OCR Coverage of the Laguna Woods Credit Card Debacle As if Written By Real Journalists
Kudos to the OCR – about time!
June 29, 2007
When we first read the article titled Laguna Woods managers defend spending Managers of Laguna Woods Village defend credit card charges, but suspicion persists, published June 27, 2007, we thought that the OC Register (OCR)reporters did not ask Milt Johns, PCM General Manager at Laguna Woods Village, the tough questions. For example, the article refers to Mr. Jones characterization as expenditures “as "a treat" for the governing board that contracts with PCM”, then go on the state that “the same board that will decide whether to set spending limits” – an obvious follow up question might have been: Is this not a conflict of interest?
Then there is this entry: "Besides food, Johns spent $441 in 2005 at Tiffany and Co. for a gift from the governing board to the retiring editor of the Leisure World News, which was purchased in 1990 by the Orange County Register's parent firm." - we trust this is not a contributing factor to previous OCR "paraphrase" reporting.
As it happens, Mr. Johns, was on the local closed-circuit television station, Channel 6, this morning during the first half hour of the morning "News" program - It will be rebroadcast this evening at 7PM - He states that the OC Register was nothing but lies, attacking reporters, residents, and others speaking out about the lack of fiscal transparency and accountability. Among other things, Mr. Johns said “ people just don't understand ... people don't understand the implications of challenging these expenditures” – wondering if that is a threat?
Mr. Johns has in essence endorsed the OC Register reporting in this case – when the two sides of an issue are unhappy with the reporters, we know they are doing a fine job! – Kudos to the OC Register – we trust this is the beginning of a new age of Community Journalism!
RELATED STORIES
Boy Scouts News Worthy ? Laguna Woods Village Plight Is not Not!Or is there something hidden in them thar "illegal" CC&Rs?Laguna Woods community activists outraged by use of credit cards issued to property manager employees for emergency purposes, got together April 5, 2007 at the Laguna Woods clubhouse to discuss the issue with other interested residents. Featured during...
Paraphrasing the OC Register on coverage of CZ Master Association Candidate?s Night.In the article titled Delegates meet HOA board candidates, published May 17, 2007, new OC Register community reporter states that ?a moderator asked a range of questions that covered issues including security, direct voting, the possible installation of...
OCR Paraphrasing in Laguna Woods Village - ClarificationWe published an article in the May issue of the CotoBuzz Journal titled OCR Paraphrasing in Laguna Woods Village. In the article we quoted sources as saying " ...On Monday April 23, 2007, a letter in response to Mr. Portlock?s statements as published...
OCR Paraphrasing in Laguna Woods VillageThe CotoBuzz Journal previously reported on a brewing scandal related to alleged misuse of credit card by property management company employees in an article titled Laguna Woods Residents Outraged by Use of Credit Cards Issued to Property Manager...
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
function jumpMenu(){
location=document.jump.menu.options[document.jump.menu.selectedIndex].value;
}
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy Need Help? Contact Us Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
Friday, June 29, 2007
Sticky Rice and the Hoffman Study (to Turn Coto Into a City)
Something ($$$$$) lost in the translation
June 29, 2007
It is customary for customer-facing South East Asia (Taiwan, China, Korea) professionals to assume western-sounding names such as Andy, Susan or Lawrence. Sometimes the names chosen can be confusing because of the pronunciation. For example, for the longest time we thought that our friend’s name was Cassie, then we realized the name was Kathy. Sometimes the names are merely phonetic translations, such as Bo-Lai, or Alpha.
Other times we are left wondering, for example the name of our good friends Lone Chen, or Bobo Chen (not related to Lone Chen).
We think the practice of selecting a first name to our liking after reaching adulthood is good. Given that most our Chinese/Korean/Japanese friends and co-workers had had the opportunity to select a name they like, we decided to select a Chinese name and settled for Tao Rae.
William Galvin, the secretary of the state of Massachusetts is not at all amused at the federal requirement to translate candidate’s names into Chinese characters. He does not object to having ballot instructions in Chinese, but he argues names should be left in Roman letters. The reason, he argues, is that phonetic translations often times leads to similar sounding names, but with distinct meaning. For example presidential candidates’ names may translate into:
Tao Rae Signet
Mit Romney à Uncooked Rice
(Barack) Obama à Oh Bus Horse
Fred Thompson -à Virtue Soup
We find it ironic that customer–facing South East Asia professionals get to choose a Western-sounding first name, while the Federal and (and certain states) government mandate the phonetic translation of candidates’ names into Chinese characters. Just imagine the money spend by local and federal government just in translation costs for the various mandated languages!
Might this be analogous to Hoffman Study, commissioned by the CZ Master Association allegedly to “find out where the taxes go”, but in reality to buy propaganda to convince residents to turn Coto into a city.
Perhaps the CZ Master Association learned a lesson from the Orange County Board of Supervisors? When you ask the board questions about propriety of certain expenditures, one is referred to “audited financials”. When you ask the financial auditor the process used to approve these financials, the auditor refers you to the board! After the recent County of Orange Bankruptcy Debacle, we asked then candidate Bates a number of fiscal transparency questions, and these were never responded to – see below for details - Click here for the complete Orange County Y2006-2007
The CZ Master Association budget is consumed in large part by two items: Landscape = 56% ( includes the purchase of free trees, the Arizona look and River Rock) and 22% for security (the fine print says it is really not security, and included the firing of the CHP and Securitas, private security guards helping kids cross the streets and OC Sheriffs Mounties to patrol horse trails).
Federal Spending breakdown - 2006: Lost in the translation
Orange County Sheriff-Coroner Michael Carona has been clear that his department is under-funded and Proposition 172 ($286.3M for FY2006-2007) is intended to spell come relief
County Or Orange Sheriff's Funding - Proposition 172
RELATED STORIES
CZ Master Association Harkins (Attorney) Letter - Zipperman's (CZ President's) First Test?
Mr. Harkins: I am in receipt of your letter dated June 12, 2007 in reference to the requests that I made concerning our last CZ Board Election, obtaining the CZ Master?s financial records and the Sports League Roster specific to use of our Sports Park ....
New CZ Master Association Leadership, New Name?
The Varo/Mezger administration recently engaged a high-priced intellectual property law firm, contributing to the barrage of nasty lawyer letters going to residents, in attempts to suppress free speech
CZ Master Association Transparency - Mr. Zipperman
Mr. Zipperman: As the new President of CZ, you really need to break with the Varo/Mezger past and culture of corruption if more transparency is really a goal you want to advance. Executive Session issues relate to Contracts, Specific legal issues and...
Coto de Caza BOD's involved in transparency, or committed to it?
Given that certain reporters either do not know the meaning of the word paraphrase, (or misplace), or simply define the terms as they please to promote their own agenda, we figured that it is best to define the term commitment, since the CZ board...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Questions posed to then-candidate Bates and never responded to
Background:
During 1995 and 1996, Orange County borrowed $1,039,000,000 ($1,940,000, 000 including interest) to resolve bankruptcy claims resulting from the collapse of the Orange County Investment pool in 1994.
In 1995 Orange County issued Refunding Recovery Bonds in the amount of $278,790,000. The county pledged Motor Vehicle License Fees (MVLF) to pay debt service on this issue. The debt service schedule postponed beginning principal payments until fiscal year 2000-2001.
Then, in 1996 Orange County issued Recovery Certificates of Participation (COPS) in the amount of $760,800,000. The county pledged sales taxes; MVLF and $38,000,000 DIVERTED from the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) to pay debt service.
The combined debt service schedule increased from $78,000,000 in 1995-96 to over $90,000,000 in the fiscal year 2000-2001.
A Grand Jury was convened and it was concerned that the financial impact of the bankruptcy had been postponed until 2000-2001.
In December 1998, the Orange County Board of Supervisors adopted a plan that would use $230,000,000 resulting from the settlement of various lawsuits to defease and/or "pay off" the 1995 bond issue. It was purported that, that plan would reduce the annual debt service requirements to $62,500,000.
Then in 1998 the Board of Supervisors purportedly adopted a five-year strategic financial planning process.
1) One of the Superior Court recommendations after the Grand Jury hearings was that "The Orange County Board of Supervisors not reduce its lobbying efforts in Sacramento."
2) Another so-called recommendations was that the "Orange County Board of Supervisors continue the policy of defeasing bankruptcy related debt whenever possible."
3) And, lastly, recommendation was made that "Orange County prepare and publish each fiscal year a detailed analysis comparing original estimates with year-end actuals; explaining any variation consisting of plus or minus 10%.
Questions:
i) "What" is the Orange County Board of Supervisors lobbying in Sacramento? WHY are they paying lobbyists? HOW MUCH are they paying lobbyists? WHAT do the lobbyists do? WHO are the lobbyists? Is this really a good use of taxpayer funds? That money should be put back into the community. What is your position?
ii) DOES the Orange County Board of Supervisors continue the policy of defeasing bankruptcy related debt? HOW are they, or HOW have they, defeased bankruptcy debt, using what funds to do so? Additionally, is the bankruptcy debt fulled defeased? Is any of it remaining, if so, how much has totally been defeased? What is your position?
iii) In the Orange County Board of Supervisors adopted a plan to use $230,000,000 resulting from the settlement of various lawsuits to defease and/or "pay off" the 1995 bond issue -- [WHY WOULD THE OC SUPERVISORS ADOPT SUCH PLAN?] (a) WHAT "various lawsuits" were used to defease or help offsset or pay off that 1995 bond issue? (b) What lawsuit settlements have, since that time, been used to offset the 1995 bond? (c) Have any lawsuit settlements been used for a purpose OTHER THAN the 1995 defeasement? (d) Has the County Board of Supervisors continued this action of using lawsuit settlements to pay off bond issues, OR other such issues that would otherwise fly off the radar for its citizens? What is your position?
iv) Does Orange County prepare and publish the recommended "detailed analysis comparing original estimates with year-end actuals and explaining any variation consisting of plus or minus ten percent" and if so, where can we find such is document? We have been trying to get a copy of it ever since--its been impossible! What do you know and can you help us get such information?
v) Because the debt service schedule was postponed until fiscal year 2000-2001 for the beginning of principal payments -- did those principal payments actually BEGIN during that time or are they STILL POSTPONED? What can you tell us about this?
vi) Because the county pledged sales taxes the Motor Vehicle License Fees and $38,000,000 were DIVERTED from the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) to pay debt service. Was this money ever repaid to the Orange County Transportation Authority -- AND -- if it was not, WHY NOT? Was ANY of that borrowed money repaid? Is there a penalty for non payment? What can you tell us about this?
vii) Has this bankruptcy been resolved in toto? Is it paid off? What is the status and how has it affected the taxpayers?
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy Need Help? Contact Us Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
Sunday, June 24, 2007
Boy Scouts News Worthy – Laguna Woods Village Plight Is not Not!
Boy Scouts News Worthy – Laguna Woods Village Plight Is not Not!
Or is there something hidden in them thar "illegal"CC&Rs?
June 24, 2007
Laguna Woods community activists outraged by use of credit cards issued to property manager employees for emergency purposes, got together April 5, 2007 at the Laguna Woods clubhouse to discuss the issue with other interested residents. Featured during the meeting was the charge that credit cards issued to employees of Managing Agent Professional Management (PCM) employees strictly for emergency use, were being mis-used regularly.
A press release dated April 11, 2007, issued by the Residents Voice, a community activist group, follows up on the substantive matter covered during the April 5 meeting and indicates that use of the credit cards is a breach of fiduciary responsibility.
A representative for Milt Jones and the Golden Rain Foundation board of directors informed CotoBuzz that the board was aware of the charges and would provide us with a response - We have yet to hear from the Golden Rain Foundation, From PCM, the property Manager or from Milt Jones.
On April 23, 2007, the Orange County Register published an article titled Card usage shows 'no malfeasance,' say Golden Rain, PCM Credit card statements under scrutiny by Laguna Woods residents cover about $114,000 in 2005 through 2007 expenses. However, the same article also reports that “ In the Golden Rain Foundation statement issued Monday afternoon, the board pointed out that the three board members appointed were not forensic accountants, "therefore, an in depth investigation could not be done."
We have since learned that the three-person committee was disbanded after recommending that the matter be turned over to forensic consultants with relevant expertise.
On Friday, June 8, 2007, the OC Register (OCR) published a story titled Boy Scouts execs splurge - Local council's records on trip to Key West show spending on alcohol, pricey food, golf, including copies of receipts for such expenses. A follow up story was published by the OCR Monday, June 18, 2007 titled, Scouts pledge to do 'better' and quotes David Hirz, chairman of the Orange County Council's executive board as saying that “ Hirz accused the Register of painting the Boy Scouts "solely in a negative light." Hirz also said that the Boy Scouts provided the Register with written documentation that supported the Scouts' side of the story”, and then added “In fact, the Boy Scouts refused to provide the Register with proof of reimbursements”
Meanwhile, a press release issued by the Resident’s Voice dated June 7, 2007, documents A June 5th GRF Meeting: “Central to the meeting was the unwavering intent by the board to approve an additional $244,000.00 on top of the already appropriated $250,000.00 to secure land entitlements for the “GRF-owned” property in our communities”, read the release. “The fact that GRF does not own these properties did not alter the Board’s mission, nor did a fatuous debate between director Noel Hatch and Milt Jones over the validity of the recently revealed certification of GRF’s CC&Rs”, continued the press release.
In a meeting convened June 7, 2007, Resident’s Voice activists discussed
Trademark issues associated with the Globe
CC&Rs as covered during the June 5, 2007 board meeting
Handling of the infamous credit cards and
Expense reimbursement.
The conclusion reached by the Resident Voice activist regarding the trademark issue is that there was an alternative to removing the Globe, by simply getting permission to use it for non-commercial purposes.
Although Stewart Title Company have certified existence of CC&Rs, Resident’s Voice report that “PCM, GRF and Corporate Attorney, state United and GRF have no CC&Rs.
As to the credit car issue, Resident’s Voice reports that “It took four years before credit card billing records were provided to Directors and Owners”, and the overall conclusion reached byy Resident’s Voice is that “We cannot trust PCM, GRF, or our corporate attorney”
Despite volumes of evidence presented by Laguna Woods Village residents, we have yet to hear from Milt Jones and the Golden Rain Foundation board, or read any follow up in the OC Register.
Is it that the Boys Scouts are news worthy, but the plight of Laguna Woods Village is not, or is it...?, Nah! don't even go there!
RELATED STORIES
OCR Paraphrasing in Laguna Woods Village
The CotoBuzz Journal previously reported on a brewing scandal related to alleged misuse of credit card by property management company employees in an article titled Laguna Woods Residents Outraged by Use of Credit Cards Issued to Property Manager...
Laguna Woods Residents Outraged by Use of Credit Cards Issued to Property Manager Employees! Concerned Residents Speak Up About Fiscal Mismanagement
A group of concerned Laguna Woods residents got together April 5, 2007 at the clubhouse tonight to discuss a number of issues including mis-information, intimidation and fiscal mismanagement. There was even talk of the Orange County District Attorney...
Less Orange County Register Paraphrase, More Feeling?
April 27, 2007Is it coincidental that fiscal responsibility, accountability and transparency, including funding of the Sports Park have dominated the Coto Discussion Forum for the last couple of weeks, and then what do you see on the cover of the April...
The End of a Prostituting,.. err Paraphrase Era?
Prior to the arrival of Melissa Jones to the Orange County Register as City editor, we had extensive discussions with Lyn Montagna (Jones? predecessor) on the type of responsible community journalism needed for Coto de Caza.
Leisure World and Coto de Caza - One Small Small World! Concerned Resident?s Meeting Minutes
A group of concerned residents got together at the clubhouse tonight to discuss a number of issues including mis-information, intimidation and fiscal mismanagement. There was even talk of the Orange County District Attorney convening a grand jury and...
NYTimes "Paraphrases" Military Rape Story - CZ "Paraphrased" Story on CHP Firing
On March 18th, the New York Times published a piece titled ?The Women?s War?, centered around the plight of several female Veterans of the war in Iraq.
