Bell Syndrome Pandemic Sweeping Southern California

Posted By CotoBlogzz 07-30-2010

Apparently the Bell Syndrome is a pandemic sweeping through Southern California.  The Bell Syndrome is when a parasitic bureaucracy becomes irrational and its decision-making focuses strictly on self-preservation, not unlike the smoke-filled back room negotiations which concocted Stupack’s Soul Sale, the Cornhuskers Kickback, the Teachers Payola, the Union Bribe or the Louisiana Purchase in order to pass Health Care Reform – more like Parasitic Bureaucracy Feed Reform.  Or what is going on in Agoura Hills’ Morrison Ranch Homeowners Association, where the board is in essence funding a $1.000 fence for a $1 horse, not to mention the parasitic bureaucracy passing as City Hall in the City of Bell, California, City Manager Robert Rizzo, Assistant City Manager Angela Spaccia, and Police Chief Randy Adams were allowed to have a combined salary of more than $1.6 million!

Then there is Laguna Wood's governance, which allowed property management company PCM to issue an Ultimatum, telling the community in essence,  to Shut Up or else, until the Third Mutual Board decided to file a lawsuit.  Did that take care of business?  Hardly!  First, the United and Golden Rain Foundation (GRF) boards seem reluctance to not only joint the Third’s lawsuit, but they are resisting joining the suit in an apparent conflict of interest:  Legal counsel for United represents both the board and the property management company!

It does not stop here, however, Janet Price, a defendant in the lawsuit, is attentively being listened to by United and GRF pertaining to financial matters – issues front and center of the Third lawsuit.  Done?  Hardly.  The property management company defiantly issues a press release, attempting to qualify other service providers, local governance be dammed – prompting a number of questions from residents compiled by Katie McDaniel shown below:

1.       While it may be a good idea for a service provider to have a pool of other service providers, the supplier management functions should not be delegated by local governance.  Further, as described by the press release, it enables the "Bell Syndrome", or a "pay to play" process that may be extremely difficult to detect.

 

2.       The press release raises several questions that local governance using PCM must ask and be responded to.  For starters, is the press release another ultimatum to local governance, which says, you will do as PCM say, or else?

 

3.       WTF?????????????????????????

 

4.       More and more management control. Less and less board oversight. The tail is wagging the dog again.

 

5.       Who’s kidding whom? Is this just to squeeze even more money out of vendors and us by using the chosen few?

 

6.              Where is this in the matrix? Where the matrix refers to the matrix system of “Delegation of Actions and Commitments” written by Kathryn Freshley and passed by the Third board at the last board meeting

And the response from the Orange County District Attorney’s Office, you might ask? “Please report your information to your local police department.” – now compare that response to the response from California Attorney General Jerry Brown to the City of Bell Scandal: He is not only looking into the city affairs but State Controller Johns Chiang has launched an audit of Bell’ s finances, on top of Attorney General Jerry Brown's investigation prompting us to conclude that Palmetto Bugs don’t like sunlight.  

Makes you wonder where Attorney General Jerry Brown has been when his office receives hundreds of complaints, daily,  from homeowners, about similar issues.    

Perhaps once discovery starts in the Third lawsuit, the Orange County District Attorney’s Office may be compelled to find some interest in the case, and we will see other Palmetto Bugs scurrying around truing to get out of the sun light.

Coto de Caza's Army is No Gideon's Army

Or when numbers can and do lie.

Posted by CotoBlogzz 07-30-2010

When Gideon was first summoned to fight the Midianites, his army was 33,000 strong, but  The LORD said to Gideon, "The people with you are too many for me to give the Midianites into their hand, lest Israel boast over me, saying, 'My own hand has saved me.”  After a few boot camp tests, Gideon is left with only 300  good men to fight the battle facing overwhelming odds.

Arguable not the hottest pepper in the harvest, Gideon did not give up and instead listened to God  who said he would give him victory (Judges 6:16) and(Judges 7:17).  God confuses Gideon’s enemies snatching victory for Gideon's army from the jaws of defeat.

Then there is the case of figures stating facts,  but liars figuring.

In still other instances, there is a case when numbers can and do lie.

We have characterized the CZ Masters Association’s decision to open the Yocham/Varo Dog Park- a park for the mid-sized, neutered, medicated CZ dog -  a most bone-headed decision.  Responding to resident criticism, the CZ Master Association published new rules and regulations to govern the use of the park, emphasizing that it is for the sole use of CZ residents and guests.  Bruce Banigan, CZ Master Association director, asserts that some 500 families use the park or roughly 15% of the residents.

