Welcome to the Valley Citizens League

Many homeowners have become alienated from the political process both within the HOA — board of directors, president, community managers (CAM), and the HOA attorney; and  within state government – the legislature, judiciary, and elected officials.  The news media has failed to tell the truth and to ask the hard questions, as they commonly proclaim to their audiences, with respect to the HOA legal scheme, questions of constitutionality, and misrepresentation in the selling process; thereby giving a false message and spreading misinformation in support of the special interests.

They feel that their voice doesn’t matter and that the special interests control the policy decisions affecting their lives.   VCL-HOA assures that homeowner influence is brought to bear on the decisions made by politicians and state legislatures and agencies, including on the HOA political community as  well. The Valley Citizens League – Homeowners Association Research offers a methodology for conducting research in preparation for court arguments and proposed legislation on HOA problems and issues through a study process, rather than by opinion polls, surveys or focus groups.

View full document, VCL-HOA

Understanding the Legislative structure

Getting HOA reforms passed in your state legislature requires an understanding of the structure of legislatures  — how they are organized and structured.  It may surprise you that they can be understood as just another business structure, except with 2 boards of directors (BOD) — the two branches known as the Senate and the House.  The power and authority of each BOD is specified in the Constitution.

As with any business organization, there is a hierarchical structure between bosses, employees, committees, and subcommittees with the chairs of each having the power to affect the decisions of the committee to pass legislation; in many cases absolute power. A committee chair can refuse to hear a bill, hold it from being heard, or allow a vote.

At the BOD level, the party in power in each branch rules and runs that branch with broad authority to assign committee chairs from its party members, hear a bill in COW (committee of the whole where discussion is permitted before the final vote) and in the final vote. The power lies in the Senate President and the Speaker of the House, and in the Rules Committee. I’ve witnessed such power many times in which the majority party leaders were against the bill and withheld it from being heard.  

Following the business model, a legislator is just an employee of his party and has more or less ambitions to rise up the ranks to chairs of important committees and to party leadership. And then maybe to other government positions like AG or Governor or a congressional representative. All in his best interests, not yours!  Only if HOA reform helps him advance in the party’s standings.

Your legislature most likely has a publication under the heading “How a Bill is Made Law” that describes the process in general.  Also, I strongly recommend the book, “Take Back Your Government” authored by former CO Senate President Morgan Carroll that provides how grassroots reforms can be effective in getting bills passed by the legislature. (See Colorado senator’s guide to effective HOA legislation.)

Success in HOA reform bills requires an understanding that the process is a social and political movement and not just a social media talk group.

Understanding constitutionality challenges

This post contains a lot of info about challenging HOA constitutionality, from the very broad — the HOA legal scheme is ab initio unconstitutional and invalid –to specific CC&Rs covenants violations.

Read my reply to “Can homeowners get rid of unreasonable, unconstitutional HOA rules?“ by Deborah Goonan on FB:

“I would add to Deborah’s list the following: Foreclosure as an 8th Amendment violation against cruel and unusual punishment (https://pvtgov.info/…/hoa-common-sense-no-8-draconian…/), and fines/hearings as a violation of the 14th Amendment due process violation (https://pvtgov.info/…/hoa-common-sense-no-6-fair-and…/), both under the broader prohibition of special laws for special organizations. I will comment on constitutional law on my HOA Constitutional Government site to help understand what the law is all about.”

Also on FB, Emily Bloom raised the following question, and my reply follows.:

Emily Bloom. “What kind of HOA legal case(s) do you need in the courts to get these issues pushed through the supreme court for some sort of resolution? Do people just need funds and energy to be able to fight it that far?”

I replied:

“Winnable! State and US supreme court only hear 10% of the cases submitted for review. Appellate courts must hear an appeal. You can sue against state constitutions to be heard by the state supreme court as Rutgers Law Clinic did in the NJ Twin rivers 2006 lawsuit. It requires both parties to have $$$ if pursued to supreme courts, and if CAI you know they have $$$$. Of course, like I was lucky to have a non-profit constitutional law firm take on my case because it was winnable. Otherwise, insurance companies will only DFFEFEND if HOA is sued but not if HOA sues. Beyond this simplistic response, a complicated explanation requires a degree of understanding how the courts work and some constitutional law. It starts with a party raising a lawsuit on a specific charge that can lead to introducing constitutional challenges by either party. Search my website for CAO and Brendt for examples of how constitutional challenges are presented.”

On my HOA Constitutional Government website I explained judicial review for the court to determine the justification that a law is constitutional, that, as far as I know, has not been satisfactorily presented by the government.

“I have yet to see any valid government justification in support of the HOA legal scheme that deprives citizens of their constitutional and fundamental rights. . . . However, the HOA scheme must be reviewed under strict scrutiny since it damages the members’ rights and freedoms.”

See Judicial Scrutiny standards judge claims of constitutionality.

Judicial review of laws affecting your rights

In reply to an incident questioning the validity of a statute, the state’s AG responded with the usual, “determines that the enactment was reasonably necessary to further a legitimate public interest.”

This is open ended. However, very importantly, challenges to the constitutionality of the laws, and this is really the case here, fall under the doctrine of judicial review. There are 3 levels with “general interest” allowing the government to do almost anything. Strict review applies to violations of constitutional and fundamental rights and requires “a compelling reason and there is no other alternative available,” so it’s protected. Most violations of free speech and the unequal protection of the laws and due process, as we see in HOA violations, require a strict review.

Judicial review rarely occurs and not invoked when filing a relevant complaint.

AG power to investigate HOA abuse

An example of bill wordings in 2 states to be applied in every state.

It may come to a surprise to many who find no ills living in an HOA, but it’s well known that state Attorney General’s offices have shied away from investigating and bringing legal actions against HOA board violations of state laws and their contractual obligations. 

See NC group North Carolina attempts AG protection of HOA members – HB 311 https://pvtgov.info/…/new-hampshire-attempts-ag…/ See below 2011 Indiana bill (repealed 2015),

Indiana Code

Title 32, Property, Article 25.5, Homeowners Associations, Chapter 3, Homeowners Associations

IC 32-25.5-3-8 Attorney general’s action against association or board member; misappropriation or fraud; remedies Sec. 8. (a) The attorney general may bring an action against a board or an individual member of a board of a homeowners association if the attorney general finds that: (1) the association’s funds have been knowingly or intentionally misappropriated or diverted by a board member; or (2) a board member has knowingly or intentionally used the board member’s position on the board to commit fraud or a criminal act against the association or the association’s members. (b) A court in which an action is brought under this section may do the following: (1) Issue an injunction. (2) Order the board member to make restitution to the homeowners association or to a member. (3) Order a board member to be removed from the board.  (4) Order a board member to reimburse the state for the reasonable costs of the attorney general’s investigation and prosecution of the violation.