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
Or is there something hidden in them thar "illegal"CC&Rs?
June 24, 2007
Laguna Woods community activists outraged by use of credit cards issued to property manager employees for emergency purposes, got together April 5, 2007 at the Laguna Woods clubhouse to discuss the issue with other interested residents. Featured during the meeting was the charge that credit cards issued to employees of Managing Agent Professional Management (PCM) employees strictly for emergency use, were being mis-used regularly.
A press release dated April 11, 2007, issued by the Residents Voice, a community activist group, follows up on the substantive matter covered during the April 5 meeting and indicates that use of the credit cards is a breach of fiduciary responsibility.
A representative for Milt Jones and the Golden Rain Foundation board of directors informed CotoBuzz that the board was aware of the charges and would provide us with a response - We have yet to hear from the Golden Rain Foundation, From PCM, the property Manager or from Milt Jones.
On April 23, 2007, the Orange County Register published an article titled Card usage shows 'no malfeasance,' say Golden Rain, PCM Credit card statements under scrutiny by Laguna Woods residents cover about $114,000 in 2005 through 2007 expenses. However, the same article also reports that “ In the Golden Rain Foundation statement issued Monday afternoon, the board pointed out that the three board members appointed were not forensic accountants, "therefore, an in depth investigation could not be done."
We have since learned that the three-person committee was disbanded after recommending that the matter be turned over to forensic consultants with relevant expertise.
On Friday, June 8, 2007, the OC Register (OCR) published a story titled Boy Scouts execs splurge - Local council's records on trip to Key West show spending on alcohol, pricey food, golf, including copies of receipts for such expenses. A follow up story was published by the OCR Monday, June 18, 2007 titled, Scouts pledge to do 'better' and quotes David Hirz, chairman of the Orange County Council's executive board as saying that “ Hirz accused the Register of painting the Boy Scouts "solely in a negative light." Hirz also said that the Boy Scouts provided the Register with written documentation that supported the Scouts' side of the story”, and then added “In fact, the Boy Scouts refused to provide the Register with proof of reimbursements”
Meanwhile, a press release issued by the Resident’s Voice dated June 7, 2007, documents A June 5th GRF Meeting: “Central to the meeting was the unwavering intent by the board to approve an additional $244,000.00 on top of the already appropriated $250,000.00 to secure land entitlements for the “GRF-owned” property in our communities”, read the release. “The fact that GRF does not own these properties did not alter the Board’s mission, nor did a fatuous debate between director Noel Hatch and Milt Jones over the validity of the recently revealed certification of GRF’s CC&Rs”, continued the press release.
In a meeting convened June 7, 2007, Resident’s Voice activists discussed
Trademark issues associated with the Globe
CC&Rs as covered during the June 5, 2007 board meeting
Handling of the infamous credit cards and
Expense reimbursement.
The conclusion reached by the Resident Voice activist regarding the trademark issue is that there was an alternative to removing the Globe, by simply getting permission to use it for non-commercial purposes.
Although Stewart Title Company have certified existence of CC&Rs, Resident’s Voice report that “PCM, GRF and Corporate Attorney, state United and GRF have no CC&Rs.
As to the credit car issue, Resident’s Voice reports that “It took four years before credit card billing records were provided to Directors and Owners”, and the overall conclusion reached byy Resident’s Voice is that “We cannot trust PCM, GRF, or our corporate attorney”
Despite volumes of evidence presented by Laguna Woods Village residents, we have yet to hear from Milt Jones and the Golden Rain Foundation board, or read any follow up in the OC Register.
Is it that the Boys Scouts are news worthy, but the plight of Laguna Woods Village is not, or is it...?, Nah! don't even go there!
RELATED STORIES
OCR Paraphrasing in Laguna Woods Village
The CotoBuzz Journal previously reported on a brewing scandal related to alleged misuse of credit card by property management company employees in an article titled Laguna Woods Residents Outraged by Use of Credit Cards Issued to Property Manager...
Laguna Woods Residents Outraged by Use of Credit Cards Issued to Property Manager Employees! Concerned Residents Speak Up About Fiscal Mismanagement
A group of concerned Laguna Woods residents got together April 5, 2007 at the clubhouse tonight to discuss a number of issues including mis-information, intimidation and fiscal mismanagement. There was even talk of the Orange County District Attorney...
Less Orange County Register Paraphrase, More Feeling?
April 27, 2007Is it coincidental that fiscal responsibility, accountability and transparency, including funding of the Sports Park have dominated the Coto Discussion Forum for the last couple of weeks, and then what do you see on the cover of the April...
The End of a Prostituting,.. err Paraphrase Era?
Prior to the arrival of Melissa Jones to the Orange County Register as City editor, we had extensive discussions with Lyn Montagna (Jones? predecessor) on the type of responsible community journalism needed for Coto de Caza.
Leisure World and Coto de Caza - One Small Small World! Concerned Resident?s Meeting Minutes
A group of concerned residents got together at the clubhouse tonight to discuss a number of issues including mis-information, intimidation and fiscal mismanagement. There was even talk of the Orange County District Attorney convening a grand jury and...
NYTimes "Paraphrases" Military Rape Story - CZ "Paraphrased" Story on CHP Firing
On March 18th, the New York Times published a piece titled ?The Women?s War?, centered around the plight of several female Veterans of the war in Iraq.
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
HOA Micro-Managing or Quid Pro Quo?
HOA Micro-Managing or Quid Pro Quo?
June 24, 2007
When Governor Schwarzenegger signed legislation to bring direct elections to Homeowner’s Associations such as the CZ Master Association, the president of the board called this legislation an act of “micro-management”, and proceeded to ignore the spirit and the law.
A recent call to the office of Senator Sheila Kuehl by a member of the HOAATM group inquiring about the reasoning behind the Senator’s support of Senate Bill 127, the person attending the phones charafterized the Senator’s stakeholders as “property management companies and HOA board of directors”, NOT HOA residents.
An update sent to members of the HOAATM group today, June 22, 2007 follows:
SB528 Senator Aansted's stupid bill, has been re-re-re-referred to committee (basically a dodge ball technique until they are able to fly under OUR radar...we've got this one on the run big time)
SB948 Senator Harman's stupid bill, remains on "inactive status" voluntarily put there by Harman (couldn't stand the heat and didn't have the nerve to do the decent thing and pull it... -- I wanted him to come out and be answerable for his actions!)
AB1574 Assemblyman Houston's lethal bill (KEEP AN EYE OUT FOR THIS, its just waiting in the wings for us to be diverted, then it will fly right past us if we are not careful)
AB980 Assemblyman Calderon's REALLY lethal bill (KEEP AN EYE OUT FOR
THIS, its just waiting in the wings for us to be diverted, then it will fly right past us if we are not careful)
So, is all this legislation necessary? Is it a necessary evil? Is it Micro-management, or is it Quid Pro Quo?
RELATED STORIES
Senator Ducheny to introduce a bill to protect residents from Incomptent HOA boards On Septmeber 30, 2004 Senator Denise Moreno Ducheny (D-San Diego) announced that AB 2598, her bill to protect homeowners in common interest developments from foreclosure for small amounts of delinquent assessments, was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger.
Correa, Kingston, CAI and Corrupt Politicians. When the governor signed legislation to bring direct elections to Homeowner’s associations such as the CZ Master Association, the president of the board called this legislation “micro-management”, and proceeded to ignore the spirit and the law.
More Homeowner Association Financial Audit Irregularities Marina and Coto and other HOA residents may benefit from the GRF looking at independent financial audits.
Following are excerpts of a letter sent April 25, 2007 to a committee formed by Golden Rain Foundation president George Porlock to look into alleged mis-use of credit cards by property managing company PCM employees:
CZ Master Association - Varo & Mezger Should NOT Be Re-elected - 11 Reasons As a former CZ Board Member and concerned citizen, I can say without condition that Bob Varo and Jerry Mezger should not be re-elected to the CZ Board because they do not understand the foundation concepts of Board Member fiduciary responsibility, ethical behavior and conflict of interests
EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY! OOPS! WE JUST HAD THE MEETING! YOU MISSED IT!!!
Massive injustice by way of confusion and corruption await all owners, Senate Bill 528 is just what the industry ordered
HOW DO OWNERS SPELL L-A-W S-U-I-T? SENATE BILL NO. 127! Another Legislative Bill That Will Subject Owners to Litigation After it passes This author asks WHERE ARE THE PENALTIES AGAINST MANAGEMENT COMPANIES AND BOARDS? WHAT’S THE PENALTY FOR BREAKING THE LAWS THAT THESE LEGISLATORS ARE PASSING?
HOAATM SENDS LETTER TO SENATOR KUEHL: SENATE BILL 127 IS A TOTAL "WANK"
Who gave Senator Kuehl the right to control OUR escrows?
KUEHL: PIMP MY HOA!!
Attention: All Real Estate Brokers and Agents the California Association of Realtors has sold you down the river -- let the litigation begin . . . Attention: All Insurance Brokers and Agents you will NEVER be able to sell insurance again like you used...
LETTER TO SEN. KUEHL RE: OPPOSITION TO SB- 127
Re: SENATE BILL 127 IS A BAD BILL OPPOSITION TO SENATE BILL 127Dear Senator Kuehl Please file this opposition with the appropriate committees to lodge our opposition to Senate Bill 127. I am the spokesperson for the group known as HOAATM (Homeowners...
SENATOR AANESTAAD: PIMP MY HOA!X75,257 HOAATM Members Want Senator Aanestaad to Get this Message: Stop Messing With Our Property Rights!!!X
Senate Bill No. 528 should really be called "How The California Legislature Takes Property Away Piecemeal Without The Guilt of Eminent Domain."
The Stark Reality: We're Running Out of Time
CONTRARY TO "Opinion Poll Pundits" who "borrow" (and that's being kind, "steal" is more the word) material from individuals offering to help their cause but then publish that material by putting their own name to it -- or -- CONTRARY TO other "Hot...
FIRED MANAGER CLEANS UP IN MORE WAYS THAN ONE
QUESTION: I'm a board member of my association. Four years ago, a prior board hired a manager whom this board just fired. We gave her two weeks to "clean up loose ends." Soon we heard the shredder churning more than usual but didn't think anything of it....
75,000 MEMBERS OF GROUP "HOAATM" PLEAD WITH GOVERNOR SCHWARZENEGGER TO VETO THESE BAAAAAD BILLS -- YOU PROMISED YOU WOULD LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE
The worst bills for owners in common interest developments with homeowner associations and boards of directors are making their way through the legislature like a runaway train and no brakes. HOMEOWNERS, IF YOU DO NOT HELP STOP THIS NOW -- YOU WILL BE IN...
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
Friday, June 22, 2007
New CZ Master Association Leadership, New Name?
New CZ Master Association Leadership, New Name?
June 22, 2007
The Varo/Mezger administration recently engaged a high-priced intellectual property law firm, contributing to the barrage of nasty lawyer letters going to residents, in attempts to suppress free speech
The advice from this firm led directly to certain signage such as the one used in the association's web site - the third in three months, and the sign placed at the South Oso Gate – the name seems to have now been changed, rendering the expensive advice useless.
Is this new CZ leadership with a new name, or…..?
RELATED STORIES
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
NATIONAL AWARD FOR EXCELLENCE IN NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH
NATIONAL AWARD FOR EXCELLENCE IN NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH
June 20, 2007
The National Sheriff’s Association has selected the Orange County Sheriff’s Department to receive the 2007 Award for Excellence in Neighborhood Watch.
The ten cities in South Orange County patrolled by the Orange County Sheriff’s Department have a population of 525,017 stretching across 110 square miles. There are 1500 Neighborhood Watch Groups with approximately 30,000 residents taking part. “It is no coincidence that the South Orange County communities served by the Sheriff’s nationally recognized award winning Neighborhood Watch program also have the State’s lowest Part 1 crime rates when compared against all California cities with a population over 100,000,” said Assistant Sheriff Jack Anderson who oversees the Sheriff’s patrol operations. Part 1 offenses include criminal homicide, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson.
The Sheriff’s South Operations Crime Prevention Unit has developed a Disaster Preparedness Academy for Neighborhood Watch members, empowering them with the necessary tools to provide a safe environment where they live. Residents have also been instructed about how to pull the plug on drug dealers by utilizing the Nuisance Abatement Law. The Sheriff’s Crime Prevention Unit was the first to test this law in court and they were successful.
Unfortunately a comparison between the 1Q2006 and 1Q2007 Crime and Vandalism reports do not support the Mezger/Varo’s CZ board assertion that pubic safety in Coto de Caza has gotten better over the last four years. In fact, the Varo/Mezger boards have been consistently unsympathetic to any public awareness campaign, as evidenced by their refusal to allow CHP management to address the issue during open board meetings – but turned over a complete board meeting to trashy TV producers.
RELATED STORIES
1Q2007 Coto de Caza Crime and Vandalism Report
A comparison between the 1Q2006 and 1Q2007 Crime and Vandalism reports shows that a favorite Coto de Caza crime is fraud, that the Peter Pan Syndrome continues to be alive and well (crime is evenly distributed between kids and adults) and a criminal...
Sheriff Carona appointed to California Rehabilitation Oversight Board
A group of his peers (the California State Sheriff?s Association) as appointed Orange County Sheriff Michael Carona as the Association?s only representative on the California Rehabilitation Oversight Board.
Of Lawyer Tricks, Sheriff Carona and Lt. Hunt
Consider that Hunt came in a distant second to Carona in last June's election but was placed on suspension just hours after Carona narrowly won his third term. Hunt retired in December before he could be demoted and is now a private investigator.
The CotoBuzz Journal May 2007
CHP in Coto - Big Mouth CZ Bob- By Joseph Morabito, former member CZ Master Association Board of DirectorsHello All: I have heard that CHP officers are not volunteering to work in Coto even for the time and a half pay they would earn. So, we are not even...
The CotoBuzz Journal April 2007
CZ Master Association BOD and the Stanford Prisoner Experiment
CSI Coto de Caza
As much as homeowners association board of directors would like to think otherwise, the boards are merely ?pretend? government entities chartered with only three things: RMR - Repair, Maintain and Replace. These pretend governments are usually training...
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
June 20, 2007
The National Sheriff’s Association has selected the Orange County Sheriff’s Department to receive the 2007 Award for Excellence in Neighborhood Watch.
The ten cities in South Orange County patrolled by the Orange County Sheriff’s Department have a population of 525,017 stretching across 110 square miles. There are 1500 Neighborhood Watch Groups with approximately 30,000 residents taking part. “It is no coincidence that the South Orange County communities served by the Sheriff’s nationally recognized award winning Neighborhood Watch program also have the State’s lowest Part 1 crime rates when compared against all California cities with a population over 100,000,” said Assistant Sheriff Jack Anderson who oversees the Sheriff’s patrol operations. Part 1 offenses include criminal homicide, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson.
The Sheriff’s South Operations Crime Prevention Unit has developed a Disaster Preparedness Academy for Neighborhood Watch members, empowering them with the necessary tools to provide a safe environment where they live. Residents have also been instructed about how to pull the plug on drug dealers by utilizing the Nuisance Abatement Law. The Sheriff’s Crime Prevention Unit was the first to test this law in court and they were successful.
Unfortunately a comparison between the 1Q2006 and 1Q2007 Crime and Vandalism reports do not support the Mezger/Varo’s CZ board assertion that pubic safety in Coto de Caza has gotten better over the last four years. In fact, the Varo/Mezger boards have been consistently unsympathetic to any public awareness campaign, as evidenced by their refusal to allow CHP management to address the issue during open board meetings – but turned over a complete board meeting to trashy TV producers.
RELATED STORIES
1Q2007 Coto de Caza Crime and Vandalism Report
A comparison between the 1Q2006 and 1Q2007 Crime and Vandalism reports shows that a favorite Coto de Caza crime is fraud, that the Peter Pan Syndrome continues to be alive and well (crime is evenly distributed between kids and adults) and a criminal...
