Friday, March 16, 2018

Oxberry pays HOA dues to get neighborhood support for luxury retail project - Houston Chronicle

Oxberry pays HOA dues to get neighborhood support for luxury retail project - Houston Chronicle:

Here you go, folks. Local democracy in action. Money for votes.



"Oxberry Group compensated nearly 200 residents in a deed-restricted neighborhood to approve plans for a high-end shopping center in the Tanglewood area.

The Houston developer donated $100,000 to the Briarcroft community association and paid one year’s worth of HOA dues — about $625 per household — to any Briarcroft homeowner who voted in favor of its Shops at Tanglewood project. It also held neighborhood meetings, sent informational mailers and knocked on doors to get signatures.

Sean Jamea, an Oxberry co-principal and an attorney, said there’s “nothing wrong” with swaying votes in this manner.

“It’s been happening in Florida for decades,” he said. “There’s absolutely nothing wrong with it. We wanted the Briarcroft neighborhood to prosper with us as we build this shopping center.”"



1 comment:

IC_deLight said...

Absolutely!

The HOA industry has repeatedly FALSELY alleged the HOAs represent the homeowners and therefore HOA board members and vendors somehow represent a large voting block. With this HOA board members and vendors (management companies) have EXTORTED concessions, dollars, etc. for themselves when in reality the politicians and others should have IGNORED them.

Folks HOA corporations CANNOT VOTE. As many stories as there are about bad HOA experiences it should be obvious to all that HOAs do NOT represent the members - membership is INVOLUNTARY because if given a choice most folks would NOT be a member! The developer here realized that the HOMEOWNERS are the ones that have the power to vote - not the HOA corporation.

In this particular instance the matter is not really something the homeowners decide anyway. The property at issue does not belong to the homeowners nor the HOA and is not subject to the deed restrictions. Essentially the developer paid them to not protest an application to local government for the project.