zlacker

Why would anyone do that, then?

>>Gordon+(OP)
Because they might want to live in a place without laundry or rotting cars in the front yard.

Also common is HOAs for 55+ year olds, who essentially don't want to deal with kids around.

>>Gordon+(OP)
Because in many areas these are almost the only homes available in certain price ranges and sizes.

If you want new construction and are not independently wealthy, you would be extremely challenged to find a house not under a HoA.

It's eye opening when looking in some areas how hundreds of square miles of developments are 100% HoA controlled.

I would never buy such a place, but I do understand why some folks would feel forced into such a transaction.

>>Gordon+(OP)
There are literally stacks of papers that get signed when you close on a house. I imagine 90% of people just sign everything in front of them without a second thought.

>>phil21+Q1
People like HOAs. The HOAs can vote to disband, but people don't care enough to do so. Many people feel they protect property value, and they are probably right.

>>Gordon+(OP)
Presumably the majority of the people living there like the rules, otherwise they wouldn't have been voted into the rule book. Democracy in action.

>>Gordon+(OP)
Because, and you may not know this, some people have standards they live by. They like "nice things". And there's large groups of them that feel this way and want to ensure they don't attract an antisocial person that has different values.

I feel like people have this really funny idea that everyone should accept them and respect them for exactly who they are and that people should respect whatever it is they want to do. This isn't true at all. Your mom and dad may, but no one else does even if we say we do.

We specifically construct social systems like private clubs, HOAs, etc to keep people out because we don't want to associate with people like them. A great thing about liberty is it allows us to freely associate which means groups of people can construct social gates which keep other people out that can't or won't meet a standard.

>>nemo44+t7
It also nicely keeps out people with the wrong skin colour.

>>chriss+h5
The article says not:

>the no-hanging rules are usually included by the communities’ developers

It may be hard / too much hassle / etc. to vote them out.

>>gpvos+Qm
I haven't seen that any modern HOA contracts.

>>gpvos+Qm
That's correct. It's very popular today to have "affinity groups" on college campuses that only allow people of certain skin colors in. For instance, a PoC affinity group disallows white people from being a part of it. They even have special graduation ceremonies where only people with certain complexions are allowed to participate. There's numerous examples beyond skin color like sexuality and gender.

Freedom of association I guess?

>>gpvos+hn
You could say the same about any democratic action - if people are too lazy to vote then yeah they won’t get what they want.

>>nemo44+t7
One of the standards that I live by is that I don't want to live around people who think they have a right to tell others what colour they can paint their fence, or if they can hang washing out or not.

I would pay good money to avoid living near people like that, and indeed I do.

>>Gordon+(OP)
Because developers sell to people who like "new houses" and to make those more desirable they add a HOA that says that you're safe buying your house because the HOA prevents others from changing their houses to look different from the pristine perfection that is the American Suburb.

Or it's a condominium development and you need a HOA to deal with the roof and other shared maintenance issues, and things get tacked on.

It is painfully easy to avoid a HOA if you don't want one, but once they exist they stick with the house for basically forever.

And the underlying aspect remains, which is keep poor people out (often explicitly racist, mind you): https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/ugly-legacy-latino-coupl...

Even though not enforceable, they often remain and people still sign them. https://www.vice.com/en/article/y3ppgw/californians-can-now-...

>>nemo44+fo
You know full well that it works much stronger the other way around.