Sheriff Carona appointed to California Rehabilitation Oversight Board
A group of his peers (the California State Sheriff?s Association) as appointed Orange County Sheriff Michael Carona as the Association?s only representative on the California Rehabilitation Oversight Board.
Of Lawyer Tricks, Sheriff Carona and Lt. Hunt
Consider that Hunt came in a distant second to Carona in last June's election but was placed on suspension just hours after Carona narrowly won his third term. Hunt retired in December before he could be demoted and is now a private investigator.
The CotoBuzz Journal May 2007
CHP in Coto - Big Mouth CZ Bob- By Joseph Morabito, former member CZ Master Association Board of DirectorsHello All: I have heard that CHP officers are not volunteering to work in Coto even for the time and a half pay they would earn. So, we are not even...
The CotoBuzz Journal April 2007
CZ Master Association BOD and the Stanford Prisoner Experiment
CSI Coto de Caza
As much as homeowners association board of directors would like to think otherwise, the boards are merely ?pretend? government entities chartered with only three things: RMR - Repair, Maintain and Replace. These pretend governments are usually training...
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
HOAATM SENDS LETTER TO SENATOR KUEHL: SENATE BILL 127 IS A TOTAL "WANK"
Who gave Senator Kuehl the right to control OUR escrows?
by D. Vanitzian, J.D., Arbitrator
(c)2007 D. Vanitzian
June 19, 2007
The Honorable Shiela Kuehl
State Capitol, Room 5108
Sacramento, CA 95814
Re: SENATE BILL 127 IS A BAD BILL
OPPOSITION TO SENATE BILL 127
Dear Senator Kuehl,
Please file this opposition with the appropriate committees to lodge our opposition to Senate Bill 127. I am the spokesperson for the group known as HOAATM (Homeowners Against Association Tyranny & Manipulation) and we are now 75,257 members strong.
WE ARE STAKEHOLDERS. WE HAVE A DOG IN THIS FIGHT.
With all due respect Senator, your Senate Bill 127 is NOT ABOUT DISCLOSURES.
1. Senate Bill 127 creates roadblocks to free enterprise for both buyers and sellers. Assuming arguendo that most, BUT CERTAINLY NOT ALL, escrows are approximately 30 days, your Senate Bill 127 does a disservice to the millions of homeowners that are stuck owning and attempting to sell or 1031 exchange their "properties" whether or not they are located within common interest developments throughout California -- but most especially if they ARE located within common interest developments.
2. Senate Bill 127 is both pedestrian and myopic. Your Senate Bill 127 PRESUMES escrow periods are "30 days," when in fact some are closing in as little FIVE days. My husband is a 25-year veteran Realtor® and he can tell you he has witnessed properties close in as little as FOUR days -- and AT LEAST ONE that closed in 24 hours. Why do buyers have to be subject to your narrow interpretation of "escrow."
3. Senate Bill 127 predictably will, and does, interfere with the free-flow of inter- and intrastate COMMERCE in that, 1031 exchanges for example, that are able to close quickly and complete transactions, will be subject to a statute that will not only hinder those efforts, it will interfere with business, free trade, and prospective economic advantage for buyers and sellers alike -- be it one (1) day or thirty (30) days closing.
4. Senate Bill 127 conflicts with other existing statutes by placing contingencies that are unable to be satisfied, let alone be satisfied in a TIMELY MANNER -- let alone be satisfied pursuant to the state statute(s) existing or otherwise. THE PUBLIC IS IN NEED OF PROTECTION -- yet your bill EXEMPTS those who need that protection the most. Presently your office assistants are relaying to the public that "existing law" allows the buyer to "get out of the sale" within three days -- right. Big Deal! HAVE YOU EVER TRIED TO INVOKE THAT SECTION OF CODE TO GET OUT OF A PURCHASE? GOOD LUCK. Yet your staff states that phrase with such conviction your constituents will actually believe it.
Even with that illusive statute that your office claims lets reluctant buyers escape their sales agreement to/of purchase, Senate Bill 127 as it stands today (June 19, 2007) nails the coffin shut on millions of unsuspecting buyers and sellers by SURPASSING that 3-day escape clause. [how ridiculous is THA!] Senator Kuehl, if you REALLY WANTED TO ASSIST BUYERS AND SELLERS, BUT ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO ARE HANDICAPPED THE MOST (common interest development owners) THEN YOUR BILL WOULD UNEQUIVOCALLY STATE THAT ALL SUCH DOCUMENTS SHALL BE PRODUCED *PRIOR TO* EXECUTION OF SAID SALES AND/OR PURCHASE AGREEMENTS. Wouldn’t that be the SMART thing to do? That would eliminate LITIGATION. It would eliminate GRIDLOCK. It would eliminate any potential FISCAL IMPACT on the state. But it would also eliminate your porked up Senate Bill 127.
6. When your office was asked: WHERE IS THE PENALTY AGAINST THOSE IN POSSESSION OF SAID DOCUMENTS FOR THEIR NON-COMPLIANCE AND FAILURE TO PRODUCE? -- There is none.
The unfortunate reality regarding the information circulated by your office is MISLEADING at best.
(A) When asked to direct us (the public) to the section of Code where these items can be found, your aid says: "go to www.leginfo, its all there." (shaking head: oh brother!)
(B) Your office also no doubt with a straight face, informs callers that there is a $500 penalty existing in the statute against non-compliance. ARE YOU SERIOUS? PUH-LEEZ! GIVE US A BREAK! With all due respect Senator, you KNOW that statute is wholly ineffective and inapplicable to Senate Bill 127. Frankly you should be ashamed in allowing such statements to be made to the unsuspecting public who voted you into office and who do not know better. They actually BELIEVE YOU.
(6.1) The Civil Code Sections 1350–1378 (the Davis-Stupid Act) provides for $500 penalties for various items that are frankly, impossible to collect on or act upon. That statute to which your assistant refers, is a CRUEL RUSE that is meant to placate California owners who are losing thousands if not millions of dollars across this state because they are unable to adequately protect their assets which are located within a common interest development. (See, Vanitzian, Common Interest Developments (Thomson/West, 2006-2008).
(6.2) That Civil Code Section "allowing" common interest development owners to FILE A LAWSUIT in order to invoke that section of code, is inapplicable in the situation your statute creates. But then, YOU KNOW that don’t you?
Here’s why:
FIRST: the BUYER has no standing to invoke the statute because they do not yet own in a common interest development.
SECOND: the SELLER may not invoke that statute because in order to do so, the event in question must have come to pass. The Civil Code Sections alluding to the $500 fine (NOT PENALTY) can only be instituted AFTER 10 days have passed AND the homeowner association has failed to comply with a REQUEST. Even with that, the owner MUST PROVE IPSO FACTO that (a) the association was served with a request to comply; (b) that the association WILLFULLY failed to comply; (c) present proof of damages. (See, Vanitzian, Common Interest Developments (Thomson/West, 2006-2008).
THIRD: assuming arguendo that the useless Davis-Stupid Act’s $500 spit-fee does apply --> PLEASE explain how a measly $500 penalty which unenforceable compares to a sales constituting HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IF NOT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN LOST SALES? How your aid could actually lead the public to believe what was said with a straight face, boggles intelligent minds. THIS is why the public does not trust politicians. Invoking that section of Code to apply the $500 "fine" REQUIRES filing a LAWSUIT.
FOURTH: Your Senate Bill 127 also PRESUMES that the seller will be able to assert a defense (SUE, LITIGATE) AFTER the sale, presumably against the saboteurs (i.e., management companies and boards of directors) but you are WRONG. Once the seller completes the sale, the seller no longer has standing as an association member to sue in that capacity. (See, Vanitzian, Common Interest Developments (Thomson/West, 2006-2008).
(6.3) Of course you KNOW that Civil Code Sections 1350–1378 place ALL burdens of production of documents regarding the "sale" on the SELLER. You also KNOW that the ONLY recourse a BUYER has is not against the saboteurs (i.e., management companies and association boards of directors) but against the seller. Senate Bill 127 kills the sale. It unilaterally prejudices the seller/owner and increases the burden of doing business for the everyday citizen. (See, Vanitzian, Common Interest Developments (Thomson/West, 2006-2008).
7. For Senate Bill 127 to be effective it must "per se" detail the items that can and cannot be demanded and a drop-dead deadline for compliance, the breach of which "stays" the sale. This alone will create conflicts in several areas of California statutes.
There is so much more that is wrong with this Senate Bill 127 that frankly, it is impossible to list it all in this memorandum.
Without the aforementioned items being addressed, this bill is absolutely toothless and as the British say, a "wank."
Very truly yours,
/s/
cc: Members of HOAATM
RELATED STORIES
KUEHL: PIMP MY HOA!!
Attention: All Real Estate Brokers and Agents the California Association of Realtors has sold you down the river -- let the litigation begin . . . Attention: All Insurance Brokers and Agents you will NEVER be able to sell insurance again like you used...
LETTER TO SEN. KUEHL RE: OPPOSITION TO SB- 127
Re: SENATE BILL 127 IS A BAD BILL OPPOSITION TO SENATE BILL 127Dear Senator Kuehl Please file this opposition with the appropriate committees to lodge our opposition to Senate Bill 127. I am the spokesperson for the group known as HOAATM (Homeowners...
SENATOR AANESTAAD: PIMP MY HOA!X75,257 HOAATM Members Want Senator Aanestaad to Get this Message: Stop Messing With Our Property Rights!!!X
Senate Bill No. 528 should really be called "How The California Legislature Takes Property Away Piecemeal Without The Guilt of Eminent Domain."
The Stark Reality: We're Running Out of Time
CONTRARY TO "Opinion Poll Pundits" who "borrow" (and that's being kind, "steal" is more the word) material from individuals offering to help their cause but then publish that material by putting their own name to it -- or -- CONTRARY TO other "Hot...
FIRED MANAGER CLEANS UP IN MORE WAYS THAN ONE
QUESTION: I'm a board member of my association. Four years ago, a prior board hired a manager whom this board just fired. We gave her two weeks to "clean up loose ends." Soon we heard the shredder churning more than usual but didn't think anything of it....
75,000 MEMBERS OF GROUP "HOAATM" PLEAD WITH GOVERNOR SCHWARZENEGGER TO VETO THESE BAAAAAD BILLS -- YOU PROMISED YOU WOULD LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE
The worst bills for owners in common interest developments with homeowner associations and boards of directors are making their way through the legislature like a runaway train and no brakes. HOMEOWNERS, IF YOU DO NOT HELP STOP THIS NOW -- YOU WILL BE IN...
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
by D. Vanitzian, J.D., Arbitrator
(c)2007 D. Vanitzian
June 19, 2007
The Honorable Shiela Kuehl
State Capitol, Room 5108
Sacramento, CA 95814
Re: SENATE BILL 127 IS A BAD BILL
OPPOSITION TO SENATE BILL 127
Dear Senator Kuehl,
Please file this opposition with the appropriate committees to lodge our opposition to Senate Bill 127. I am the spokesperson for the group known as HOAATM (Homeowners Against Association Tyranny & Manipulation) and we are now 75,257 members strong.
WE ARE STAKEHOLDERS. WE HAVE A DOG IN THIS FIGHT.
With all due respect Senator, your Senate Bill 127 is NOT ABOUT DISCLOSURES.
1. Senate Bill 127 creates roadblocks to free enterprise for both buyers and sellers. Assuming arguendo that most, BUT CERTAINLY NOT ALL, escrows are approximately 30 days, your Senate Bill 127 does a disservice to the millions of homeowners that are stuck owning and attempting to sell or 1031 exchange their "properties" whether or not they are located within common interest developments throughout California -- but most especially if they ARE located within common interest developments.
2. Senate Bill 127 is both pedestrian and myopic. Your Senate Bill 127 PRESUMES escrow periods are "30 days," when in fact some are closing in as little FIVE days. My husband is a 25-year veteran Realtor® and he can tell you he has witnessed properties close in as little as FOUR days -- and AT LEAST ONE that closed in 24 hours. Why do buyers have to be subject to your narrow interpretation of "escrow."
3. Senate Bill 127 predictably will, and does, interfere with the free-flow of inter- and intrastate COMMERCE in that, 1031 exchanges for example, that are able to close quickly and complete transactions, will be subject to a statute that will not only hinder those efforts, it will interfere with business, free trade, and prospective economic advantage for buyers and sellers alike -- be it one (1) day or thirty (30) days closing.
4. Senate Bill 127 conflicts with other existing statutes by placing contingencies that are unable to be satisfied, let alone be satisfied in a TIMELY MANNER -- let alone be satisfied pursuant to the state statute(s) existing or otherwise. THE PUBLIC IS IN NEED OF PROTECTION -- yet your bill EXEMPTS those who need that protection the most. Presently your office assistants are relaying to the public that "existing law" allows the buyer to "get out of the sale" within three days -- right. Big Deal! HAVE YOU EVER TRIED TO INVOKE THAT SECTION OF CODE TO GET OUT OF A PURCHASE? GOOD LUCK. Yet your staff states that phrase with such conviction your constituents will actually believe it.
Even with that illusive statute that your office claims lets reluctant buyers escape their sales agreement to/of purchase, Senate Bill 127 as it stands today (June 19, 2007) nails the coffin shut on millions of unsuspecting buyers and sellers by SURPASSING that 3-day escape clause. [how ridiculous is THA!] Senator Kuehl, if you REALLY WANTED TO ASSIST BUYERS AND SELLERS, BUT ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO ARE HANDICAPPED THE MOST (common interest development owners) THEN YOUR BILL WOULD UNEQUIVOCALLY STATE THAT ALL SUCH DOCUMENTS SHALL BE PRODUCED *PRIOR TO* EXECUTION OF SAID SALES AND/OR PURCHASE AGREEMENTS. Wouldn’t that be the SMART thing to do? That would eliminate LITIGATION. It would eliminate GRIDLOCK. It would eliminate any potential FISCAL IMPACT on the state. But it would also eliminate your porked up Senate Bill 127.
6. When your office was asked: WHERE IS THE PENALTY AGAINST THOSE IN POSSESSION OF SAID DOCUMENTS FOR THEIR NON-COMPLIANCE AND FAILURE TO PRODUCE? -- There is none.
The unfortunate reality regarding the information circulated by your office is MISLEADING at best.
(A) When asked to direct us (the public) to the section of Code where these items can be found, your aid says: "go to www.leginfo, its all there." (shaking head: oh brother!)
(B) Your office also no doubt with a straight face, informs callers that there is a $500 penalty existing in the statute against non-compliance. ARE YOU SERIOUS? PUH-LEEZ! GIVE US A BREAK! With all due respect Senator, you KNOW that statute is wholly ineffective and inapplicable to Senate Bill 127. Frankly you should be ashamed in allowing such statements to be made to the unsuspecting public who voted you into office and who do not know better. They actually BELIEVE YOU.
(6.1) The Civil Code Sections 1350–1378 (the Davis-Stupid Act) provides for $500 penalties for various items that are frankly, impossible to collect on or act upon. That statute to which your assistant refers, is a CRUEL RUSE that is meant to placate California owners who are losing thousands if not millions of dollars across this state because they are unable to adequately protect their assets which are located within a common interest development. (See, Vanitzian, Common Interest Developments (Thomson/West, 2006-2008).
(6.2) That Civil Code Section "allowing" common interest development owners to FILE A LAWSUIT in order to invoke that section of code, is inapplicable in the situation your statute creates. But then, YOU KNOW that don’t you?
Here’s why:
FIRST: the BUYER has no standing to invoke the statute because they do not yet own in a common interest development.
SECOND: the SELLER may not invoke that statute because in order to do so, the event in question must have come to pass. The Civil Code Sections alluding to the $500 fine (NOT PENALTY) can only be instituted AFTER 10 days have passed AND the homeowner association has failed to comply with a REQUEST. Even with that, the owner MUST PROVE IPSO FACTO that (a) the association was served with a request to comply; (b) that the association WILLFULLY failed to comply; (c) present proof of damages. (See, Vanitzian, Common Interest Developments (Thomson/West, 2006-2008).
