Ugh this isn't what HOAs are for!
HOAs are intended to harass and discriminate against black and brown people so that they don't move in, or at least immediately leave.
Not white guys with majestic beards.
He must've been giving water to black or brown people, it's the only justifiable reason.
My favorite HOA conflict:
https://www.jeepforum.com/threads/epic-hoa-parking-boot-battle.572540/
TL;DR - HOA boots a car parked outside a guys house. He puts the car up on dollies and pushes it into his garage.
They accuse him of stealing the boot.
He tells them they can come get it any time they want.
They tell him it's $140 to remove the boot.
He tells them "Nah, it's cool, I don't need to drive the car." LOL.
Edit Also in Arizona... Something in the water down there?
HOAs seem like they should be illegal. Having a contract in perpetuity that is attached to the purchase of property seems like it shouldn't be allowed. So it is not only bound to the person who originally signed, but to whoever purchases the relevant property afterwards, and that gives other people rights over you that can be changed afterwards and are only limited by their conscience.
I basically don't think you should be able to create a government by using a contract.
I found an update about the vote to remove the three board members.
Homeowners voted 190 to 20 in favour of removal, however the board cancelled the vote claiming there wasn't a 24 hour notice given to the community and subsequently that 210 votes might not qualify a quorum of more than a thousand homes.
What a dystopian hell hole. My condolences to everyone having something like HOA in their lives. May you all experience a civilised and free country at some point.
How anyone that lives in a country that has HOAs can unironically call it "land of the free" is beyond me
If you’re in a state with ballot measures, then you could campaign for rules against single family home HOAs.
Whoever ratted it him out is just jealous of his beard.
Man, I could never live with an HOA. It’s just dumb.
No good deed goes unpunished.
Would be interesting to know what rule they might have that could be interpreted in such a way to ban giving out water (and which should be referenced in a citation, no?) but the article doesn't mention anything of the sort.
top 50 comments