this post was submitted on 16 Apr 2025
331 points (96.1% liked)
AskUSA
516 readers
2 users here now
About
Community for asking and answering any question related to the life, the people or anything related to the USA. Non-US people are welcome to provide their perspective! Please keep in mind:
- [email protected] - politics in our daily lives is inescapable, but please post overtly political things there rather than here
- [email protected] - similarly things with the goal of overt agitation have their place, which is there rather than here
Rules
- Be nice or gtfo
- Discussions of overt political or agitation nature belong elsewhere
- Follow the rules of discuss.online
Sister communities
Related communities
founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Wouldn't things like street maintenance be handled by the city? If they aren't currently and HOAs got banned, it seems like cities could step in and take over without much fuss.
The maintenance costs are why cities make this deal with developers. The city will green light the development provided an HOA is present so their responsibility is kept at a minimum.
The HOA of today isn’t an idea born of people saying they want to govern themselves. It’s from government yelling “less regulation” and pushing their residents into an adrift situation where it’s the only option.
The ethos from the gated community is there, somehow, but that’s the grift. The HOA is only there, in most cases, to remove cost and responsibility from the municipality.
Yup. Even plowing is an HOA task in some places. It’s all a privatization scam and the HOA residents are the marks.
smew or field plowing?
Smew, but also snow.
This is why HOAs are allowed to exist in the first place.
They tell the city, "hey, you've got this huge plot of land that can be developed for residential housing, but it looks like you can't afford to develop it (roads, water pipes, power, etc). Instead of developing and selling it bit by bit, you can sell the land to us, and we'll take care of everything, and just cut you your check!"
HOAs pass the municipal buck from the government to the HOA. Since the HOA (in most cases) owns the infrastructure for the community, there isn't a good way to allow individuals to opt out.
In theory but they do a shit job of it.
Neighborhood associations also exist and are usually much better than HOAs. I would be happy if mine was in charge of the streets instead of the city. But not my HOA, they suck.
I was thinking like gated community type areas which are treated more like private property. And in that example, I meant more like if one house opted out of the HOA, but the HOA was still there, then they'd be using the roads without contributing to maintenance.
But yeah, assuming the HOA dissolved, I would imagine the city or county would take over.