THIRD: assuming arguendo that the useless Davis-Stupid Act’s $500 spit-fee does apply --> PLEASE explain how a measly $500 penalty which unenforceable compares to a sales constituting HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IF NOT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN LOST SALES? How your aid could actually lead the public to believe what was said with a straight face, boggles intelligent minds. THIS is why the public does not trust politicians. Invoking that section of Code to apply the $500 "fine" REQUIRES filing a LAWSUIT.
FOURTH: Your Senate Bill 127 also PRESUMES that the seller will be able to assert a defense (SUE, LITIGATE) AFTER the sale, presumably against the saboteurs (i.e., management companies and boards of directors) but you are WRONG. Once the seller completes the sale, the seller no longer has standing as an association member to sue in that capacity. (See, Vanitzian, Common Interest Developments (Thomson/West, 2006-2008).
(6.3) Of course you KNOW that Civil Code Sections 1350–1378 place ALL burdens of production of documents regarding the "sale" on the SELLER. You also KNOW that the ONLY recourse a BUYER has is not against the saboteurs (i.e., management companies and association boards of directors) but against the seller. Senate Bill 127 kills the sale. It unilaterally prejudices the seller/owner and increases the burden of doing business for the everyday citizen. (See, Vanitzian, Common Interest Developments (Thomson/West, 2006-2008).
7. For Senate Bill 127 to be effective it must "per se" detail the items that can and cannot be demanded and a drop-dead deadline for compliance, the breach of which "stays" the sale. This alone will create conflicts in several areas of California statutes.
There is so much more that is wrong with this Senate Bill 127 that frankly, it is impossible to list it all in this memorandum.
Without the aforementioned items being addressed, this bill is absolutely toothless and as the British say, a "wank."
Very truly yours,
/s/
cc: Members of HOAATM
RELATED STORIES
KUEHL: PIMP MY HOA!!
Attention: All Real Estate Brokers and Agents the California Association of Realtors has sold you down the river -- let the litigation begin . . . Attention: All Insurance Brokers and Agents you will NEVER be able to sell insurance again like you used...
LETTER TO SEN. KUEHL RE: OPPOSITION TO SB- 127
Re: SENATE BILL 127 IS A BAD BILL OPPOSITION TO SENATE BILL 127Dear Senator Kuehl Please file this opposition with the appropriate committees to lodge our opposition to Senate Bill 127. I am the spokesperson for the group known as HOAATM (Homeowners...
SENATOR AANESTAAD: PIMP MY HOA!X75,257 HOAATM Members Want Senator Aanestaad to Get this Message: Stop Messing With Our Property Rights!!!X
Senate Bill No. 528 should really be called "How The California Legislature Takes Property Away Piecemeal Without The Guilt of Eminent Domain."
The Stark Reality: We're Running Out of Time
CONTRARY TO "Opinion Poll Pundits" who "borrow" (and that's being kind, "steal" is more the word) material from individuals offering to help their cause but then publish that material by putting their own name to it -- or -- CONTRARY TO other "Hot...
FIRED MANAGER CLEANS UP IN MORE WAYS THAN ONE
QUESTION: I'm a board member of my association. Four years ago, a prior board hired a manager whom this board just fired. We gave her two weeks to "clean up loose ends." Soon we heard the shredder churning more than usual but didn't think anything of it....
75,000 MEMBERS OF GROUP "HOAATM" PLEAD WITH GOVERNOR SCHWARZENEGGER TO VETO THESE BAAAAAD BILLS -- YOU PROMISED YOU WOULD LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE
The worst bills for owners in common interest developments with homeowner associations and boards of directors are making their way through the legislature like a runaway train and no brakes. HOMEOWNERS, IF YOU DO NOT HELP STOP THIS NOW -- YOU WILL BE IN...
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
CZ Master Association Transparency - Mr. Zipperman
CZ Master Association Transparency - Mr. Zipperman
By Joseph Morabito, former member CZ Master Association Board of Directors
June 19, 2007
Mr. Zipperman: As the new President of CZ, you really need to break with the Varo/Mezger past and culture of corruption if more transparency is really a goal you want to advance. Executive Session issues relate to Contracts, Specific legal issues and personnel matters and nothing more as prescribed by LAW. Any other topic including the very discussion we are having about Sports Park utilization is an open session matter. And, if these topics and documents are being passed around during Committee Meetings, any CZ Member has a right to attend those meetings requiring minutes and be privy to documents provided to the Committee. The Sports Park matter is not an Executive Session matter. The percentage of CZ kids using our Sports Park is definitely not an Executive Session matter.
Deep Throat felt the need to call me anonymously to give me information about the number of CZ kids participating in league sports because he/she apparently was required to sign a confidentiality agreement to participate on that Committee. The only time that I know of that the Glisson/Rose Board required Committee participants to sign a Confidentiality agreement was when I ran the bidder process to select a property management company. That was done appropriately because we were discussing contractual matters as part of the process. In essence that Supplier Selection Committee was acting as an extension of the Board in Executive Session.
Steve, it is pretty bad when a CZ Member has to call me anonymously fearing retribution from the Board for giving me information that I have every right to see by just going to the Committee meeting in question. This situation is a hold over from the Varo/Mezger years of corruption and mismanagement. Please STOP IT.
And, you must disclose what is really happening at our Sports Park and that includes the specific number of CZ Member’s kids actually participating in league sports and the fully loaded cost to maintain the Sports Park . We don’t need any one’s names just the numbers. Based on the numbers provided by Deep Throat, it is becoming very clear to me with the change in Coto demographics, that the Sports Park should probably be converted into a multi-generational Central Park with broad appeal to all 3,575 CZ Members rather than a few hundred families who refuse to pay their fair share to maintain those fields. And, this will particularly be the case, if we can’t get local government support and more money from the leagues to cover maintenance. It makes no sense to tie up that much acreage to benefit just a few hundred CZ Members. It is high time that CZ Board Members begin to represent the interests of all CZ Members and not just the special interests of a minority in our community.
Most important, the Zipperman/Yocham Board needs to break with the past shenanigans of the Varo/Mezger Board to avoid tarnish and the culture of corruption that has been prevalent for several years. Varo & Mezger should either resign or be recalled from office for cause. As the facts continue to come out, it is very clear that Bob Varo & Jerry Mezger have continuously violated their fiduciary responsibility by failing to properly represent the interests of CZ Members. This whole deal with the Sports League is just one of many, many examples. Joe Morabito
P.S. The Sport League is paying $9,000 a month to use Lennar/Wagon Wheel Park as we get almost nothing from them for use of our facility. We are getting SCREWED because Varo & Mezger abrogated their responsibility and turned our Sports Park over to the league for almost nothing!!! How does that make you feel?
Hi Joe:
It is deplorable that in Coto de Caza, it takes a Kasparov-like (Putin’s) critic, (in this case Joseph Morabito) to encourage anonymous callers to come forward with relevant information, or residents cowed into submission to provide the CotoBuzz Journal with copies of correspondence, but only on the condition their names not be revealed. Worse yet, the Varo/Mezger board requiring potential volunteers to sign confidentiality agreements. Is it any wonder the Varo/Mezger boards have been consistently against direct elections?
By law, Coto residents have a basic protected right to free speech, the right to be informed and to participate in the operation of the Association and the right to enter into dialogue with the CZ Board of Directors with regard to the workings of the Association . The law does not make these rights contingent upon Members not writing to the Coto Discussion Forum, The CotoBuzz Journal, Canyon Life, the Register or any other media, as set forth in The Basic Principles of Fiduciary Duty in the California Corporations Code. Corp. 7231(a), Corporate Law 124-5 (1986), and Higley v. Kidder, Peabody & Co., 920 P.2d 884 ( Colo. App. 1996
The Zipperman/Yocham Board has some real work to do to reverse the culture of corruption, deceit and cronyism that existed under the Varo/Mezger Board. And, the CZ Board needs to start minding the store once again instead of abrogating its responsibilities. It is time for hands on management rather than the old Varo/Mezger country club, feel good, smooze fest that resulted in fiasco after fiasco. CZ Board Members need to do their homework, plain and simple. JM
RELATED STORIES
Coto de Caza BOD's involved in transparency, or committed to it?
Given that certain reporters either do not know the meaning of the word paraphrase, (or misplace), or simply define the terms as they please to promote their own agenda, we figured that it is best to define the term commitment, since the CZ board...
CZ Master Association Harkins (Attorney) Letter - Zipperman's (CZ President's) First Test?
Mr. Harkins: I am in receipt of your letter dated June 12, 2007 in reference to the requests that I made concerning our last CZ Board Election, obtaining the CZ Master?s financial records and the Sports League Roster specific to use of our Sports Park ....
New CZ Leadership Evident During the First 2007-2008 CZ Board of Directors Meeting
New board president S. Zipperman called the CZ Master Association board meeting to order at roughly 6:00 PM with the obligatory introduction of board members, including freshman board member V. Hylka, who received a round of applause from those in...
No Support From Coto de Caza's Jerry?s Kids
Our informal survey: has confirmed that Jerry?s Kids are not supporting Jerry?s assertion that there no interest in electoral reform: ?I, for one, see no need to waste time on that, especially if less than 1% of the members want it? - in fact, it is...
Z Winds of Change, or Blowing in the Wind for a Change.
Coto de Caza Winds of Change, or Blowing in the Wind in Coto de Caza for a Change?
The Scrutiny of Lawyers
?There are plenty of jokes about lawyers, but everyone investigating them knows it can be a challenging task?, reads the preamble to an article by Ames Alexander, an investigative reporter with the Charlotte Observer for over 28 years and with more than...
From World Poverty to CZ Elections, to Coto Public Safety- What the numbers mean, depends on who audits the numbers: My board is less corrupt than your board!
According to Carl Bialik, the Wall Street Journal?s Numbers Guy, one challenge facing Paul Wolfowitz? replacement at the World Bank?s helm is ?how to count the world?s poor so we might know if that dream is approaching reality?. The ?dream? refers to the...
Coto de Caza - Land of the NO WAY, Men
As we continue to make the case for a leader volunteer to close the management divide between the Varo/Mezger position and the one proposed by Joseph Morabito, we thought the Beatles could help with the music:
CZ Master Association Fork On the Road
Hello All: It really does not matter what was done during the Glisson/Rose years or even the Varo/Mezger years concerning the management of CZ. That is all water under the bridge and old news. There have been four dues increases since 1996; one under...
What does it take to create a public spectacle? - In Coto de Caza
During the 2007 CZ Master Association Candidate?s Nigh (in preparation for the 2007 CZ board of directors' election), incumbents Varo/Mezger insisted that because Ladera Ranch residents were making a public spectacle, CHP hours that otherwise might be...
Orange County Crime Down, Nation's Crime Up
While the FBI is expected to report a 1.3 percent rise in violent crime nationwide in 2006 ? an increase for the second straight year, Sheriff Michael Carona today announced that criminal homicide, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
By Joseph Morabito, former member CZ Master Association Board of Directors
June 19, 2007
Mr. Zipperman: As the new President of CZ, you really need to break with the Varo/Mezger past and culture of corruption if more transparency is really a goal you want to advance. Executive Session issues relate to Contracts, Specific legal issues and personnel matters and nothing more as prescribed by LAW. Any other topic including the very discussion we are having about Sports Park utilization is an open session matter. And, if these topics and documents are being passed around during Committee Meetings, any CZ Member has a right to attend those meetings requiring minutes and be privy to documents provided to the Committee. The Sports Park matter is not an Executive Session matter. The percentage of CZ kids using our Sports Park is definitely not an Executive Session matter.
Deep Throat felt the need to call me anonymously to give me information about the number of CZ kids participating in league sports because he/she apparently was required to sign a confidentiality agreement to participate on that Committee. The only time that I know of that the Glisson/Rose Board required Committee participants to sign a Confidentiality agreement was when I ran the bidder process to select a property management company. That was done appropriately because we were discussing contractual matters as part of the process. In essence that Supplier Selection Committee was acting as an extension of the Board in Executive Session.
Steve, it is pretty bad when a CZ Member has to call me anonymously fearing retribution from the Board for giving me information that I have every right to see by just going to the Committee meeting in question. This situation is a hold over from the Varo/Mezger years of corruption and mismanagement. Please STOP IT.
And, you must disclose what is really happening at our Sports Park and that includes the specific number of CZ Member’s kids actually participating in league sports and the fully loaded cost to maintain the Sports Park . We don’t need any one’s names just the numbers. Based on the numbers provided by Deep Throat, it is becoming very clear to me with the change in Coto demographics, that the Sports Park should probably be converted into a multi-generational Central Park with broad appeal to all 3,575 CZ Members rather than a few hundred families who refuse to pay their fair share to maintain those fields. And, this will particularly be the case, if we can’t get local government support and more money from the leagues to cover maintenance. It makes no sense to tie up that much acreage to benefit just a few hundred CZ Members. It is high time that CZ Board Members begin to represent the interests of all CZ Members and not just the special interests of a minority in our community.
Most important, the Zipperman/Yocham Board needs to break with the past shenanigans of the Varo/Mezger Board to avoid tarnish and the culture of corruption that has been prevalent for several years. Varo & Mezger should either resign or be recalled from office for cause. As the facts continue to come out, it is very clear that Bob Varo & Jerry Mezger have continuously violated their fiduciary responsibility by failing to properly represent the interests of CZ Members. This whole deal with the Sports League is just one of many, many examples. Joe Morabito
P.S. The Sport League is paying $9,000 a month to use Lennar/Wagon Wheel Park as we get almost nothing from them for use of our facility. We are getting SCREWED because Varo & Mezger abrogated their responsibility and turned our Sports Park over to the league for almost nothing!!! How does that make you feel?
Hi Joe:
It is deplorable that in Coto de Caza, it takes a Kasparov-like (Putin’s) critic, (in this case Joseph Morabito) to encourage anonymous callers to come forward with relevant information, or residents cowed into submission to provide the CotoBuzz Journal with copies of correspondence, but only on the condition their names not be revealed. Worse yet, the Varo/Mezger board requiring potential volunteers to sign confidentiality agreements. Is it any wonder the Varo/Mezger boards have been consistently against direct elections?
By law, Coto residents have a basic protected right to free speech, the right to be informed and to participate in the operation of the Association and the right to enter into dialogue with the CZ Board of Directors with regard to the workings of the Association . The law does not make these rights contingent upon Members not writing to the Coto Discussion Forum, The CotoBuzz Journal, Canyon Life, the Register or any other media, as set forth in The Basic Principles of Fiduciary Duty in the California Corporations Code. Corp. 7231(a), Corporate Law 124-5 (1986), and Higley v. Kidder, Peabody & Co., 920 P.2d 884 ( Colo. App. 1996
The Zipperman/Yocham Board has some real work to do to reverse the culture of corruption, deceit and cronyism that existed under the Varo/Mezger Board. And, the CZ Board needs to start minding the store once again instead of abrogating its responsibilities. It is time for hands on management rather than the old Varo/Mezger country club, feel good, smooze fest that resulted in fiasco after fiasco. CZ Board Members need to do their homework, plain and simple. JM
RELATED STORIES
Coto de Caza BOD's involved in transparency, or committed to it?
Given that certain reporters either do not know the meaning of the word paraphrase, (or misplace), or simply define the terms as they please to promote their own agenda, we figured that it is best to define the term commitment, since the CZ board...
CZ Master Association Harkins (Attorney) Letter - Zipperman's (CZ President's) First Test?
Mr. Harkins: I am in receipt of your letter dated June 12, 2007 in reference to the requests that I made concerning our last CZ Board Election, obtaining the CZ Master?s financial records and the Sports League Roster specific to use of our Sports Park ....
New CZ Leadership Evident During the First 2007-2008 CZ Board of Directors Meeting
New board president S. Zipperman called the CZ Master Association board meeting to order at roughly 6:00 PM with the obligatory introduction of board members, including freshman board member V. Hylka, who received a round of applause from those in...
