HOA Reform Belongs on Every Political Platform
If owners do not bring HOA concerns to lawmakers, we should not expect them to take action.
Every election, Nevada's political candidates promise to address the cost of living, housing affordability, property rights, and government accountability. These concerns dominate political campaigns and party platforms. Yet one important part of homeownership receives remarkably little attention: the costs, obligations, restrictions, and governance imposed by homeowners associations.
Nevada has more than 3,800 registered common-interest associations, covering approximately 648,000 reported association units. These are substantial numbers, representing a over half of Nevada's residential housing landscape.
For these homeowners, affordability does not end with the mortgage payment. Increasing monthly assessments, special assessments, and reserve funding can significantly affect the expense of owning a home. HOA authority, rules, and the decisions made also affect how owners use their property, participate in community governance, and exercise rights guaranteed under Nevada law.
These are not peripheral homeowner concerns. They are part of the same cost-of-living and property-rights issues that both political parties regularly promise to address.
Missing from the Political Platforms
Consider the published platforms of Nevada's two major political parties.
The Nevada Democratic Party's 2026 platform expressly supports making housing more accessible to renters and homebuyers. Yet it makes no mention of homeowners associations or the financial and governance issues confronting existing homeowners.
The Nevada Republican Party's publicly posted 2024 platform emphasizes individual liberty, lower taxes and fees, limited government, and personal responsibility. But it, too, makes no mention of HOA governance. The Clark County Republican Party's 2026 platform similarly emphasizes property rights, transparency, and housing availability without addressing HOAs.
This omission is striking because HOA governance directly intersects with the concerns both parties already recognize. Nevada law grants homeowners associations substantial authority over private property and community finances. Boards can impose assessments, enforce restrictions, levy fines, and initiate collection proceedings that, under specified circumstances, can result in foreclosure.
Indeed, Nevada's own mandatory homeowner disclosure under NRS 116.41095 expressly recognizes that HOA decisions affect an owner's property, freedom of choice, and cost of living.
The omission of HOA issues from both parties' platforms reflects a broader failure to recognize HOA governance as an ongoing political responsibility. Nevada legislators have enacted numerous HOA protections, but those legislative efforts have not been accompanied by a sustained commitment to examining whether the protections are being properly implemented and enforced.
Our three-part series, Have Nevada's HOA Regulators Abandoned Homeowners?, explores this problem in detail. Part 2 examines recurring homeowner problems and unresolved issues that continue despite the protections already written into Nevada law.
HOA Reform Is Not a Partisan Cause
There is no inherently Democratic or Republican position on whether homeowners deserve transparent financial management, fair elections, accountable boards, meaningful regulatory oversight, or affordable means of resolving disputes.
Nor should HOA reform be confused with opposition to homeowners associations themselves.
Well-managed HOAs provide valuable services, maintain common property, and contribute to desirable communities. Homeowners satisfied with their associations have an interest in preserving effective governance, just as homeowners experiencing disputes have an interest in correcting its failures.
The central issue is whether Nevada's HOA laws and regulatory institutions adequately protect the homeowners they were established to serve. That question deserves consideration regardless of political affiliation.
Nevada Does Not Need to Start Over
Nevada already has an extensive body of HOA laws intended to protect homeowners. The Legislature also established a regulatory framework to interpret, implement, and enforce those laws. That framework includes the Nevada Real Estate Division, the Office of the Ombudsman, and the Commission for Common-Interest Communities and Condominium Hotels.
The problem is not a shortage of laws or regulatory institutions. It is whether the existing institutions are fulfilling the responsibilities lawmakers assigned to them. This concern is hardly unique to HOA regulation; it reflects a broader challenge in government oversight, where the existence of laws and institutions does not necessarily mean they are fulfilling their intended purposes.
Too often, homeowners encounter unresolved questions about their rights, inconsistent interpretations of existing protections, and regulatory processes that provide little practical resolution.
For an example of how an identified homeowner problem can remain unresolved despite the existence of multiple regulatory institutions, see our post How Nevada HOA Policy Is Made—Or Not. What is needed is a renewed commitment to making the existing system work as intended—supported by targeted statutory or regulatory changes where experience demonstrates they are necessary.
