Trash cans, weeds, and paint color is fine. The legal status of my relationships… none of anybody’s business.

Preaching to the choir on that one, brother.

How many people worry about their HOA when they buy a house (other than the amount of the dues and the pool provided)?

I did…and my realtor was pretty good about going through the pros and cons of homeowners associations with me when I started looking for houses. Of course, I was pretty picky about the house I chose too…made sure to check out the neighborhood thoroughly before closing, looked around to see how much expansion was going to happen in my area. I figure anyone who invests as much money as you do in a house and doesn’t check out all the angles kind of deserves what they get. And with a homeowners association you pretty much know what you’re in for before you close if you check them out. That’s not really the case with the government in Black Jack because if you’re moving to another town who would really think that an elected government would tell you it’s illegal to live in the house you bought if you’re unmarried? Plus, it’s something that could change after the purchase too…which would make it even more unjust. I wonder if the realtor told them about that angle before she sold them the property? They certainly had to know about it. If so, that would seem to constitute fraud on the realtor’s part.

Regardless, I still think it’s unjust for an HOA to regulate something that can’t possibly bother the neighbors.

If you sign a contract to abide by their terms while you live there, it’s just…so long as they’re adhering to their end of the contract. If they’re doing things that aren’t part of the arrangement, however, that’s another story.

From the outside looking in they appear to unelected governments that gain power from the lack of diligence of home buyers. How many people worry about their HOA when they buy a house (other than the amount of the dues and the pool provided)? Only after moving in do they realize that some busybody is going to bust them for leaving their trashcans out or using an unapproved paint color.

Regardless, I still think it’s unjust for an HOA to regulate something that can’t possibly bother the neighbors. Trash cans, weeds, and paint color is fine. The legal status of my relationships… none of anybody’s business.

Good points.

Homeowner’s associations are government by contract…you know the rules going in before you buy the home, the power they have is legitimate because they have an ownership stake, and they don’t get to change the rules on you without penalty to them because 50% + 1 decided to do so (unless it’s written into your contract)…and if they try it you have legal recourse because of the contract you signed. If people want to “preserve culture” a homeowner’s association is a far better tool to do it because it doesn’t trample on any rights you didn’t choose to give away in a written contract…the same can’t be said of government.

That said, I seriously doubt I’d ever buy a house under the authority of a homeowner’s association for the very reasons you listed. But then I’m also not a Baptist and I have enough of a life not to care what my neighbors are doing with theirs as long as it doesn’t affect me.

This was an entire town, whereas a homeowners association would be smaller. Hypothetically if you replace the ‘undesirables’ above with someone a more rational person wouldn’t want to live near (3 time rapist with 26 drunken driving convictions perhaps?) Expanding the concept to an entire town doesn’t make these people go away it just shifts them to some other nearby community.

On a town level if you ship all your rapists/murderers/thieves elsewhere you could reduce the size of your police force due to your now lower crime rate. Meanwhile my town has to hire an extra officer to deal with your misplaced people. Should your town really be getting the benefit of lower taxes here?

Hypothetically a very large private homeowner’s association could have the same consequences. Of course in this case the so called ‘undesirables’ really aren’t so there wouldn’t be an issue.

If you’re doing something that doesn’t bother your neighbors, that they won’t even know about without going through your mail, then they have no right to make you stop doing it. Period. It doesn’t matter what sort organization, governmental or private, they try to use to make you stop.

In more then a few states unmarried couples living together are commiting a crime.

Those laws are on the books but rarely enforced. And in very few of those places are you required to supply proof of marriage before they let you move in.

If you’re talking about a private homeowner’s association setting standards I’ve got no problem with that. Government intervening in this manner is always a bad thing. It’s not the government’s role to “preserve culture”…that’s just institutionalized bigotry. Government’s role is to represent the interests of all residents, not just the ones it happens to like.

I think some of the comments were amusing. Russell is mad that we are not tolerant of his intolerance. LoL.

Russell: “why is it that when a town or community that want’s to harbor illegal aliens, or pedifiles, or muslims, or criminals or homosexuals thats ok, but if a town as a community has decided how THEY want to live and it happens to be the opposite of what DEMs and liberals want thats not O.K. if anyone in this country lives by double standards its the leftist liberals. Why is it you preach tolerance so long as its the tolerance you believe in, but those that don’t convert to your way are condemned????????? I thought by your stated idiology that ALL peoples are entitled to thier believes and practices???? PRACTICE WHAT YOU PREACH LIBERAL AMERICA “

I wonder if these idiots would’ve done the same to my wife and I. We lived together for 2.5 years before getting married last month. Probably not, since we’re both white professionals who earn over 80K each a year. They’d love to have us.

Do I feel sorry for this family? Not exactly.

It’s like joining the military, signing a lease, or any other contract for that matter; you need to know what you are getting yourself into.

Buying a house and relocating is a huge deal, I for one would get all sorts of information together before deciding that “This is the place for me!” The couple should have looked into all of the local laws before purchasing the property.

Usually the occupancy permit (or certificate of occupancy, which is what Raleigh, NC called it) is tagged to the house and enforcement only comes into play if the neighbors complain about the number of cars or amount of traffic. In these towns in Missouri it’s different, though… the occupancy permit is applied for by the occupants, and if they don’t get it, they can’t move in. If these people had just moved in, no one ever would have complained about the unmarried couple next door, mostly because no one ever would have known they were unmarried.

That sort of preemptive prying into people’s lives really bothers me. Laws used to shut down boarding houses because the neighbors complain that they’re a nuisance… those don’t bother me quite as much.

I’d still like to know why this has never been challenged in federal court.

I know in Indiana there are a few communities that have enacted, or tried to enact, occupancy laws aimed at immigrant families and college kids. They’ve been based on actual numbers instead of familial relationships.