No Support From Coto de Caza's Jerry?s Kids
Our informal survey: has confirmed that Jerry?s Kids are not supporting Jerry?s assertion that there no interest in electoral reform: ?I, for one, see no need to waste time on that, especially if less than 1% of the members want it? - in fact, it is...
Z Winds of Change, or Blowing in the Wind for a Change.
Coto de Caza Winds of Change, or Blowing in the Wind in Coto de Caza for a Change?
The Scrutiny of Lawyers
?There are plenty of jokes about lawyers, but everyone investigating them knows it can be a challenging task?, reads the preamble to an article by Ames Alexander, an investigative reporter with the Charlotte Observer for over 28 years and with more than...
From World Poverty to CZ Elections, to Coto Public Safety- What the numbers mean, depends on who audits the numbers: My board is less corrupt than your board!
According to Carl Bialik, the Wall Street Journal?s Numbers Guy, one challenge facing Paul Wolfowitz? replacement at the World Bank?s helm is ?how to count the world?s poor so we might know if that dream is approaching reality?. The ?dream? refers to the...
Coto de Caza - Land of the NO WAY, Men
As we continue to make the case for a leader volunteer to close the management divide between the Varo/Mezger position and the one proposed by Joseph Morabito, we thought the Beatles could help with the music:
CZ Master Association Fork On the Road
Hello All: It really does not matter what was done during the Glisson/Rose years or even the Varo/Mezger years concerning the management of CZ. That is all water under the bridge and old news. There have been four dues increases since 1996; one under...
What does it take to create a public spectacle? - In Coto de Caza
During the 2007 CZ Master Association Candidate?s Nigh (in preparation for the 2007 CZ board of directors' election), incumbents Varo/Mezger insisted that because Ladera Ranch residents were making a public spectacle, CHP hours that otherwise might be...
Orange County Crime Down, Nation's Crime Up
While the FBI is expected to report a 1.3 percent rise in violent crime nationwide in 2006 ? an increase for the second straight year, Sheriff Michael Carona today announced that criminal homicide, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Coto de Caza BOD's involved in transparency, or committed to it?
Coto de Caza BOD's involved in transparency, or committed to it?
June 19, 2007
Given that certain reporters either do not know the meaning of the word paraphrase, (or misplace), or simply define the terms as they please to promote their own agenda, we figured that it is best to define the term commitment, since the CZ board president has gone on record as being committed to transparency.
It so happens that a call placed today to Senator Kuehl’s office inquiring on why Senator Kuehl is protecting homeowner association management companies and boards of directors AND NOT THE OWNERS, the person answering the phone defined the term “stakeholders” as management companies and board of of directors!
Commitment- Defined
a) a pledge or promise; obligation: We have made a commitment to pay our bills on time.
b) The state of being bound emotionally or intellectually to a course of action or to another person or persons: a deep commitment to liberal policies; a profound commitment to the family.
Commitment- An application
We like to use the All American Ham and Eggs Breakfast as an analogy to differentiate between involvement and commitment: We say that the chicken was involved in the breakfast, whereas the pig was committed – the question then is, will the 2007-2008 Coto de Caza board of directors be involved in transparency, or committed to it?
Reference:
commitment. (n.d.). The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Retrieved June 17, 2007, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/commitment
RELATED STORIES
The end of a Prostituting,.. err Paraphrase Era?- Prior to the arrival of Melissa Jones to the Orange County Register as City editor, we had extensive discussions with Lyn Montagna (Jones’ predecessor) on the type of responsible community journalism needed for Coto de Caza.
OCR Paraphrasing in Laguna Woods Village -The CotoBuzz Journal previously reported on a brewing scandal related to alleged misuse of credit card by property management company employees in an article titled Laguna Woods Residents Outraged by Use of Credit Cards Issued to Property Manager Employees! Concerned Residents Speak Up About Fiscal Mismanagement –
When is a retraction not a retraction? When it comes from the OCR! In the August 4 issue of the OCR’s CanyonLife, hidden under a picture of the Pet of the Week, appears an inconspicuous paragraph titled Clarification that reads”
NYTimes “Paraphrases” Military Rape Story - CZ "Paraphrased" Story on CHP Firing- On March 18th, the New York Times published a piece titled “The Women’s War”, centered around the plight of several female Veterans of the war in Iraq.
Coto de Caza’s Bastard Child – Public Safety- In just 15 short months, the community witnessed the absence of the CHP for proactive traffic patrol followed by two tragic traffic accidents. In the last one, the board blamed the victim, although the teen driver eventually pleaded guilty.
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
June 19, 2007
Given that certain reporters either do not know the meaning of the word paraphrase, (or misplace), or simply define the terms as they please to promote their own agenda, we figured that it is best to define the term commitment, since the CZ board president has gone on record as being committed to transparency.
It so happens that a call placed today to Senator Kuehl’s office inquiring on why Senator Kuehl is protecting homeowner association management companies and boards of directors AND NOT THE OWNERS, the person answering the phone defined the term “stakeholders” as management companies and board of of directors!
Commitment- Defined
a) a pledge or promise; obligation: We have made a commitment to pay our bills on time.
b) The state of being bound emotionally or intellectually to a course of action or to another person or persons: a deep commitment to liberal policies; a profound commitment to the family.
Commitment- An application
We like to use the All American Ham and Eggs Breakfast as an analogy to differentiate between involvement and commitment: We say that the chicken was involved in the breakfast, whereas the pig was committed – the question then is, will the 2007-2008 Coto de Caza board of directors be involved in transparency, or committed to it?
Reference:
commitment. (n.d.). The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Retrieved June 17, 2007, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/commitment
RELATED STORIES
The end of a Prostituting,.. err Paraphrase Era?- Prior to the arrival of Melissa Jones to the Orange County Register as City editor, we had extensive discussions with Lyn Montagna (Jones’ predecessor) on the type of responsible community journalism needed for Coto de Caza.
OCR Paraphrasing in Laguna Woods Village -The CotoBuzz Journal previously reported on a brewing scandal related to alleged misuse of credit card by property management company employees in an article titled Laguna Woods Residents Outraged by Use of Credit Cards Issued to Property Manager Employees! Concerned Residents Speak Up About Fiscal Mismanagement –
When is a retraction not a retraction? When it comes from the OCR! In the August 4 issue of the OCR’s CanyonLife, hidden under a picture of the Pet of the Week, appears an inconspicuous paragraph titled Clarification that reads”
NYTimes “Paraphrases” Military Rape Story - CZ "Paraphrased" Story on CHP Firing- On March 18th, the New York Times published a piece titled “The Women’s War”, centered around the plight of several female Veterans of the war in Iraq.
Coto de Caza’s Bastard Child – Public Safety- In just 15 short months, the community witnessed the absence of the CHP for proactive traffic patrol followed by two tragic traffic accidents. In the last one, the board blamed the victim, although the teen driver eventually pleaded guilty.
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
Sheriff Carona appointed to California Rehabilitation Oversight Board
Sheriff Carona appointed to California Rehabilitation Oversight Board
June 18, 2007
A group of his peers (the California State Sheriff’s Association) as appointed Orange County Sheriff Michael Carona as the Association’s only representative on the California Rehabilitation Oversight Board.
Assembly Bill 900 (the Public Safety and Offender Rehabilitation Services Act of 2007) created the California Rehabilitation Oversight Board (C-ROB) within the Office of the Inspector General. CROB’s mandate is to regularly examine the various mental health, substance abuse, educational, and employment programs for inmates and parolees operated by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (department).
Sheriff Carona is the only Sheriff on the 11-member board that is chaired by the Inspector General. “By investing in the recovery and rehabilitation of inmates while incarcerated, we dramatically reduce the likelihood that they will re-offend”, said Sheriff Carona.
“This program is a huge step forward in stopping the revolving door,” Sheriff Carona said.
“Whether it is learning a skill or a trade, inmate labor, educational services, or substance abuse
rehabilitation, our focus is to ensure the inmates in our care make productive use of their time,"
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
June 18, 2007
A group of his peers (the California State Sheriff’s Association) as appointed Orange County Sheriff Michael Carona as the Association’s only representative on the California Rehabilitation Oversight Board.
Assembly Bill 900 (the Public Safety and Offender Rehabilitation Services Act of 2007) created the California Rehabilitation Oversight Board (C-ROB) within the Office of the Inspector General. CROB’s mandate is to regularly examine the various mental health, substance abuse, educational, and employment programs for inmates and parolees operated by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (department).
Sheriff Carona is the only Sheriff on the 11-member board that is chaired by the Inspector General. “By investing in the recovery and rehabilitation of inmates while incarcerated, we dramatically reduce the likelihood that they will re-offend”, said Sheriff Carona.
“This program is a huge step forward in stopping the revolving door,” Sheriff Carona said.
“Whether it is learning a skill or a trade, inmate labor, educational services, or substance abuse
rehabilitation, our focus is to ensure the inmates in our care make productive use of their time,"
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
KUEHL: PIMP MY HOA!!
COLUMN
KUEHL: PIMP MY HOA!!
June 19, 2007
Attention: All Real Estate Brokers and Agents the California Association of Realtors has sold you down the river -- let the litigation begin . . .
Attention: All Insurance Brokers and Agents you will NEVER be able to sell insurance again like you used to--because you're liability just increased with the cost of insurance. . .
by Donie Vanitzian, J.D., Arbitrator
(c)2007 Vanitzian
75,257 HOAATM Members Say NO! to Senate Bill 127
HOAATM wants to know why Senator Kuehl is protecting homeowner association management companies and boards of directors AND NOT THE OWNERS?
Senate Bill 127 at first glance looks may look like something everybody wants? WRONG! It is something NO BODY wants. This is one of those “signal right--turn left” bills.
There are NO protections in Senate Bill 127 for residential deed-restricted PROPERTY owners -- this bill places us at risk.
There are NO protections in Senate Bill 127 for California Real Estate Brokers and Agents.
Homeowners complain, year after year that their management companies and boards sabotaged their sales. Management companies and boards interfere with costs of escrow. Management companies and boards drive up the costs of selling and drive up the escrow costs -- and in too many other cases, actually prevent the owner from realizing their profit from sale because of an incredible array of legal machinations they are able to unilaterally use against the seller and the seller’s agents.
Senator Kuehl’s Senate Bill 127 will prolong escrows, prevent sales, and subject all real estate professionals -- including the seller -- to LAWSUITS.
ANYBODY SMELL CAI?
ANYBODY SMELL INDUSTRY SPECIAL INTERESTS?
ANYBODY SMELL MANAGEMENT COMPANY INTERFERENCE A-G-A-I-N-?
The Davis-Stupid Act puts the entire burden of producing such documents on the SELLER -- not the arrogant board -- not the aider and abettor management companies -- it puts the THREAT OF LITIGATION ON THE OWNER!!
A-N-D to make it worse, Senator Kuehl has just DELETED THESE SECTIONS FROM SENATE BILL 127:
DELETED:
Existing law requires an association of a common interest development, if requested by the owner of the separate property interest, to deliver a copy of the information required to be disclosed by that owner within 10 days of the mailing or delivery of the request, as specified. This means she REMOVED the PROTECTIONS that EXIST IN THE LAW FOR US!
DELETED:
The bill would require an association of a common interest development, if requested by the owner of the separate property interest, to deliver a copy of the information required to be disclosed by that owner within 7 days of the mailing or delivery of the request. If we think we had problems before, we haven't begun to see what we are headed for now!
If you think THAT’S bad, get a load of what she did here:
AMENDED:
The bill would require, in the case of a sale of a separate interest in a common interest development, that the necessary disclosures be made as soon as practicable before transfer of title but no later than [[[[ DELETED: 10 ]]]]] [[[[[ INSERTED: 20 ]]]]] calendar days after the execution of the purchase agreement to purchase title to the separate interest or execution of a real property sales contract.
HOAATM ASKS SENATOR KUEHL:
WILL YOU BE THERE DURING MY ESCROW TO PROTECT ME WHEN I CAN’T CLOSE ESCROW IN 30-DAYS BECAUSE *YOU* HAVE GIVEN ME LITTLE TIME TO PERFORM MY STATUTORY DUTIES TO THE BUYER???
HOAATM ASKS SENATOR KUEHL:
WILL YOU BE THERE WHEN I GET SUED FOR NON-PERFORMANCE ON MY STATUTORY DUTIES TO THE BUYER?
HOAATM ASKS SENATOR KUEHL:
WILL YOU BE THERE WHEN MY BOARD AND MANAGEMENT COMPANY INSTEAD GIVE ME “BLANK PIECES OF PAPER” OR “EXPIRED INFORMATION” INSTEAD OF WHAT WAS DEMANDED IN ESCROW IN ORDER FOR ME TO FULFILL MY OBLIGATION TO THE BUYER BEFORE 30-DAY CLOSING?
HOAATM ASKS SENATOR KUEHL:
WILL YOU BE THERE WHEN MY BOARD AND MANAGEMENT COMPANY SABOTAGE MY SALE BY NOT COMPLYING WITH YOUR SENATE BILL 127 AND I GET SUED?
Please take one minute and write/fax/call Senator Kuehl NOW
She has just increased our cost of doing business!
Phone: (916) 651-4023
Fax: (916) 324-4823
State Capitol, Room 5108
Sacramento, CA 95814
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
KUEHL: PIMP MY HOA!!
June 19, 2007
Attention: All Real Estate Brokers and Agents the California Association of Realtors has sold you down the river -- let the litigation begin . . .
Attention: All Insurance Brokers and Agents you will NEVER be able to sell insurance again like you used to--because you're liability just increased with the cost of insurance. . .
by Donie Vanitzian, J.D., Arbitrator
(c)2007 Vanitzian
75,257 HOAATM Members Say NO! to Senate Bill 127
HOAATM wants to know why Senator Kuehl is protecting homeowner association management companies and boards of directors AND NOT THE OWNERS?
Senate Bill 127 at first glance looks may look like something everybody wants? WRONG! It is something NO BODY wants. This is one of those “signal right--turn left” bills.
There are NO protections in Senate Bill 127 for residential deed-restricted PROPERTY owners -- this bill places us at risk.
There are NO protections in Senate Bill 127 for California Real Estate Brokers and Agents.
Homeowners complain, year after year that their management companies and boards sabotaged their sales. Management companies and boards interfere with costs of escrow. Management companies and boards drive up the costs of selling and drive up the escrow costs -- and in too many other cases, actually prevent the owner from realizing their profit from sale because of an incredible array of legal machinations they are able to unilaterally use against the seller and the seller’s agents.
Senator Kuehl’s Senate Bill 127 will prolong escrows, prevent sales, and subject all real estate professionals -- including the seller -- to LAWSUITS.
ANYBODY SMELL CAI?
ANYBODY SMELL INDUSTRY SPECIAL INTERESTS?
ANYBODY SMELL MANAGEMENT COMPANY INTERFERENCE A-G-A-I-N-?
The Davis-Stupid Act puts the entire burden of producing such documents on the SELLER -- not the arrogant board -- not the aider and abettor management companies -- it puts the THREAT OF LITIGATION ON THE OWNER!!
A-N-D to make it worse, Senator Kuehl has just DELETED THESE SECTIONS FROM SENATE BILL 127:
DELETED:
Existing law requires an association of a common interest development, if requested by the owner of the separate property interest, to deliver a copy of the information required to be disclosed by that owner within 10 days of the mailing or delivery of the request, as specified. This means she REMOVED the PROTECTIONS that EXIST IN THE LAW FOR US!
DELETED:
The bill would require an association of a common interest development, if requested by the owner of the separate property interest, to deliver a copy of the information required to be disclosed by that owner within 7 days of the mailing or delivery of the request. If we think we had problems before, we haven't begun to see what we are headed for now!
If you think THAT’S bad, get a load of what she did here:
AMENDED:
The bill would require, in the case of a sale of a separate interest in a common interest development, that the necessary disclosures be made as soon as practicable before transfer of title but no later than [[[[ DELETED: 10 ]]]]] [[[[[ INSERTED: 20 ]]]]] calendar days after the execution of the purchase agreement to purchase title to the separate interest or execution of a real property sales contract.
