Mentoring: Reorienting HOA board – mission
Review of StarMan Group Mission
- to establish the climate and culture of the HOA enabling the restoration of the lost constitutional principles of democratic government — individual rights, justice and fair play — for its members within the confines of a private contractual government, and
- to remove the very strong external influences of the special interest vendors and lobbyists who are the primary causes of this deviation from the general societal norms and values.
In earlier papers I described the Cultural Dynamics of and the domination of HOA-Land by industry “stakeholders” who claim a special interest in your HOA controlled home. I maintained that the Community Associations Institute (CAI) dominates and heavily influences the decisions and functioning of boards (BODs) through its strong influence on state legislatures adopt biased and unjust laws detrimental to the members. CAI’s effect on the BOD, the members — especially the loyal “followers” — and the public in general stems from 45 years of indoctrination by means of the CAI School of HOA Governance.
This series, “Restructuring the HOA Model of Governance,” offers a plan, conforming to the principles of organizational development, to return HOA-Land to democratic constitutional government and cease being a protected outlaw government functioning outside the Constitution and laws of the land. Having introduced my positions on the role of the BOD in its policymaking capacity and the heavy hand of CAI, I now address the need to reorient the BOD with its huge authoritarian powers that would not be allowed under municipal governments.
“HOAs currently engage in many activities that would be prohibited if they were viewed by the courts as the equivalent of local governments.”
I wrote, “The policy makers have failed to understand that the HOA CC&Rs have crossed over the line between purely property restrictions to establishing unregulated and authoritarian private governments.”
Addressing nonprofit organizations, eminent management consultant Peter F. Drucker wrote: “The first job of the leader is to think through and define the mission of the institution. . . . One of the most common mistakes is to make the statement [a series] of good intentions.” It has to be operational, otherwise it’s just good intentions. Using my prior example of a large-scale active adult HOA in Arizona, I contrast the mission, goal and values statements that illustrate an effective and productive community.
HOA vision statement: [HOA] is the premier active, age−restricted community in Arizona.
Restructured Vision Statement: To become the premier active, age-restricted community in Arizona.
HOA mission statement: [HOA] provides residents with a high−value community, with resort−style amenities, in which every person can choose to participate and live well, based on their needs and desires. This high standard will maximize our investments and promote our well−being in an active close−knit community.
Restructured Mission Statement: To provide residents with a high-value community with resort-style amenities to maximize our investments.
HOA values statement: In support of our Mission Statement, we hold to these values:
- We foster relationships built on respect, trust, and effective communications.
- We listen to understand.
- We are open−minded, collaborative, and always look for ways to improve our community.
- We believe in life−long learning and a desire for active well−
- We are a forward−looking, fiscally−sound community
- We encourage an environment of empowerment and personal responsibility.
Restructured Values: We believe in a community culture having high standards and principles of conduct and behavior.
These HOA views and attitudes came quite as a surprise considering that it is a $20,000,000 revenue operation, and one would expect it to do better than that. My impression is that they are a prime example of the BOD’s mistake of using lofty, high and mighty statements lacking focus and aimed to give the appearance of good intentions, as Drucker explained above. These HOA statements read very similar to CAI’s propaganda and its advice and training offered by its School of HOA Governance.
The time is well passed for the BOD to drop CAI as an advisor, as CAM and as its HOA attorney. It’s well passed the time for BOD’s to learn about the effective and healthy council-manager form of local government. Not that public government is perfect but it is far better in upholding the principles of democratic government lost under the adhesive CC&Rs “constitution.”
(Part 2 of the Reorienting HOA BOD will discuss BOD failure to attract member commitment as volunteers).
 George K. Staropoli, HOA-Land Nation Within America, Part 1, “The Cultural Dynamics of HOA-Land” (2019) and High RWA followers can be found in HOA members. (2019).
 “HOA-Land is a collection of fragmented independent principalities within America, known in general as HOAs, that are separate local private governments not subject to the constitution, and that collectively constitute a nation within the United States”, Defining HOA-LAND: what it is (2017).
 George K. Staropoli, Restructuring HOAs: “CAI School and member benefits” pt. 2 (2020) and CAI School faculty advice – managing HOAs (2020).
 George K. Staropoli, Restructuring the HOA model,(2019).
 See in general, “Organizational Development,” George K. Staropoli, (2019).
 Supra n. 1.
 Evan McKenzie, Privatopia: Homeowners Associations and the Rise of Residential Private Governments, Yale Univ. Press, 1994.
 Peter F. Drucker, Managing the Nonprofit Organization: Principles and Practices, HarperCollins (1990).
 See in general, Roger L. Kemp, “Forms of Governance,” Managing America’s Cities: A Handbook for Local Government Productivity, McFarland & Co., (2007). They are: Strong Mayor, Council-Manager, Town Meeting (direct or representative democracy), and Commission.