Reforming homeowner association (HOA) governance without good data and an engaged regulator presents significant challenges. The problem isn’t merely one of logistics—it strikes at the heart of policy legitimacy, public accountability, and reform sustainability. Below is a general discussion, tailored to the HOA context:
1. Absence of Reliable Data: Reforming in the Dark
Effective reform depends on understanding the scope, nature, and prevalence of problems. Without reliable, disaggregated data on HOA governance failures, owner complaints, enforcement outcomes, or financial practices, several core problems arise:
Selective or anecdotal policymaking: Policymakers are forced to rely on isolated horror stories or self-interested industry narratives, which may obscure systemic issues or exaggerate outliers.
Invisible burden on homeowners: Without tracking complaint outcomes or foreclosure statistics, the actual toll of aggressive enforcement, conflicts of interest, or infrastructure neglect is hidden.
Suppressed legislative urgency: In the absence of quantifiable evidence of harm, lawmakers face difficulty justifying the political costs of reform. Industry actors can more easily claim there is “no real problem.”
Limited ability to measure success: Reforms, if enacted, cannot be evaluated or fine-tuned because there’s no baseline or follow-up data to compare.
2. A Passive or Captured Regulator: Enforcement Without Teeth
When the agency tasked with oversight is disengaged, under-resourced, or captured by the very industry it regulates, reform efforts lose their backbone.
Selective enforcement and hidden settlements: Without transparency and accountability, agencies may quietly resolve serious violations without meaningful penalties, sending the message that rules are optional.
Poor complaint follow-up: Homeowners lose trust in the system when filing a complaint leads to silence or generic dismissals, further discouraging participation.
Regulatory silence as policy: Inaction becomes a form of policy that implicitly ratifies the status quo—even when statutes authorize stronger oversight.
No counterweight to industry influence: Absent an engaged public regulator, organized HOA and property management lobbies face little institutional resistance to shaping the law in their favor.
Explore more in NvHOAreform blog post "Uncheck and Unaccountable".
3. Policy Implications: Reform Undermined
When reform efforts proceed under these conditions, even well-drafted laws may be compromised:
Symbolic but toothless reforms: Laws get passed but without funding, enforcement, or implementation mechanisms.
Loophole proliferation: Without regulatory interpretation and rulemaking, statutory language may be exploited or ignored by powerful actors.
Backsliding or repeal: Weak implementation allows industry groups to argue reforms were unnecessary or unworkable, setting the stage for rollbacks.
4. The Reform Paradox: Data and Oversight Must Precede Reform—But Reform Is Needed to Get Data and Oversight
HOA reformers often face a circular dilemma:
You need better data and stronger oversight to justify and shape reform.
But those conditions won’t improve without reforming the legal and institutional structures that suppress transparency and public accountability.
This is why many advocates push for foundational reforms first—such as public disclosure laws, regulatory independence, and mandatory data collection—as preconditions for broader policy changes.
Conclusion
Reforming HOA law in the absence of reliable data and a committed regulator means reformers are often flying blind while trying to alter a structure entrenched by law, practice, and economic interest. To break this cycle, early reform efforts should prioritize data transparency, regulatory accountability, and procedural fairness, laying the groundwork for more ambitious structural change.
Add your voice to the Coalition, it free.
