Governance
The Davis-Stirling Act
The Davis-Stirling Common Interest is the primary body of law governing homeowners associations (HOAs) in California. Enacted to provide a uniform legal framework, it defines how HOAs are formed, governed, and operated, covering elections, assessments, budgets, reserves, records access, and dispute resolution.
In theory, Davis-Stirling is meant to balance the interests of homeowners and associations by promoting transparency, fairness, and democratic governance. In practice, however, the Act contains significant structural weaknesses. It grants broad discretion to volunteer boards, relies heavily on self-enforcement, and offers homeowners only limited, costly remedies when abuses occur. Management companies and HOA attorneys often dominate interpretation and enforcement, creating an imbalance of power that favors institutions over individual owners.
As a result, homeowners frequently encounter opaque finances, biased elections, retaliation for speaking out, and barriers to accountability. While Davis-Stirling provides the rules of the game, it lacks meaningful guardrails—making reform, education, and homeowner vigilance essential to prevent misuse and protect communities.
Governance as a System
Governance as a System, Not a Personality. Good governance is not about finding “good people” and hoping they act well. It is about designing a system that functions predictably, transparently, and fairly regardless of who is in charge. When governance depends on personalities, communities become vulnerable to ego, favoritism, and silence. When governance depends on structure, abuse becomes difficult and visible.
Effective governance separates power. Those who make decisions should not be the same people who control information, money, or enforcement. Clear procedures, written standards, and routine disclosure replace informal practices and back-room decisions. Meetings are purposeful, records are accessible, and rules are applied consistently.
Accountability is the defining feature. Leaders are evaluated against objective criteria, not intentions. Poor performance has consequences, and good performance is measurable. Homeowners are treated as stakeholders, not obstacles, and participation is encouraged through openness rather than intimidation.
In short, governance works best when it is engineered—built with foresight, limits, and safeguards—so that trust is earned through design, not demanded through authority.
Serving the Community
Governance That Serves the Community
At its core, governance exists to serve the people subject to it—not to protect those in power. When governance loses that focus, rules become tools of control rather than instruments of order. A healthy governance model begins with a simple premise: authority is temporary, conditional, and accountable.
Strong governance prioritizes clarity. Policies are written in plain language, decisions are explained, and financial activity is easy to trace. Nothing important is hidden behind technicalities or silence. Transparency is not treated as a courtesy; it is treated as a requirement.
Equally important is proportionality. Enforcement is consistent and fair, not selective or punitive. Disagreements are resolved through dialogue and structured problem-solving, not escalation or legal intimidation. Systems are designed to de-escalate conflict, not profit from it.
When governance functions properly, communities become more resilient. Trust replaces suspicion, participation replaces apathy, and leadership becomes a responsibility rather than a prize. Governance succeeds not when it exerts control, but when it creates stability, confidence, and a shared sense of ownership.
Governance
The Davis-Stirling Act
The Davis-Stirling Common Interest is the primary body of law governing homeowners associations (HOAs) in California. Enacted to provide a uniform legal framework, it defines how HOAs are formed, governed, and operated, covering elections, assessments, budgets, reserves, records access, and dispute resolution.
In theory, Davis-Stirling is meant to balance the interests of homeowners and associations by promoting transparency, fairness, and democratic governance. In practice, however, the Act contains significant structural weaknesses. It grants broad discretion to volunteer boards, relies heavily on self-enforcement, and offers homeowners only limited, costly remedies when abuses occur. Management companies and HOA attorneys often dominate interpretation and enforcement, creating an imbalance of power that favors institutions over individual owners.
As a result, homeowners frequently encounter opaque finances, biased elections, retaliation for speaking out, and barriers to accountability. While Davis-Stirling provides the rules of the game, it lacks meaningful guardrails—making reform, education, and homeowner vigilance essential to prevent misuse and protect communities.
Governance as a System
Governance as a System, Not a Personality. Good governance is not about finding “good people” and hoping they act well. It is about designing a system that functions predictably, transparently, and fairly regardless of who is in charge. When governance depends on personalities, communities become vulnerable to ego, favoritism, and silence. When governance depends on structure, abuse becomes difficult and visible.
Effective governance separates power. Those who make decisions should not be the same people who control information, money, or enforcement. Clear procedures, written standards, and routine disclosure replace informal practices and back-room decisions. Meetings are purposeful, records are accessible, and rules are applied consistently.
Accountability is the defining feature. Leaders are evaluated against objective criteria, not intentions. Poor performance has consequences, and good performance is measurable. Homeowners are treated as stakeholders, not obstacles, and participation is encouraged through openness rather than intimidation.
In short, governance works best when it is engineered—built with foresight, limits, and safeguards—so that trust is earned through design, not demanded through authority.
Serving the Community
Governance That Serves the Community
At its core, governance exists to serve the people subject to it—not to protect those in power. When governance loses that focus, rules become tools of control rather than instruments of order. A healthy governance model begins with a simple premise: authority is temporary, conditional, and accountable.
Strong governance prioritizes clarity. Policies are written in plain language, decisions are explained, and financial activity is easy to trace. Nothing important is hidden behind technicalities or silence. Transparency is not treated as a courtesy; it is treated as a requirement.
Equally important is proportionality. Enforcement is consistent and fair, not selective or punitive. Disagreements are resolved through dialogue and structured problem-solving, not escalation or legal intimidation. Systems are designed to de-escalate conflict, not profit from it.
When governance functions properly, communities become more resilient. Trust replaces suspicion, participation replaces apathy, and leadership becomes a responsibility rather than a prize. Governance succeeds not when it exerts control, but when it creates stability, confidence, and a shared sense of ownership.