There are a number of most obvious flaws with the latest CZ excuses, err....arguments.  First, Banigan is no Gideon.  That is,  the assertion that  500 CZ families are using  the Dog Park is analogous to VP Biden’s job creation numbers, and not the filtering of the trivial many to the vital few. The dog park barely holds 12 dogs at a time.  Further, an informal survey shows that no more than 10 dogs are at the park at any one time, and only during the peak period of 5:00 – 7:30 pm - where is the 500 number coming from?

Secondly, even though the dog park is to be used by CZ residents and guests, what about other facilities which are several factors more expensive to maintain, such as the horse trails, where only roughly 1% of the CZ residents use, while non-residents usually wander off the trails leaving poop trails of their own, and pay zilch for maintenance, but at the same time demand right-of-way at any time.  Not to mention the Sports Park. But what are $3 million /year subsidies for a parasitic bureaucracy afflicted by the Bell Syndrome?

When Hate Crime and other Numbers can and Do Lie

Posted By CotoBlogzz 07-30-2010

Last  week,  Attorney General Jerry Brown released what he characterized an "encouraging  2009 annual report showing that hate crimes in California fell by more than 20% last year”, but  warned that “ we are still a long way from ending bigotry and prejudice.”  According to the Attorney General, the decline in hate crimes reflects an overall drop on all types of crime in California.  At about the same time, the Anti-Defamation League reported a sharp increase in hate crime  incidents in California last year.  Amanda Susskind, regional director for the organization  said the trend was troubling and and blamed the increase in anti-Semitic incidents, on the confluence of the election of President Obama, the recession and the Israeli incursion into the Gaza Strip. 

Is this a case of figures don’t lie, but liars figure?  Or is this a case of only seeing what you want to see?  Or what about another plausible explanation for the diametrically opposed views?  Hold your thoughts:

Last month we reported on the waste of tax-payer money associated with Attorney General Gerry Brown's 2009  Legalized Murder Protection Act Special Report.  In all fairness, the AG’s office is simply doing what the parasitic California Legislature intended when it enacted  Bill 780, the 2002 Reproductive Rights Law Enforcement Act requiring the Attorney General to collect and analyze information on crimes that violate reproductive rights and submit a report to the Legislature (California Penal Code section 13777), where section 13776(a) of the California Penal Code defines an anti-reproductive-rights crime as a crime “committed partly or wholly because the victim is a reproductive health services client, provider, or assistant, or a crime that is partly or wholly intended to intimidate the victim, any other person or entity, or any class of persons.” - view this as the Legalized Murder Protection Act (LMPA).  In this case, there were some 10 or so reported cases

Now, in looking at traffic incidents and crime & vandalism trends in certain communities in Orange County, we have been able to establish predictable  cause-and-effect for traffic incidents using California Highway Patrol statistics.  On the other hand, trending crime and vandalism using Orange County Sheriff Department data is a bit more challenging:  In one case, a couple of years back, we were able to trace major quarter-to-quarter variances on system change-over at the department.  We have been unable to trace the last major discrepancy in the data for the second quarter of 2010.  The point is that unless local law enforcement data collection is driven by a closed loop corrective action system where the data is not only collected locally, but also corrective action is taken and documented immediately, there is no guarantee that as the data flows up to the California Justice Department, it is remotely comparable to what goes on in real life.   View the current system more as a case of GIGO – garbage-in-garbage-out.

Worse, the system as currently implemented, lends itself to corruption and or political manipulation – no unlike the recent case of  deputies in the Los Angeles Central Jail using fake bar codes to check in, and managers being clueless this was going on.

So, the question as to who is right?  California’s AG Jerry Brown, when he says that hate crimes are going down,  or the Anti-Defamation League when it reports hate-crimes are going up?  The answer may be both are right.  Most plausible explanation is that the AG is using un-checked, unreliable data from local law enforcement agencies, whereas the Anti-Defamation League is more provincial and hence has a better handle on the data.  In any case, a definitive answer can only be had when the law enforcement union allows for a closed loop corrective action in all its data gathering and retrieval processes.

The Bell Syndrome Spotted at Morrison Ranch

Posted By CotoBlogzz  07-29-2010


Agoura Hills, CA - Once the spotlight turned to the City of Bell, California, seems like all Bells went off - the preliminary conclusion is that Palmetto Bugs do not like the sun light, perhaps because it is a good disinfectant.


Consider that as soon as the inflated salaries of certain Bell employees became public knowledge, City Hall decided to reduce its own salaries!  Just last week,  Bell's  city council accepted the resignations of City Manager Robert Rizzo, Assistant City Manager Angela Spaccia, and Police Chief Randy Adams, who reportedly had a combined salary of more than $1.6 million, for a most insignificant city in California!