HOAATM ASKS SENATOR KUEHL:
WILL YOU BE THERE DURING MY ESCROW TO PROTECT ME WHEN I CAN’T CLOSE ESCROW IN 30-DAYS BECAUSE *YOU* HAVE GIVEN ME LITTLE TIME TO PERFORM MY STATUTORY DUTIES TO THE BUYER???
HOAATM ASKS SENATOR KUEHL:
WILL YOU BE THERE WHEN I GET SUED FOR NON-PERFORMANCE ON MY STATUTORY DUTIES TO THE BUYER?
HOAATM ASKS SENATOR KUEHL:
WILL YOU BE THERE WHEN MY BOARD AND MANAGEMENT COMPANY INSTEAD GIVE ME “BLANK PIECES OF PAPER” OR “EXPIRED INFORMATION” INSTEAD OF WHAT WAS DEMANDED IN ESCROW IN ORDER FOR ME TO FULFILL MY OBLIGATION TO THE BUYER BEFORE 30-DAY CLOSING?
HOAATM ASKS SENATOR KUEHL:
WILL YOU BE THERE WHEN MY BOARD AND MANAGEMENT COMPANY SABOTAGE MY SALE BY NOT COMPLYING WITH YOUR SENATE BILL 127 AND I GET SUED?
Please take one minute and write/fax/call Senator Kuehl NOW
She has just increased our cost of doing business!
Phone: (916) 651-4023
Fax: (916) 324-4823
State Capitol, Room 5108
Sacramento, CA 95814
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
LETTER TO SEN. KUEHL RE: OPPOSITION TO SB- 127
COLUMN
LETTER TO SEN. KUEHL RE: OPPOSITION TO SB- 127
June 19, 2007
To: The Honorable Senator Kuehl
Date: June 19, 2007 P By fax OPPOSITION TO SENATE BILL 127
Author: Donie Vanitzian, J.D., Arbitrator
Stakeholders: HOAATM 75,257 strong and growing
June 19, 2007
The Honorable Shiela Kuehl
State Capitol, Room 5108
Sacramento, CA 95814
Re: SENATE BILL 127 IS A BAD BILL OPPOSITION TO SENATE BILL 127
Dear Senator Kuehl,
Please file this opposition with the appropriate committees to lodge our opposition to Senate Bill 127. I am the spokesperson for the group known as HOAATM (Homeowners Against Association Tyranny & Manipulation) and we are now 75,257 members strong.
WE ARE STAKEHOLDERS. WE HAVE A DOG IN THIS FIGHT.
With all due respect Senator, your Senate Bill 127 is NOT about disclosures.
1. Senate Bill 127 creates roadblocks to free enterprise for both buyers and sellers. Assuming arguendo that most, but certainly not all, escrows are approximately 30 days, your Senate Bill 127 does a disservice to the millions of homeowners that are stuck owning and attempting to sell or 1031 exchange their “properties” whether or not they are located within common interest developments throughout California – but most especially if they ARE located within common interest developments.
2. Senate Bill 127 is both pedestrian and myopic. Your Senate Bill 127 presumes escrow periods are 30 days, when in fact some are closing in as little FIVE days. My husband isa 25-year Realtor® veteran and he can tell you he has witnessed properties close in as little as FOUR days -- and ONE that closed in 24 hours. Why do buyers have to besubject to your interpretation of “escrow.”
3. Senate Bill 127 predictably will, and does, interfere with the free-flow of inter- and intrastate commerce in that, 1031 exchanges for example, that are able to close quickly and complete transactions, will be subject to a statute that will not only hinder those efforts, it will interfere with business, free trade, and prospective economic advantagefor buyers and sellers alike -- be it one (1) day or thirty (30) days closing.
4. Senate Bill 127 conflicts with other existing statutes by placing contingencies that areunable to be satisfied, let alone be satisfied in a timely manner -- let alone be satisfied pursuant to the state statute(s) existing or otherwise. The public is in need of protection -- yet your bill exempts those who need that protection the most. Presently your office aids are relaying to the public that “existing law” allows the buyer to “get out of the sale” within three days -- right. Big Deal! Have you ever tried to invoke that section of code to get out of a purchase? Good luck. Yet your staff states that phrase with such conviction your constituents will believe it.
Even with that illusive statute that your office claims lets reluctant buyers escape their sales agreement to/of purchase, Senate Bill 127 as it stands today (June 19, 2007) nails the coffin shut on millions of unsuspecting buyers and sellers by surpassing that 3- day escape clause. Senator Kuehl, if you really wanted to assist buyers and sellers, but especially those who are handicapped the most (common interest development owners) then your bill would unequivocally state that ALL such documents SHALL be PRODUCED PRIOR TO execution of said sales and/or purchase agreements. Wouldn’t that be the SMART thing to do? That would eliminate LITIGATION. It would eliminate GRIDLOCK. It would eliminate any potential FISCAL IMPACT on the state. But it would also eliminate your Senate Bill 127.
6. When your office was asked: WHERE IS THE PENALTY AGAINST THOSE IN POSSESSION OF SAID DOCUMENTS FOR THEIR NON-COMPLIANCE AND FAILURE TO PRODUCE? The unfortunate reality regarding the information circulated by your office is misleading at best. (A) When asked to direct us to the section of Code where these items can be found, your aid says: “go to www.leginfo, its all there.” (B) Your office also no doubt with a straight face, informs callers that there is a $500 penalty existing in the statute against non-compliance. ARE YOU SERIOUS? PUH-LEEZ! GIVE US A BREAK!
With all due respect Senator, you KNOW that statute is wholly ineffective and inapplicable to Senate Bill 127. Frankly you should be ashamed in allowing such statements to be made to the unsuspecting public who voted you into office and who do not know better. They actually BELIEVE YOU.
(A) The Civil Code Sections 1350–1378 (the Davis-Stupid Act) provides for $500 penalties for various items that are frankly, impossible to collect on. That statute to which your aid refers is a cruel ruse that was meant to placate California owners who are losing thousands if not millions of dollars across this state because they are unable to adequately protect their assets which are located within a common interest development. (See, Vanitzian, Common Interest Developments (Thomson/West, 2006-2008).
(B) That Civil Code Section “allowing” common interest development owners to file a lawsuit in order to invoke that section of code, is inapplicable in the situation your statute creates.
First: the buyer has no standing to invoke the statute because they do not yet own in a common interest development.
Second: the seller may not invoke that statute because in order to do so the event in question must have come to pass. The Civil Code Sections alluding to the $500 fine (NOT PENALTY) can only be instituted AFTER 10 days have passed AND the homeowner
association has failed to comply. Even with that, the owner MUST PROVE IPSO FACTO that (a) the association was served with a request to comply; (b) that the association WILLFULLY failed to comply; (c) present proof of damages. (See, Vanitzian, Common Interest Developments (Thomson/West, 2006-2008).
Third: assuming arguendo that the useless Davis-Stupid Act’s $500 spit-fee applies
à PLEASE explain how a measly $500 penalty which unenforceable compares to a sales constituting hundreds of thousands of dollars if not millions of dollars in lost sales? How your aid could actually lead the public to believe what was said with a straight face, boggles intelligent minds. THIS is why the public does not trust politicians. Invoking that section of Code to apply the $500 “fine” REQUIRES filing a LAWSUIT.
Fourth: Your Senate Bill 127 also presumes that the seller will be able to assert a defense (SUE, LITIGATE) after the sale, presumably against the saboteurs (i.e., management companies and boards of directors) but you are wrong. Once the seller completes the sale, the seller no longer has standing as an association member to sue in that capacity. (See, Vanitzian, Common Interest Developments (Thomson/West, 2006-2008).
(C) Of course you know that Civil Code Sections 1350–1378 place ALL burdens of production of documents regarding the “sale” on the seller. You also know that the only recourse a buyer has is not against the saboteurs (i.e., management companies and association boards of directors) but against the seller. Senate Bill 127 kills the sale. It unilaterally prejudices the seller/owner and increases the burden of doing business for the everyday citizen. (See, Vanitzian, Common Interest Developments (Thomson/West, 2006-2008).
7. For Senate Bill 127 to be effective it must per se detail the items that can and cannot be demanded. This alone will create conflicts in several areas of California statutes.
There is so much more that is wrong with this Senate Bill 127 that frankly, it is impossible to list it all in this memorandum.
Without the aforementioned items being addressed, this bill is absolutely toothless and as the British say, a “wank.”
Very truly yours,
/s/
_________________________
D. Vanitzian cc: Members of HOAATM
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
LETTER TO SEN. KUEHL RE: OPPOSITION TO SB- 127
June 19, 2007
To: The Honorable Senator Kuehl
Date: June 19, 2007 P By fax OPPOSITION TO SENATE BILL 127
Author: Donie Vanitzian, J.D., Arbitrator
Stakeholders: HOAATM 75,257 strong and growing
June 19, 2007
The Honorable Shiela Kuehl
State Capitol, Room 5108
Sacramento, CA 95814
Re: SENATE BILL 127 IS A BAD BILL OPPOSITION TO SENATE BILL 127
Dear Senator Kuehl,
Please file this opposition with the appropriate committees to lodge our opposition to Senate Bill 127. I am the spokesperson for the group known as HOAATM (Homeowners Against Association Tyranny & Manipulation) and we are now 75,257 members strong.
WE ARE STAKEHOLDERS. WE HAVE A DOG IN THIS FIGHT.
With all due respect Senator, your Senate Bill 127 is NOT about disclosures.
1. Senate Bill 127 creates roadblocks to free enterprise for both buyers and sellers. Assuming arguendo that most, but certainly not all, escrows are approximately 30 days, your Senate Bill 127 does a disservice to the millions of homeowners that are stuck owning and attempting to sell or 1031 exchange their “properties” whether or not they are located within common interest developments throughout California – but most especially if they ARE located within common interest developments.
2. Senate Bill 127 is both pedestrian and myopic. Your Senate Bill 127 presumes escrow periods are 30 days, when in fact some are closing in as little FIVE days. My husband isa 25-year Realtor® veteran and he can tell you he has witnessed properties close in as little as FOUR days -- and ONE that closed in 24 hours. Why do buyers have to besubject to your interpretation of “escrow.”
3. Senate Bill 127 predictably will, and does, interfere with the free-flow of inter- and intrastate commerce in that, 1031 exchanges for example, that are able to close quickly and complete transactions, will be subject to a statute that will not only hinder those efforts, it will interfere with business, free trade, and prospective economic advantagefor buyers and sellers alike -- be it one (1) day or thirty (30) days closing.
4. Senate Bill 127 conflicts with other existing statutes by placing contingencies that areunable to be satisfied, let alone be satisfied in a timely manner -- let alone be satisfied pursuant to the state statute(s) existing or otherwise. The public is in need of protection -- yet your bill exempts those who need that protection the most. Presently your office aids are relaying to the public that “existing law” allows the buyer to “get out of the sale” within three days -- right. Big Deal! Have you ever tried to invoke that section of code to get out of a purchase? Good luck. Yet your staff states that phrase with such conviction your constituents will believe it.
Even with that illusive statute that your office claims lets reluctant buyers escape their sales agreement to/of purchase, Senate Bill 127 as it stands today (June 19, 2007) nails the coffin shut on millions of unsuspecting buyers and sellers by surpassing that 3- day escape clause. Senator Kuehl, if you really wanted to assist buyers and sellers, but especially those who are handicapped the most (common interest development owners) then your bill would unequivocally state that ALL such documents SHALL be PRODUCED PRIOR TO execution of said sales and/or purchase agreements. Wouldn’t that be the SMART thing to do? That would eliminate LITIGATION. It would eliminate GRIDLOCK. It would eliminate any potential FISCAL IMPACT on the state. But it would also eliminate your Senate Bill 127.
6. When your office was asked: WHERE IS THE PENALTY AGAINST THOSE IN POSSESSION OF SAID DOCUMENTS FOR THEIR NON-COMPLIANCE AND FAILURE TO PRODUCE? The unfortunate reality regarding the information circulated by your office is misleading at best. (A) When asked to direct us to the section of Code where these items can be found, your aid says: “go to www.leginfo, its all there.” (B) Your office also no doubt with a straight face, informs callers that there is a $500 penalty existing in the statute against non-compliance. ARE YOU SERIOUS? PUH-LEEZ! GIVE US A BREAK!
With all due respect Senator, you KNOW that statute is wholly ineffective and inapplicable to Senate Bill 127. Frankly you should be ashamed in allowing such statements to be made to the unsuspecting public who voted you into office and who do not know better. They actually BELIEVE YOU.
(A) The Civil Code Sections 1350–1378 (the Davis-Stupid Act) provides for $500 penalties for various items that are frankly, impossible to collect on. That statute to which your aid refers is a cruel ruse that was meant to placate California owners who are losing thousands if not millions of dollars across this state because they are unable to adequately protect their assets which are located within a common interest development. (See, Vanitzian, Common Interest Developments (Thomson/West, 2006-2008).
(B) That Civil Code Section “allowing” common interest development owners to file a lawsuit in order to invoke that section of code, is inapplicable in the situation your statute creates.
First: the buyer has no standing to invoke the statute because they do not yet own in a common interest development.
Second: the seller may not invoke that statute because in order to do so the event in question must have come to pass. The Civil Code Sections alluding to the $500 fine (NOT PENALTY) can only be instituted AFTER 10 days have passed AND the homeowner
association has failed to comply. Even with that, the owner MUST PROVE IPSO FACTO that (a) the association was served with a request to comply; (b) that the association WILLFULLY failed to comply; (c) present proof of damages. (See, Vanitzian, Common Interest Developments (Thomson/West, 2006-2008).
Third: assuming arguendo that the useless Davis-Stupid Act’s $500 spit-fee applies
à PLEASE explain how a measly $500 penalty which unenforceable compares to a sales constituting hundreds of thousands of dollars if not millions of dollars in lost sales? How your aid could actually lead the public to believe what was said with a straight face, boggles intelligent minds. THIS is why the public does not trust politicians. Invoking that section of Code to apply the $500 “fine” REQUIRES filing a LAWSUIT.
Fourth: Your Senate Bill 127 also presumes that the seller will be able to assert a defense (SUE, LITIGATE) after the sale, presumably against the saboteurs (i.e., management companies and boards of directors) but you are wrong. Once the seller completes the sale, the seller no longer has standing as an association member to sue in that capacity. (See, Vanitzian, Common Interest Developments (Thomson/West, 2006-2008).
(C) Of course you know that Civil Code Sections 1350–1378 place ALL burdens of production of documents regarding the “sale” on the seller. You also know that the only recourse a buyer has is not against the saboteurs (i.e., management companies and association boards of directors) but against the seller. Senate Bill 127 kills the sale. It unilaterally prejudices the seller/owner and increases the burden of doing business for the everyday citizen. (See, Vanitzian, Common Interest Developments (Thomson/West, 2006-2008).
7. For Senate Bill 127 to be effective it must per se detail the items that can and cannot be demanded. This alone will create conflicts in several areas of California statutes.
There is so much more that is wrong with this Senate Bill 127 that frankly, it is impossible to list it all in this memorandum.
Without the aforementioned items being addressed, this bill is absolutely toothless and as the British say, a “wank.”
Very truly yours,
/s/
_________________________
D. Vanitzian cc: Members of HOAATM
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
Monday, June 18, 2007
SENATOR AANESTAAD: PIMP MY HOA!
SENATOR AANESTAAD: PIMP MY HOA!
75,257 HOAATM Members Want Senator Aanestaad to Get this Message: Stop Messing With Our Property Rights!!!
by Donie Vanitzian, J.D., Arbitrator
(c)2007 Vanitzian
June 18, 2007
Senate Bill No. 528 should really be called "How The California Legislature Takes Property Away Piecemeal Without The Guilt of Eminent Domain."
Senate Bill No. 528, does just that, it pimp’s every homeowner association in California by disenfranchising titleholders who pay for the fraud being perpetrated on us right now by our legislature.
Senate Bill No. 528 nullifies Civil Code Section 1363.05, the Common Interest Development Open Meeting Act. This Senate Bill all but voids what little protections titleholders in these orsaken hell holes called homeowner associations ("Assoc" for short).
Senate Bill No. 528 unilaterally disenfranchises the physically challenged; anyone who owns property but live elsewhere; anyone who travels; anyone who takes vacations; anyone with a job or with a busy schedule; anyone who has to prepare documentation prior to the meeting; and anyone who wants to protect their assets by attending an association board of directors meeting.
Senate Bill No. 528 elevates the status of third party vendors by injecting vendors into the shoes and/or positions of board directors by giving them an equal footing at Open Meetings. These third party vendors are EMPLOYEES of the association, just like the vendors who clean out the sewers, plant the plants, spread fertilizer, clean out the plumbing -- legally a management company is no different than any other third party VENDOR. ALL third party vendors, management companies included, have a vested interest in their CONTRACTS and PAYCHECKS and getting PAID.
Titleholders have a VESTED INTEREST IN OUR PROPERTY that we PAID MONEY FOR. IT IS OUR MONEY THAT PAYS THOSE CONTRACTS!
SENATE BILL NO. 528 STATES:
"The act also requires that notice of the time and place of a meeting be given to members at least four (4) days prior to the meeting, except in the case of an emergency meeting, as described."
SENATE BILL NO. 528 DOES NOT TELL YOU:
Say what? Listen up kiddies, "just because the [Davis-Stupid] Act says it’s so, doesn’t make it so!"
That the initial "FOUR" day notice was meant for developers NOT for association boards of directors. The reason it was only 4-days, was because the units were sold very slowly and they were sold as the others continued to be built AND even if "many" units were sold, the developer kept control of the development because he was still receiving state subsidies and wanted and needed to CONTROL THE MONEY -- AND -- control the board because the common interest development had not yet been turned over to the owners pursuant to the California laws! That meant, the only people the developer really had to give notice to, (a) was himself; and (b) his crew or investors that SAT on HIS board. In THAT situation, 4 days might have been acceptable. I said: MIGHT.
Fast forward to today’s reality in homeowner associations: Here’s the new 4-day notice. A management company employee climbs up a telephone pole and posts the notice. Takes a picture of it. Rips the notice down. Board has its meeting. Owner complains. Management company employee, in a SWORN UNDER OATH affidavit, says, "I put the notice up. Here’s the picture. It was there, if they didn’t see it, that’s not my problem or the board’s problem." Hell, you can't make a dentist appoint in 4 days!
HOAATM MEMBERS WANT:
Fourteen (14) days notice of all homeowner association board of directors meetings. Anything short of that disenfranchises titleholders. Not only do we want 14 days minimum notice, we want PROOF you gave us notice!
HOAATM MEMBERS WANT:
We want Senator Aanestaad to understand that if we are physically challenged, or out of the area from our common interest development, or not able to make it to the telephone pole in 24 hours to look at that stupid notice for your stupid meeting, that you must give us enough time to have our nurses or attendants prepare us for that meeting, get us some transportation, so that we can be there. We want Senator Aanestaad to understand if we are at the other end of the state or have the flu, or in the hospital, or have classes, we need time and NOTICE to be able to make it back for a meeting.
We want Senator Aanestaad to understand that this so-called Senate Bill disenfranchises the physically challenged, while at the same time unilaterally removing what little protections PROPERTY OWNERS **MIGHT** HAVE HAD TO PROTECT THEIR HOMES.
HOAATM MEMBERS WANT:
Obviously this Honorable Senator is of a privileged class of individuals, because he could NOT possibly live under the regime of an association board infiltrated by third party interlopers who interfere with individual titleholder property rights and have the audacity to put in print what is in this Senate Bill No. 528.
HOAATM members want the Honorable Senator to understand that presently too many management companies have perfected the art of disenfranchising owners THROUGH the board of directors. One of the quickest ways of accomplishing this is by insisting the board of directors hold meetings at locations OTHER THAN THE COMMON INTEREST DEVELOPMENT!! This means, if meetings are held OFF or OUTSIDE of THE DEVELOPMENT, or AWAY FROM the development, 4-DAYS NOTICE IS RIDICULOUS -- thus making it impossible for owners to exercise their right to the Common Interest Development Open Meeting Act. It may be an impossibility for us to get there for a variety of reasons, including the fact that some will have to arrange transportation, arrange for care givers, babysitters, and so on.
SENATE BILL NO. 528 STATES:
This bill would require the above notice to contain the agenda for the meeting. It would prohibit the board of directors from discussing or taking action on any item at a non-emergency meeting unless the item was placed on the agenda included in the notice. The bill would provide that these provisions do not prohibit a resident who is not a member of the board from speaking on issues not on the agenda. The bill would also permit the board of directors, its managing agent, or its other agents or staff, to briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by a person speaking at a meeting, ask a question for clarification, make a brief announcement, or make a brief report on his or her own activities, as specified.
SENATE BILL NO. 528 DOES NOT TELL YOU:
No one in their right mind could take that paragraph seriously, it is so patently preposterous one must contain one’s self from saying, ARE YOU ****I*** SERIOUS? Right now, the titleholder letters I receive IN BULK COMPLAIN of constant interference from Assoc.. Attorneys, Ass. management companies, Ass. Board Directors WHILE the titleholder is "trying" to speak. That’s right, the t-i-t-l-e-h-o-l-d-e-r => is a person who paid m-o-n-e-y for p-r-o-p-e-r-t-y => this titleholder wants to protect his a-s-s-e-t -- you know -- that p-r-o-p-e-r-t-y that he PAID M-O-N-E-Y for that is located in a common interest development. This is likely the same titleholder who can’t get his board to answer his letters! The same titleholder who is sabotaged by management company personnel. This titleholder => who has a VESTED INTEREST IN HIS PROPERTY => wants to SAY something and the ONLY *TIME* he will get to say it, is at an duly NOTICED Open Meeting. [that now, thanks to YOU, will be reduced to 4 **** days notice] Now, the Honorable Senator wants to TAKE that from us.
HOAATM MEMBERS SAY:
Management companies need to conduct THEIR business ON THEIR OWN TIME (that's what they supposedly get paid for) -- AND NOT CONDUCT THEIR BUSINESS ON THE TIME ALLOCATED FOR OWNERS TO CONDUCT OUR BUSINESS. Keep management OUT of the association meetings -- they do not belong there. Hell! The next thing you know, management company personnel will want to sit on our board!
Management companies GET PAID to PERFORM under the terms of their contract -- letting management do business at Open Meetings will mean they are doing business on OUR time ===> AND, they will be getting paid DOUBLE what their contract terms state.
SENATE BILL NO. 528 DOES NOT TELL YOU:
The Senate Bill No. 528 states "nonemergency":
The only section of code in the entire Davis-Stupid Act that defines "emergency" is in the section that allows the board to SPECIALLY ASSESS (gee, that's a real surprise).
Civil Code Section 1366 states "This section does not limit assessment increases necessary for emergency situations."
In EVERY other section located in the Davis-Stupid Act, the word "emergency" is used as an escape hatch for the board to conduct meetings giving 4-day notice (if that) to circumvent holding an ACTUAL bona fide association board of directors meeting. Other than that, nowhere in the Davis–Stupid Act is EMERGENCY or NON-EMERGENCY DEFINED. So how the hell does the Senator expect the public to understand this slop that he has written and calls "LAW"?
HOAATM MEMBERS WANT:
We want to know if the Honorable Senator will be there when the Agenda is NOT FOLLOWED?
We want to know WHERE’S THE PENALTY AGAINST THE BOARD for not following the law?
We want the Honorable Senator Aanestaad to REMOVE the provision that allows third parties to speak at a HOMEOWNER MEETING on issues that are NOT on the agenda. If the Senator is making ONE EXCEPTION then he has nullified his own bill. If he has nullified his own bill, then he has a DUTY to the public to REMOVE his bill from the Senate lineup. He has a DUTY to be HONORABLE and KILL SENATE BILL 528.
SENATE BILL NO. 528 STATES:
This Senate Bill No. 528 would further permit the board of directors or a member of the board of directors, subject to rules or procedures of the board of directors, to provide a reference or factual information to its managing agent or other agents or staff, request its managing agent or other agents or staff to report back to the board of directors at a subsequent meeting or to place a matter of business on a future agenda, or direct its managing agent or other agents or staff to perform administrative tasks that are necessary to carry out these provisions. The bill would also make technical changes.
SENATE BILL NO. 528 DOES NOT TELL YOU:
This Senate Bill is a free-for-all, giving every board of director and their aiders and abettors a blank check to take over not only the association meeting, but the common interest development. Don’t laugh, read the DANGEROUS LEGAL EFFECT OF THE LANGUAGE of Aanastaad’s bill: "to provide a reference or factual information to its managing agent or other agents or staff, request its managing agent or other agents or staff to report back to the board of directors at a subsequent meeting or to place a matter of business on a future agenda, or direct its managing agent or other agents or staff to perform administrative tasks that are necessary to carry out these provisions. . ."
The bill states "The bill would also make technical changes." ==> OF COURSE NO ONE KNOWS WHAT THE HELL THE HONORABLE SENATOR IS REFERRING TO? Trick? No. That is INTENTIONAL.
HOAATM MEMBERS WANT:
WE WANT management company personnel OUT of OUR meetings.
WE WANT Assoc. board attorneys OUT of OUR meetings.
WE WANT Senator Aanestaad to do the honorable thing, and KILL THIS BILL. It is a BAD bill. It will NOT help homeowners.
SENATE BILL NO. 528 STATES:
". . . except as specified. . ." - and - ". . . as specified . . ." WHAT THE HELL DOES THAT MEAN?
HOAATM MEMBERS WANT:
WE WANT all STUPID language REMOVED from the Honorable Senator’s Senate Bill 528. The Honorable Senator Aanestaad cannot possibly justify language that is not self-explanatory.
The Honorable Senator Aanestaad cannot justify language that makes the public do something that is "open to interpretation."
The Honorable Senator Aanestaad cannot justify forcing an entire segment of our society to live by his incompetence.
WE WANT the Honorable Senator Aanestaad to PLEASE be present when my Assoc. board says these fatal, lethal, damning words: "as specified, so passed."
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
75,257 HOAATM Members Want Senator Aanestaad to Get this Message: Stop Messing With Our Property Rights!!!
by Donie Vanitzian, J.D., Arbitrator
(c)2007 Vanitzian
June 18, 2007
Senate Bill No. 528 should really be called "How The California Legislature Takes Property Away Piecemeal Without The Guilt of Eminent Domain."
Senate Bill No. 528, does just that, it pimp’s every homeowner association in California by disenfranchising titleholders who pay for the fraud being perpetrated on us right now by our legislature.
Senate Bill No. 528 nullifies Civil Code Section 1363.05, the Common Interest Development Open Meeting Act. This Senate Bill all but voids what little protections titleholders in these orsaken hell holes called homeowner associations ("Assoc" for short).
Senate Bill No. 528 unilaterally disenfranchises the physically challenged; anyone who owns property but live elsewhere; anyone who travels; anyone who takes vacations; anyone with a job or with a busy schedule; anyone who has to prepare documentation prior to the meeting; and anyone who wants to protect their assets by attending an association board of directors meeting.
Senate Bill No. 528 elevates the status of third party vendors by injecting vendors into the shoes and/or positions of board directors by giving them an equal footing at Open Meetings. These third party vendors are EMPLOYEES of the association, just like the vendors who clean out the sewers, plant the plants, spread fertilizer, clean out the plumbing -- legally a management company is no different than any other third party VENDOR. ALL third party vendors, management companies included, have a vested interest in their CONTRACTS and PAYCHECKS and getting PAID.
Titleholders have a VESTED INTEREST IN OUR PROPERTY that we PAID MONEY FOR. IT IS OUR MONEY THAT PAYS THOSE CONTRACTS!
SENATE BILL NO. 528 STATES:
"The act also requires that notice of the time and place of a meeting be given to members at least four (4) days prior to the meeting, except in the case of an emergency meeting, as described."
SENATE BILL NO. 528 DOES NOT TELL YOU:
Say what? Listen up kiddies, "just because the [Davis-Stupid] Act says it’s so, doesn’t make it so!"
That the initial "FOUR" day notice was meant for developers NOT for association boards of directors. The reason it was only 4-days, was because the units were sold very slowly and they were sold as the others continued to be built AND even if "many" units were sold, the developer kept control of the development because he was still receiving state subsidies and wanted and needed to CONTROL THE MONEY -- AND -- control the board because the common interest development had not yet been turned over to the owners pursuant to the California laws! That meant, the only people the developer really had to give notice to, (a) was himself; and (b) his crew or investors that SAT on HIS board. In THAT situation, 4 days might have been acceptable. I said: MIGHT.
Fast forward to today’s reality in homeowner associations: Here’s the new 4-day notice. A management company employee climbs up a telephone pole and posts the notice. Takes a picture of it. Rips the notice down. Board has its meeting. Owner complains. Management company employee, in a SWORN UNDER OATH affidavit, says, "I put the notice up. Here’s the picture. It was there, if they didn’t see it, that’s not my problem or the board’s problem." Hell, you can't make a dentist appoint in 4 days!
HOAATM MEMBERS WANT:
Fourteen (14) days notice of all homeowner association board of directors meetings. Anything short of that disenfranchises titleholders. Not only do we want 14 days minimum notice, we want PROOF you gave us notice!
HOAATM MEMBERS WANT:
We want Senator Aanestaad to understand that if we are physically challenged, or out of the area from our common interest development, or not able to make it to the telephone pole in 24 hours to look at that stupid notice for your stupid meeting, that you must give us enough time to have our nurses or attendants prepare us for that meeting, get us some transportation, so that we can be there. We want Senator Aanestaad to understand if we are at the other end of the state or have the flu, or in the hospital, or have classes, we need time and NOTICE to be able to make it back for a meeting.
We want Senator Aanestaad to understand that this so-called Senate Bill disenfranchises the physically challenged, while at the same time unilaterally removing what little protections PROPERTY OWNERS **MIGHT** HAVE HAD TO PROTECT THEIR HOMES.
HOAATM MEMBERS WANT:
Obviously this Honorable Senator is of a privileged class of individuals, because he could NOT possibly live under the regime of an association board infiltrated by third party interlopers who interfere with individual titleholder property rights and have the audacity to put in print what is in this Senate Bill No. 528.
HOAATM members want the Honorable Senator to understand that presently too many management companies have perfected the art of disenfranchising owners THROUGH the board of directors. One of the quickest ways of accomplishing this is by insisting the board of directors hold meetings at locations OTHER THAN THE COMMON INTEREST DEVELOPMENT!! This means, if meetings are held OFF or OUTSIDE of THE DEVELOPMENT, or AWAY FROM the development, 4-DAYS NOTICE IS RIDICULOUS -- thus making it impossible for owners to exercise their right to the Common Interest Development Open Meeting Act. It may be an impossibility for us to get there for a variety of reasons, including the fact that some will have to arrange transportation, arrange for care givers, babysitters, and so on.
SENATE BILL NO. 528 STATES:
This bill would require the above notice to contain the agenda for the meeting. It would prohibit the board of directors from discussing or taking action on any item at a non-emergency meeting unless the item was placed on the agenda included in the notice. The bill would provide that these provisions do not prohibit a resident who is not a member of the board from speaking on issues not on the agenda. The bill would also permit the board of directors, its managing agent, or its other agents or staff, to briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by a person speaking at a meeting, ask a question for clarification, make a brief announcement, or make a brief report on his or her own activities, as specified.
