three years — has expired, the association is on its own. Suddenly, roofs begin to leak, streets break down and the HOA realizes it needs to begin serious repairs.”
All true, although of course residential houses also tend to run into problems 15 years after construction. Especially when they are not well maintained.
‘Even when an HOA is well run and filled with great people, adds McKenzie, “it’s only one election away from a disaster.”‘ Also correct, but isn’t that also true for any democracy? Don’t all democracies get exactly the government they deserve?
Gordon Mohr | 27-Dec-02 at 1:15 am | Permalink
There might be room for a “risk of ruin” type analysis of small/volunteer/high-turnover democracies, like HOAs (and student groups). They are extremely vulnerable to one or a few bad elections, and almost always seem to be in a state of disaster or recovery. (An exception would be when a well-functioning self-sustaining clique has captured the organization for its own benefit… which offers stability but other sorts of long-term decay.)
There should be a pattern language of keeping such “thin” organizations healthy, and/or some sort of outsourceable outside management service — perhaps billed as continuity insurance — to patch over ups and downs of transitory leadership as a predictable cost. That is, as long as the continuity premiums are paid, some outside pros can come in and run the elections/rectify the books/raise exceptions against major boo-boos, on an occasional basis.
I suppose the use of city managers to smooth out the effects of electoral turnover in many cities is one form of such an approach.
Dan Kohn | 27-Dec-02 at 10:00 am | Permalink
Excellent point, Gordon. With HOAs, you have outsourced Community Management associations, who act something like a permanent civil service, providing continuity as the board changes. One of the challenges in coming on the board was that we had just replaced that management association (in fact, we’d had 3 in the space of 6 months), which added to the confusion.
It becomes difficult, though, to know how to balance the competitive threat against the management agency to make them perform up to par, with the value one gets from continuity.
Finally, California mandates that all HOAs have a (different) accredited firm perform a “reserve study” every three years, showing that the HOA dues are covering all necessary ongoing maintenance, and that that maintenance is being performed. This additional regulatory step prevents the board from doing anything really wrong.
We’re only in a crisis because of the unforseen maintenance and resulting special assessment and million dollar construction project to fix it. I expect when we’re finished this summer that the board could almost go to meeting every other month, and my experience in world domination may be over.
Now, we’ll leave it as an exercise for the reader to extrapolate my HOA experience to how international institutions like the World Bank, IMF, and WTO can cause otherwise questionable “donor democracies” to avoid screwing up.
First piece of evidence is this article on Daniel Arap Moi stepping down in Kenya. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/27/international/africa/27CND-KENY.html
Jean Winters | 27-Aug-03 at 11:13 am | Permalink
HOA: Isn’t it like any other democracy?
NO - OUR GOVERNMENT HAS SEPARATION OF POWERS.
AN HOA DOES NOT
HOAS ARE FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED