- is not allowed to capture rainwater (a state law)
- is not allowed to have a clothesline (Home Owners' Association by-law)
- is not allowed to have chickens (ditto)
It is even more remarkable that citizens of the Land of the Free would voluntarily sign up to the intrusive impositions of HOAs, yet they do. I would consider it a gross impertinence for my neighbours to interfere in quiet, private backyard matters such as my washing. How is it any business of theirs?
But oh, it's a different matter when the elected government tells people what to do! San Francisco wants to bring in mandatory recycling -- and that's government interference! No matter that proper separation of rubbish lowers the costs of disposal as well as protecting the environment. It's intrusion. Yet what the HOA decrees isn't? With considerably less justification?
I must say the San Francisco legislation does seem rather ham-fisted. I think my council's solution involves more carrot and less stick -- most Sydney councils would have a similar system. In my municipality, we are issued one 120-litre (32 US gallons) rubbish bin, which is emptied weekly. Excess rubbish removal must be ordered and paid for. The recycling bin is 240 litres (64 US gallons) and is emptied fortnightly -- it takes paper, steel tins, aluminium cans, glass and recyclable plastics. The identical green waste bin (for garden refuse) is emptied on the alternate fortnight. If the garbos notice improperly sorted waste, they will refuse to empty the bin -- it's then the householder's responsibility to fix it up. There is no need to turn the garbos into the eco-police, but there is a reasonable incentive to sort rubbish properly and minimise landfill waste.