SENATE BILL NO. 528 DOES NOT TELL YOU:
No one in their right mind could take that paragraph seriously, it is so patently preposterous one must contain one’s self from saying, ARE YOU ****I*** SERIOUS? Right now, the titleholder letters I receive IN BULK COMPLAIN of constant interference from Assoc.. Attorneys, Ass. management companies, Ass. Board Directors WHILE the titleholder is "trying" to speak. That’s right, the t-i-t-l-e-h-o-l-d-e-r => is a person who paid m-o-n-e-y for p-r-o-p-e-r-t-y => this titleholder wants to protect his a-s-s-e-t -- you know -- that p-r-o-p-e-r-t-y that he PAID M-O-N-E-Y for that is located in a common interest development. This is likely the same titleholder who can’t get his board to answer his letters! The same titleholder who is sabotaged by management company personnel. This titleholder => who has a VESTED INTEREST IN HIS PROPERTY => wants to SAY something and the ONLY *TIME* he will get to say it, is at an duly NOTICED Open Meeting. [that now, thanks to YOU, will be reduced to 4 **** days notice] Now, the Honorable Senator wants to TAKE that from us.
HOAATM MEMBERS SAY:
Management companies need to conduct THEIR business ON THEIR OWN TIME (that's what they supposedly get paid for) -- AND NOT CONDUCT THEIR BUSINESS ON THE TIME ALLOCATED FOR OWNERS TO CONDUCT OUR BUSINESS. Keep management OUT of the association meetings -- they do not belong there. Hell! The next thing you know, management company personnel will want to sit on our board!
Management companies GET PAID to PERFORM under the terms of their contract -- letting management do business at Open Meetings will mean they are doing business on OUR time ===> AND, they will be getting paid DOUBLE what their contract terms state.
SENATE BILL NO. 528 DOES NOT TELL YOU:
The Senate Bill No. 528 states "nonemergency":
The only section of code in the entire Davis-Stupid Act that defines "emergency" is in the section that allows the board to SPECIALLY ASSESS (gee, that's a real surprise).
Civil Code Section 1366 states "This section does not limit assessment increases necessary for emergency situations."
In EVERY other section located in the Davis-Stupid Act, the word "emergency" is used as an escape hatch for the board to conduct meetings giving 4-day notice (if that) to circumvent holding an ACTUAL bona fide association board of directors meeting. Other than that, nowhere in the Davis–Stupid Act is EMERGENCY or NON-EMERGENCY DEFINED. So how the hell does the Senator expect the public to understand this slop that he has written and calls "LAW"?
HOAATM MEMBERS WANT:
We want to know if the Honorable Senator will be there when the Agenda is NOT FOLLOWED?
We want to know WHERE’S THE PENALTY AGAINST THE BOARD for not following the law?
We want the Honorable Senator Aanestaad to REMOVE the provision that allows third parties to speak at a HOMEOWNER MEETING on issues that are NOT on the agenda. If the Senator is making ONE EXCEPTION then he has nullified his own bill. If he has nullified his own bill, then he has a DUTY to the public to REMOVE his bill from the Senate lineup. He has a DUTY to be HONORABLE and KILL SENATE BILL 528.
SENATE BILL NO. 528 STATES:
This Senate Bill No. 528 would further permit the board of directors or a member of the board of directors, subject to rules or procedures of the board of directors, to provide a reference or factual information to its managing agent or other agents or staff, request its managing agent or other agents or staff to report back to the board of directors at a subsequent meeting or to place a matter of business on a future agenda, or direct its managing agent or other agents or staff to perform administrative tasks that are necessary to carry out these provisions. The bill would also make technical changes.
SENATE BILL NO. 528 DOES NOT TELL YOU:
This Senate Bill is a free-for-all, giving every board of director and their aiders and abettors a blank check to take over not only the association meeting, but the common interest development. Don’t laugh, read the DANGEROUS LEGAL EFFECT OF THE LANGUAGE of Aanastaad’s bill: "to provide a reference or factual information to its managing agent or other agents or staff, request its managing agent or other agents or staff to report back to the board of directors at a subsequent meeting or to place a matter of business on a future agenda, or direct its managing agent or other agents or staff to perform administrative tasks that are necessary to carry out these provisions. . ."
The bill states "The bill would also make technical changes." ==> OF COURSE NO ONE KNOWS WHAT THE HELL THE HONORABLE SENATOR IS REFERRING TO? Trick? No. That is INTENTIONAL.
HOAATM MEMBERS WANT:
WE WANT management company personnel OUT of OUR meetings.
WE WANT Assoc. board attorneys OUT of OUR meetings.
WE WANT Senator Aanestaad to do the honorable thing, and KILL THIS BILL. It is a BAD bill. It will NOT help homeowners.
SENATE BILL NO. 528 STATES:
". . . except as specified. . ." - and - ". . . as specified . . ." WHAT THE HELL DOES THAT MEAN?
HOAATM MEMBERS WANT:
WE WANT all STUPID language REMOVED from the Honorable Senator’s Senate Bill 528. The Honorable Senator Aanestaad cannot possibly justify language that is not self-explanatory.
The Honorable Senator Aanestaad cannot justify language that makes the public do something that is "open to interpretation."
The Honorable Senator Aanestaad cannot justify forcing an entire segment of our society to live by his incompetence.
WE WANT the Honorable Senator Aanestaad to PLEASE be present when my Assoc. board says these fatal, lethal, damning words: "as specified, so passed."
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
Sunday, June 17, 2007
CZ Master Association Harkins (Attorney) Letter - Zipperman's (CZ President's) First Test?
CZ Master Association Harkins (Attorney) Letter - Zipperman's (CZ President's) First Test?
Joe Morabito, Former member CZ Masters Association Board of Directors.
June 16, 2007
Mr. Harkins: I am in receipt of your letter dated June 12, 2007 in reference to the requests that I made concerning our last CZ Board Election, obtaining the CZ Master’s financial records and the Sports League Roster specific to use of our Sports Park . Let me address each issue in response.
Election Records: The Association’s denial of my request to see results by district count makes it impossible for Members to verify the validity of our election tally. Therefore, on principle alone, I for one do not believe that the results are honest and correct because they are not verifiable. This corrupt system done in secret much the same as occurs in Communist China, Vietnam and Cuba is UNACCEPTIBLE in a country fighting to establish democracy overseas. The only reason I will not pursue this now with state authorities and/or the courts is because it appears that we have a new CZ Board committed to direct popular elections. However, be assured if we don’t have direct popular elections by 2008, I personally will organize the monies necessary to pursue court action to strike down the current corrupt electoral system. Enough is enough.
Sports League Roster: The Association’s refusal to make public the Sport League Roster to properly demonstrate the percentage of CZ children utilizing the facility primarily maintained at CZ Member expense makes it obvious that fewer than 50% of the kids playing at our private park are outsiders. If that is not the case, I invite the CZ Board to prove it!!! This information is not protected by Executive Session privilege, or any other rights of privacy since there is no issue of identify theft involved. And, it is impossible to audit fees paid to the Association by the Leagues without this information. Hence, if it is not provided, I will pursue this matter with state authorities under my right to audit the financials of the Association.
Clearly, CZ Members are providing a substantial subsidy to the Sports Leagues and outsider families at the same time the CZ Board raised our dues twice in two years as a result of blatant fiscal mismanagement. This is again UNACCEPTIBLE. The Association continues to hide material information from our Members because it does not want us to see the facts. However, in hiding that information, the case is made that CZ Members continue to experience dues increases because of all the subsidies going to outsiders. And, the lack of transparency concerning the business of the Association makes it clear that serious financial audit is necessary.
General Ledger: Since CZ Members who may be interested in seeing the General Ledger and inspecting the books also work for a living. I would like to arrange a series of meetings after 6:00 pm in the evenings so that others may participate in this process. Otherwise, one copy of the 2006 General Ledger would also be acceptable. Please advise me if this is workable. If the Association refuses my request, it will be clear that the Association by its actions and deeds continues to stone wall and make it as difficult as possible for Members to gain an understanding of the Association’s business dealings which is again UNACCEPTIBLE. In an era of Sarbanes Oaxley motivated by the Enron and WorldCom debacles, it is time for the CZ Board to recognize that failure to share information reflects on them and perpetuates the perception of a culture of corruption and deceit.
Mr. Zipperman has stated he wants to advance communications and transparency with our Members as one of his goals, yet given the first opportunity under his leadership, pertinent information is denied to our Members. Well Steve, here is your first test and it is Pass/Fail.
Hi Joe:
This response is diametrically opposed to the tone expressed by the board’s president during the first 2007-2008- CZ board meeting.
Unless the board reconsiders your request, the first test will be deemed a total failure.
When you get a chance, I would appreciate it if you post a copy of the latest Harkins letter for our collection -- Buzz
In the spirit of complete transparency, I will post the Harkin’s letter this week. However, you are right. Mr. Zipperman cannot support transparency and then given the first opportunity deny a request for information. This really is a Pass/Fail test for the new CZ Board. And, when the CZ Board refuses to provide information, we have to assume the worst case scenario. What other choice is there when elected officials at any level seek to hide the facts? The CAPO Schools maintained a Culture of Corruption that has resulted in indictments. We don’t need that same culture in Coto. Joe Morabito
Hi Joe:
....the bare-bones least, residents have a right to know how the Zipperman/Yocham board decided on your request. Was it a unanimous decision? If not, what was the breakdown?- Buzz
Since this involved a letter from James Harkins, I assume the discussion with the Board took place in Executive Session. Therefore, if there ever was a vote, it will never see the light of day. And, it really does not matter. Obviously, at least three CZ Board Members concurred that the Association should continue to hide the facts from our Members which continues to be troubling. When the facts are hidden we have to assume a worst case scenario; otherwise why hide the information? Obviously, there are facts the Board does not want us to see because they could show that Board actions were inappropriate. What else can be assumed? The Sports League roster is a real case in point. When I saw those numbers years ago about 50% of the kids playing on our fields were Coto residents. Since Coto has matured, I am willing to bet that today that number is much less. The Board does not want us to see the truth because it will demonstrate even more clearly the huge subsidy going to outsiders. And, if the Sports League is objecting to publication of this data, it is because they know the truth as well. It then becomes a conspiracy to deny our Members this information. It is starting to smell like the corruption in the CAPO Schools and that is not good.
At a minimum, the Board should publish the percentage of CZ Members playing on our fields. If they don’t know the number, they are in violation of their fiduciary responsibility to properly manage that major facility. If they do know the number and won’t reveal it, then they are hiding the facts from us on purpose in order to hide the subsidy from us. Either scenario is unacceptable. JM
…and of course that is the circular reasoning that has created in part, this lack of transparency in the first place: “ I am committed to establishing a dialogue with residents, but I cannot discuss anything, because what you asked was discussed in executive sessions” – or worse yet, use stupid lawyer letters to “interpret pertinent laws an regulations”.
Transparency should be clear as Evian bottled water- executive sessions and “attorney-client privilege” not withstanding, as these are mere excuses, not clear as mud, as is the case with your request.--Buzz
The CZ Board needs to stop hiding behind legal advice designed to keep information from our Members and open up the books for all to see. If there is nothing to hide, then there will be no consequence to more transparency. If there is something to hide, then shame on all of them. Fleming and those long time Board Members in Capo Schools are a bunch of crooks who maintained sweet heart deals for their family members and an “enemies list” to pursue critics by punishing their children. In doing so, they are guilty of misappropriation of funds. What is worse, I think the district may be paying for Fleming’s legal fees, which means tax payer money which should be going to support Capo Schools is going to keep Fleming out of jail. Some of those characters have been indicted and my guess is that more will follow. All of them should GO TO JAIL for maintaining the culture of corruption that existed in the Capo Schools. CZ Board Members need to get the message. We don’t need or want a culture of corruption in CZ. CZ Members have a right to complete transparency concerning the business dealings of CZ. If there is nothing to hide, what is the problem anyway? JM
Hi Joe:
You know how ridiculous it sounds for a board member to point to “audited financials”, prepared by an independent auditor – then you ask the auditor a simple question and you are referred back to the board – is that transparency?
It is no secret that the IRS has had growing concerns regarding conflicts of interest, relationships among directors, directors, or friends of directors serving the organization as vendors, and the resulting effect.
On April 26, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), in a significant tax planning and governance development for exempt organizations, released new "FAQs" supplementing the instructions for the 2006 Form 990 (that is, the Form 990 used as the tax return for the fiscal year beginning in 2006).
This development is relevant to all Section 501(c) organizations, including those recognized as exempt under Sections 501(c)(3), (c)(4) and (c)(6).
By law, nonprofits must make their last three years' 990s available to anyone who asks
The IRS hopes the new form will make nonprofits more transparent, instead of just providing financial information, the new front page includes details about the nonprofit's mission, governance, employment and the top salaries it pays.
The IRS encourages the (nonprofit) sector, the press and the public to comment
The FAQs are available on the IRS website: http://www.irs. gov/pub/irs- tege/2006_ form_990_ qas_final. pdf ...Buzz
It is very troubling that CZ Board Members continue to hide requested information from our Members on just about any premise they can hang their hat on. You will see when I provide the letter from Harkins that he is citing privacy issues specific to showing me the Sports League roster so we can determine how many CZ children are actually playing on our fields. Obviously, this is not about social security numbers or any other information that has anything to do with privacy issues. The list can even be provided with a simple CZ Member Name and Non-CZ Member Name listing. We don’t need addresses at all. After two dues increases in two years, this is really about our CZ Board intentionally hiding the number of outsiders playing on our fields because they do not want us to see the amount of subsidy that is being provided to non-CZ Members. And, as a result, we must now assume that it is really a very small number of CZ children playing on those fields because otherwise why would they withhold this information particularly if it actually made the case for the subsidies. At a minimum, we should be able to see the information by percentage assuming the CZ Board even knows who is playing on our fields which is their responsibility. In addition, if the CZ Board is going to attempt to get any funding from the county to maintain our Sports Park which absolutely should be happening, this information must be made public anyway.
Most important, it is impossible to examine the “financial records” of the Association as is required by law when requested by any Member without that information. So, if I don’t get the information to properly substantiate the fees paid by the Sports Leagues, I will file a complaint with state authorities. This is the very reason the state keeps passing laws to “micro manage” homeowner associations. HOA Boards and their minions all over the state continue to lie, hide information from their Members and play games with elections. These laws are the result of continuous complaints against HOA Boards and their minions that are guilty of shenanigans. Why is there a lack of transparency in CZ? The only answer must be because the current CZ Board has something to hide. There is no other logical explanation. Joe Morabito
As a result of the barrage of nasty lawyer letters sent out, the board has now realized that filing complaints with state authorities is like blowing in the wind. Consider that we have filed complaints with the bar against seven – count them – seven attorneys! – all involved in the same issue, including the fabrication of evidence. What did the bar do? Zilch, nada – they are waiting for results of a pending law suit, then the Domino Effect will take over.
Your premise is right about legislation. It is time to bring in the feds. Buzz
In reality complaint letters coming from many HOA Members serve to stimulate more laws micro managing HOA’s. Politicians only move when they feel the heat of screaming constituents. For better or worse that is our system. And, in really egregious situations like CZ’s corrupt, Communist electoral process, if it is not changed soon, court action will be the only recourse available to strike it down. Hopefully, that last resort costly action will not be necessary since it appears that the Zipperman Board is committed to bringing free and fair direct popular elections to Coto. At least, I sincerely hope that will be the case. JM
P.S. Zipperman who speaks of more transparency as a goal, when given the first opportunity to put words into action has thus far failed the test. It is very disappointing indeed. Actions speak much louder than words and so far anyway, the Zipperman Board is stone walling our legitimate request for information. What has changed?
Advertisement
Select Blogzz & click icon
BlogSpot FeedBurner CotoBlogzz BraveNet Y!360
Archived Issues
General Information
HOA Resources
Emergency numbers
Public Safety Resources
Crime Watch
Sex Offenders in the Area
Real Time Traffic Report
LA Times Orange County
Subscribe
- What is RSS?
Area Links
ORANGE COUNTY BLOGS:
R
To subscribe/unsubscribe to the CotoBuzz Journal or send Letters to the Editor : click here or send email to:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)