Who Let's the Coto Dogs Out?

Posted By CotoBlozz 04-05-2010 09"30 PM


Hello All: I had a good laugh reading the CZ’s newsletter related to building a Dog Park in Coto so “dogs could run free”. We don’t even have a multi-generational park in Coto so Seniors (soon to be me) can walk free. What I want to know is when did dogs start paying CZ dues? Certainly the dogs that reside in CZ must pay dues to warrant the dedication of a park to them. What other logic could there be for building a Dog Park on one of the few areas of common area left in Coto that should instead be dedicated to a multi-generational park. And, why do we need a Dog Park anyway, when we have miles of horse trails that can be used to walk dogs on very long leashes so that they can run and crap free.

It would appear that the CZ Board has a priority problem. The demographics in Coto are changing. We are getting older, fatter and grayer; yet we have a Sports Park monopolized by a small number of CZ residents and Outsiders, who pay almost nothing to use the facility and now potentially a Dog Park , which make absolutely no sense. CZ Members are paying hundreds of thousands of dollars each year to maintain facilities that are of no use to them and that includes the Tot lots here and there. This is just another huge subsidy for a few hundred members that are likely to use a Dog Park . To put it bluntly, it will result in a bunch of crap and more maintenance expense and liability for CZ, when we have no multi-generational park to properly reflect our demographic change. Now we really can say that Coto is going to the Dogs. At least we don’t have to worry about Seniors related to crap because eventually we will all be in diapers.

And, this whole business about cityhood, annexation by RSM, or forming a Community Service District is a waste of CZ time and money. Coto is never going to be a city because we don’t have the sales tax revenues to support, or warrant a city. And, it would be a ridiculous overlay of government that makes no sense given that everything in CZ is controlled by our HOA and that cannot change. The only reason for a Community Service District is get some money out of the Village People and the Estates for traffic enforcement so maybe there is some logic to that one; though there are other ways to make that happen by annual transponder charges anyway. Ultimately, the county will probably bribe RSM into annexing Coto; though I think we would have to vote on it and most CZ residents would probably vote NO fearing some kind of city tax. So really, we don’t need to do much of anything related to these issues. CZ can hire the CHP within our dues structure. We don’t need a government overlay of any kind to make that happen. I just hope the CZ Board is not wasting money on this issue. It is a road to no where and that horse has been beaten dead by several prior Boards. Joe Morabito, former member CZ Master Association board of directors

Hi Joe:

As a reluctant pet sitter for some seven years now, I have become aware that to properly take care of a pet requires a heavy commitment. I have also become a student of pet owner behavior, including handling dogs on a leash. I am now convinced that the way most pets are treated is inhumane, so much so, that I would not mind having a law making it illegal to own pets. So I can see validity in the argument that dogs should run free.

What is wrong is the implementation. The CZ board again, fails to make a compelling argument for just another entitlement initiative benefiting a small number of pet owners. Now, consider that if I want the pet I am now sitting to run free, I use the trails. This is not only good for the pet, but it is good for me. The pet gets to experience new sights, sounds and smells and not just smell other dogs, while I get the benefit of a good jog, as opposed to a pet owners taking a pet to a park while sipping a cup of coffee. My approach requires that I do most of the work. The latter resembles more a welfare program where someone sits there waiting to get a check from the government. Akin to the ObamaCare – where the only injury that is not covered is back-busting trying to stay afloat with an honest day’s pay for an honest day’s work.

Even worse, the CZ board keeps spending just like the federal government, as if the more it spends, the more it “saves”, or some other twisted logic, which I fail to understand. – So, I do not agree that the CZ board has a priority problem. It knows its priorities well. It knows it has created a fiscal tsunami, and as Rham Emmanuel says, let’s not let a crisis go to waste: That is, the CZ wants to spend every drop, until it gets what it wants – cityhood.

Now, with the cityhood issue is a similar story. I am convinced that California is under siege, not only from the Triple Threat: 1) unions in the public sector, 2) Parasitic bureaucracies , such as LAFCO, CLRC, AQB and the Redundant Commission on Redundancy – yes, there is one that takes laws and tries to make sure there is no redundancy – these are in essence tax-payer funded unregistered lobbyists 3) Registered Lobbyists – lobbyist outnumber lawmakers in Sacramento 8-1.

If you think that Coto de Caza has supplier management issues, you need not look further than Rancho Santa Margarita – City council has no idea how the Sheriff is spending some $8.5 million year and there are other allegations about how contracts are approved.

Buzz:

When I get my bocce court, low impact walking trail and place to play chess with old guys, then and only then can the Dogs can have a Dog Park . Or better yet, when the Dogs in Coto start paying CZ dues, then they can have a Dog Park . We have miles of horse trails for animals. That is enough already!! Joe Morabito