This is still a poor article. If that's really the point, then they should have focused on many other points related to covenants and not confused that point by including people who were not under covenants. They could also tell us what their solution is (make associations illegal?). Or are the just complaining without any solution or even a salient argument.
It's a human interest piece: I took the point of Carin Froehlich's story to be that it affects more than just the people who are forced to not air-dry their laundry.
Given the simplicity of the problem ("I can't hang my laundry [without people, including local officials, complaining]"), the solution is a little obvious ("I want to be allowed to hang my laundry"). I think the journalist who wrote this probably trusted us to understand that.
Even if it was a human interest piece, the good journalists get external perspectives. They don't just parrot whatever the one person says.
"Given the simplicity of the problem ("I can't hang my laundry [without people, including local officials, complaining]"), the solution is a little obvious ("I want to be allowed to hang my laundry")."
This makes no sense. The lady was allowed to hang her laundry! The other guy entered into a contract that didn't allow it. There is no problem here (other than neighbors not being neighborly).
