Here’s your email content:

“Would you SUPPORT or OPPOSE legislation which would do the following?• Neuter the authority and power of H.O.A. corporations; limiting themto that which is only necessary to manage and maintain their → common← property.and• Make it illegal for an H.O.A. corporation to make and enforce ruleson a homeowners own → private ← property; regardless of what iswritten in the governing documents of the H.O.A.Why?”

You are not getting a response because no such legislation has been proposed, nor is there a single legislator who has given the slightest indication of support.

At best, you could aim for a ballot initiative, which would take tens of thousands of signatures. And, to obtain those, a fairly large volunteer effort or significant financial backing to pay for the same to collect such signatures.

Meanwhile, the feedback from homeowners is not in alignment with this effort. Many want rules to be enforced on homeowners.

What you are proposing may as well be a complete dismantling of the system of restrictive covenants that “run with the land”. Or, stated differently, barring restrictive covenants entirely. I don’t think that is realistic or even within the realm of possibility. Highly improbable, at best.

Therefore, the reason for non-response to your question, as much as it angers you, is that the lack of realistic possibility means that most are judging engagement as not worth their time. There’s a huge list of potential changes that can actually be made, and not enough time to address them all in one session.

Therefore, your proposal is an outlier that isn’t likely to get traction among either activists or legislators.

You have a grand total of 8 followers on Substack, including me.

So, yes, your question was answered in my first response. It’s answered again here. You don’t have my support on this proposal.