In this election year, California's Attorney General  Jerry Brown has jumped in, and is looking into the whole affairs.  You have got to wonder where the AG has been when the office receives daily complaints from homeowners, about similar issues.  Even State Controller John Chiang is jumping into the mix -  the same State Controller who has refused the Governators' orders to make California fiscally viable again.  In this case, Chiang has launched an audit  Bell;s  finances, on top of Attorney General Jerry Brown's investigation.


At first, we thought that perhaps what is going on at the Morrison Ranch Homeowners Association was a case of an incompetent board  funding a $1,000 fence to safeguard a $1.00 horse.  We have changed our mind - seems more like the community has been afflicted with the Bell Syndrome, such as in the City of Bell - the Bell Syndrome is when a parasitic bureaucracy becomes irrational and its decision-making focuses strictly on self-preservation.


You can make up your own minds below:  See the post reproduced below, with permission, from resident Jan Gerstel.  We asked the association to comment on Mr. Gerstel's view of the fact, but the association declined to comment>

Board Spends Over $200 to Challenge $0.13 Request for Document

This is a follow up to the “Board Behaving Very Badly” post.  In response to that post I received another three page letter from the attorney’s representing the HOA Board at their request.  Keep in mind my original correspondence was with CPM, the property management company hired by the Board.  The Board has not sent a single correspondence in reply to my request for documents.  They have chosen to spend our money to have the attorney respond to a very simple request.

Simply, I requested a copy of a document and the Board chooses not to send it to me unless I pay $0.13 in advance.  Understand that before I created this website, the Board sent me pretty much all the documents I requested.  They were put on a CD at a cost of $15 and I picked them up.  At one point I was even asked if I would like to have the cost put on my account. I also know of other homeowners who requested documents that were electronically put on a CD for the same price and sent to them.

After creating this website, whenever I request any documents, I am told they must be copied and redacted at a cost of no less than a couple hundred dollars.  Hmm….what do you think is the difference now?

So here is the latest letter from the attorney at an estimated cost of over $200.  What do you think of their objectives?  First of all, it is extremely insulting and defaming in its tone and content. It is filled with their opinions mostly to slander me and absent of facts.  Secondly  they do not even mention the most important issue. While they repeat over and over in their letter that they feel I don’t understand “breach of fiduciary”, the Board has committed one by having a policy appear without being motioned nor voted or passed at a meeting.  I have asked the property management firm several times for the minutes of the meeting where this “policy” was passed.  The Board claims this was done in January but it does not appear in their meeting minutes.  (Click here to read the January 2010 minutes)

Anyway they want to spin it, I consider making up policy outside an official meeting is definitely a breach of their fiduciary duties.  As far as I am concerned, my opinions of breach of fiduciary duties are well within my rights of freedom of speech as is the Board’s rights to spend our money foolishly sending attorney written letters to try to pressure a homeowner.

Let me ask you this….how are ANY of the Board’s actions  in the best interest of the association? Is any Board member willing to answer that question. Or more importantly how policy is made without Board meetings?

I believe I have a very good grasp of the meaning of “fiduciary duties”.  Perhaps the Board and their attorneys should re-read the article on “THE LEGAL DUTIES OF ASSOCIATION BOARD MEMBERS”Again, I find the Board behaving badly…..

Dr. Pareto & New Rules for Yocham/Varo Dog Park

 Posted By CotoBlogzz 07-27-2010

Dr. Pareto’s wisdom has significantly influenced corporate America.  Many times we refer to its as a Pareto Analysis -  a too to separate the chaff from the wheat .  Dr. Juran paraphrased Dr. Pareto’s wisdom as the separation of the trivial many from the vital few, referred to as Dr. Pareto’s Rule.   In the vernacular we know it as the 80-20 rule.

Some of the paradigms resulting from the 80-20 rules are things like,   “If you are not going to use the data, do not collect it.”  Or, “if you are going to pass legislation and not enforce it, don’t” – sort of like AG Holder deciding to go after the Arizona for its newly adopted immigration legislation, while failing to go after sanctuary cities – does not make much sense.

Dr. Pareto’s Rule is one tool we often use to argue that 80% of the US government bureaucracies should be closed and or merge. 

Consider  the newly adopted rules for  the Yocham/Varo Dog Park, now consisting of 36 rules:

Rule no. 4:  No monitor or other CZ Master agent shall monitor the park area during hours of operation.  However, in the August 2010 newsletter Ms. Yocham writes “Patrol will conduct random checks to ensure the park is for enjoyment and use by Coto residents…” – in other words, Coto’s local governance will  not  monitor before monitoring.

Rule #16:  All dogs must be vaccinated and legally license prior to use of the park.  All others are prohbited from using the par.  Do you suppose the Orange County Board of Supervisors will sue Coto de Caza over this rule?  That is, the county gets money to license the dogs, is Coto trying to usurp the county’s pet immigration laws?  What about vaccination?  How will anyone even know if a dog is vaccinated?

