Natural Devolution

I've lived 40+ years in the same HOA, as original resident, longest resident, member and chair of multiple committees (grounds, social, recreation, information), director and president, and (for better or worse) perennial institutional memory, nag, gadfly and litigator. Most of those experiences have been productive and successful, for myself and (judging by neighbors' comments over the decades) for my community; but, admittedly, a few of my actions have been something less than salutary. I believe that, overall, it gives me a pretty thorough understanding of how HOAs succeed (for their members vs. for their ever-changing Boards) and how they often struggle and occasionally fail. It also has taught me--and repeatedly reinforced to me--how persistent human nature, individually and collectively, moves almost irresistibly toward entropy rather than improvement.

HOAs are initially organized and structured to strengthen developers in the formative years of their individual projects, be they single-family, attached or multi-story, multi-building residences. Successful HOAs, at least early-on, reflect the balance built into their governing documents and residents' early collaborative, tutorial experience with the developer in managing the business (and cultural) interests of the community. That formative process varies significantly with the developer's insight and long-term intentions, the character and style of the liaison/mentor assigned to the HOA, and (for better or worse) the experience, intelligence, pragmatism and maturity of the residents who volunteer to work for the HOA in its early years--and beyond. If the developer cannot see beyond its limited timeline (and short-term profitability) for completing a given community, ignoring how its future reputation and profits are tied to the success of the resident-managed HOA in maintaining--even enhancing--the perceived quality and property values of the community, long-term benefits to all likely will be crippled. Unfortunately, even with all of the aforementioned planning and nurturing, the failure of subsequent volunteers to recognize and learn from the HOA's history--or apply such lessons objectively and equitably tin the face of changing conditions and new dynamics--can often lead to deterioration, disaffection and even collapse. And that is usually long after the developer has relinquished control and moved on to found other HOA-run communities.

Dominance of a few self-serving and willful residents on the Board, in its committees and/or within the general community is an obvious factor that can lead to failure of an HOA. Another is lack of understanding, foresight and effective long-term planning, especially with regard to budgeting, spending and future reserves--but also in the failure to consider both common and individual interests when communicating (or not) with members and inducing (or forcing) compliance with continually expanding rules and restrictions. Those critical problems arise from the same interactive factors affecting almost (?) every community throughout human history: egotistical desire for control; aversion to taking responsibility; failure (even disinclination) to learn from past experience; and (possibly worst) indifference or resignation among most of the population involved. The first sign of a fatal confluence of these infections in an HOA is turning an outside manager for more than basic business functions such as accounting (income, payments, budget tracking) and contract administration--especially because the directors decide they dislike having to deal with residents disgruntled by the Board's actions, decisions or policy changes re one individual or all members. As with larger communities, right up to national issues (or beyond), a separation between power and responsibility will inescapably prove fatal. The second sign, inevitably, is a Board seeking to replace the HOA's governing documents--typically presented as "amending'" them for consistency with new (and constantly changing) legal requirements, but always increasing Board authority at the expense of homeowners' rights and, one can only conclude, strengthening the hand of the Board's attorneys (who wrote--even promulgated the "need" for--the new documents) in the event of homeowner litigation. That way leads to alienation and eventual disaster.

So attend to legal guidelines for developers, certainly; but note that, while their actions are limited to transitory control of an HOA community, their legacy survives in the governing documents they provide and early residents' experience under a developer's mentorship. In the end, it is the evolution or devolution of the supposed maturing community, sustained or eroded by outside government statutes, that determine an HOA's long-term future.