By 2019, lawmakers began questioning whether Nevada's existing HOA regulatory system was working as intended. They had already established the CIC Commission with authority to adopt regulations, examine how HOA laws affected communities, and monitor violations. Yet homeowner dissatisfaction and unresolved concerns continued to flood legislators. Why were the institutions already responsible for addressing these problems not providing effective solutions?
That was the significance of SB 392 in 2019. Rather than simply authorize another study, lawmakers authorized a separate CIC Task Force in the context of efforts to strengthen a regulatory system that was not adequately addressing homeowners' concerns. The Task Force offered a means to examine those problems, identify deficiencies, and recommend legislative or regulatory improvements. Its creation raised a fundamental question about the effectiveness of the existing institutions, particularly the CIC Commission and NRED.
Yet the Task Force met briefly in 2020 and then remained inactive for years before being reconstituted in 2025. Now that it is meeting again, what has resulted of substance for homeowners?
Another series of meetings and recommendations will accomplish little unless the problems identified lead to meaningful improvements. More importantly, a task force cannot substitute for the continuing responsibilities of Nevada's permanent HOA regulatory institutions.
The objective must be to make those institutions effective—not to create another process for examining problems they should already be addressing.
Part 3 of our series, (coming soon) examines the performance of Nevada's HOA regulatory institutions and proposes reforms intended to restore their effectiveness. These include strengthening the CIC Commission's independent oversight role, improving regulatory accountability, and reconsidering the institutional independence of the Ombudsman.
A New Administration, an Opportunity for Change
The election of a new governor presents an opportunity to reexamine how Nevada's HOA regulatory system serves homeowners. Without deliberate action, the shortcomings of the past may simply continue under a new administration.
Governor-elect Aaron Ford campaigned on addressing affordability and the rising cost of living. The cost of HOA living belongs in that conversation. More importantly, a new administration has an opportunity—and, I would argue, a responsibility—to assess whether the agencies and regulatory institutions charged with protecting homeowners are carrying out the duties lawmakers assigned to them. This need not become a partisan undertaking. The protections already written into Nevada law were developed over many legislative sessions, with contributions from lawmakers of both parties.
The challenge is not to discard that work but to make it effective.
The incoming administration and the 2027 Legislature have an opportunity to restore attention to a substantial segment of Nevada homeowners whose concerns have remained largely outside the state's broader political agenda. The question is whether they will use that opportunity to examine the performance of the existing system and insist upon improvements.
Homeowners Must Make Their Concerns Heard
Political parties establish priorities in response to competing interests and the concerns expressed by their constituents. Nevada homeowners cannot assume that their concerns will receive political attention simply because hundreds of thousands of homes are subject to HOA governance.
They must make those concerns known.
That means engaging candidates, elected representatives, party organizations, and legislative committees about HOA affordability, property rights, board accountability, regulatory oversight, and access to fair and economical dispute resolution. It also means expecting more than occasional legislation addressing an isolated HOA problem. Homeowners should expect their representatives to examine why existing protections are not producing the results lawmakers intended.
For homeowners who want to participate, NVHOAReform provides guidance on making your voice heard by Nevada lawmakers. The Coalition also maintains a 2027 HOA legislation tracker to help owners follow proposals as they develop.
The objective is not to turn HOA reform into a partisan contest. It is to make HOA governance and homeowner protection part of both parties' political platforms and policy priorities.
Making Nevada's existing HOA regulatory system more effective is neither beyond the state's ability nor too insignificant to warrant political attention. It should not be allowed to disappear beneath competing priorities year after year.
Nevada homeowners do not all share the same political beliefs. They do, however, share an interest in protecting their homes, controlling the costs of ownership, and ensuring that the institutions governing their communities remain accountable. A political platform that promises affordable housing, property rights, and accountable government should recognize that these concerns continue long after a homeowner receives the keys.
Nevada already has much of the legal framework needed to protect homeowners. What it lacks is sustained political attention to making that framework work. Homeowners must demand it.
