Followup to the story below from an Indiana newspaper that went into detail about problems with HOA governance, and included by name Stonecreek Arbors, in Vandenburgh County, Indiana. The Consumerist is reporting that the president of the Stonecreek HOA sent the following to the newspaper, after being interviewed, proving once again (as if any additional proof were needed, after all these years) that many HOA leaders need to get a clearer understanding of the limits on their powers.
“[T]his notice also requires you not to at any measure mention anything regarding my name, any resident of Stonecreek, NOR will we ALLOW any of your printing in any article regarding Stonecreek at any time in any publication… You will be held liable for any violations of this letter and notice/request in this email. If we find/discover you have mentioned Stonecreek in any legal matter their (sic) will be action toward yourself as well as any print paper you represent in the media article.
“You may contact any HOA in the County of Vanderburgh, the State of Indiana, but Stonecreek will not PERMIT OR ALLOW YOU our legal name in any future article.”
1 comment:
This article starkly illustrates the conflict between the public and private forms of local government that often arise in Privatopia.
HOA residents hold the expectation that the HOA is a local government (even though technically it is not since HOAs are not political subdivisions of states) that should like other public entities operate with a large degree of transparency and accountability. And open to media scrutiny like any other public government entity.
The elected HOA officials however believe they are private citizens and not public figures and thus view media coverage as an invasion of privacy as in this case.
Post a Comment