Rule 21: This is a dog park, and not a playground for Children.  Duh! – what part of the Yocham/Varo Dog park do people not understand so that a rule is required?

Rule 24:  Portable barbecues, amplified sound, including but not limited to boom boxes, PAs, bands and or disk jockeys permitted – Duh!  Gross! In Coto de Caza?  In a Dog Park?  Shirley you jest!

Rule 26.  Keep voice levels low and refrain from yelling.  After all, this is  a Dog Park that can double as a Dog Library!

Rule 32:  Digging is not permitted – After all, this IS as Dog Park!

 These rules should be an example of how parasitic bureaucracies propagate:  Consider the command, “Love your God, with all your might, as your neighbor” – In order to make sure people understand and or follow that simple command, tons of books have been written by the literati

Or what about the US Constitution:  How many lawyers and judges does it take to argue what the Founding Fathers meant or not meant?

QED:  Over 80% of the US bureaucracies must be closed and or merged with the following caveat:  All models are wrong, some are useful.

Prince Harry Coming to Coto de Caza – Sort of

DEMs, RINOs and GAGAs, Oh My!

Posted By CotoBlogzz 07-24-2010

Prince Harry is scheduled to be in Coto de Caza September 10, 2010.  Well sort of.  See, Tea Party Favorite and candidate for Nevada Republican US Senate Candidate Sharron is scheduled to be in  Coto De Caza, California.   Implications follow:

Arguably mainstream media, “Astrotruf® political actors” as America’s Sheriff Joe Arpaio might say, will attend the event,  hanging on to any opportunity to trip Ms. Angle – not unlike The Washington  Post’s Amy Garner’s spin in the piece titled Tea party favorite Sharron Angle emerges from the cocoon, and perhaps hoping any potential Angle gaffe can go viral.  After all, the white House, mainstream media  and the Dems in general, have declared Economic Victory  in their Summer of Recovery – not unlike VP Biden’s Imaginary Jobs, for instance.

If you happen to think that the size of the current National Debt more than makes up for the Summer of Recovery, that the Health Care Reform is not just socialized medicine and that the recently enacted Financial Reform Legislation is not merely an artifact of Fish-BHO-Nomics and more aptly named Parasitic Bureaucracy Feed Reform Legislation,   then perhaps you do not want to see and or hear Sharron Angle while she is in Coto de Caza.

On the other hand, if you think the country is going in the wrong direction and want to but the Dems, RINOs and GAGAs (going along to get along politicians), you may just want to take the opportunity to listen to Sharron Angle while she visits Coto de Caza – see invitation below.

So, while Prince Harry will not be physically in Coto de Caza, you can bet his hears will be ringing and his surrogates will be close by!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

LET’S DUMP HARRY REID!!!!

 Please join us for a Reception & Dinner in Honor of

SHARRON ANGLE

Republican Candidate & Nominee for U.S. SENATE (NV)

Friday, September 10, 2010

VIP RECEPTION 6:00-7:00PM

DINNER 7:00PM-9:00PM

at the home of

Ann & Craig Rommel - 8 Fresian - Coto De Caza

$400 per person

VIP RECEPTION & PHOTO $1,000 per couple

___ I/We will attend the Dinner for Sharron Angle.  Please reserve ______ ticket(s) at $400 per person.

___ I/We will attend the VIP Reception for Sharron Angle.  Please reserve ______ ticket(s) at $1,000 per COUPLE.

___ I/We cannot attend the event, but would like to contribute: $____________________________.

___ I really want to see Harry Reid retire.  Please add me to the Host Committee and Sharron Angle’s table @$2,400!

KINDLY R.S.V.P. to Ann at: (949) 589-3871 or rommels@cox.net

Please make checks payable to: "Friends of Sharron Angle"
8 Fresian Coto De Caza CA 92679

ALL CONTRIBUTORS PLEASE COMPLETE:  Contributions are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes. Contributions from individuals and unincorporated business entities are permitted, up to a maximum of $2,400 for the primary election and $2,400 for the general election. Couples may donate up to a maximum of $4,800 for the primary election and $4,800 for the general election. Federal multi-candidate PACs may donate up to a maximum of $5,000 for the primary election and $5,000 for the general election. Contributions from corporations, labor unions, federal government contractors, national banks and foreign nationals without permanent residency status are prohibited.  (FEC ID # C00460758)

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Your Name                                                                          Spouse’s Name

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Company Name                                                                Title

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Address                                                                                City                                                                 State                                                              Zip

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Phone                                                                                   Fax                                                                 Email Address

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Employer (or name of business, if self-employed, required by law)             Occupation (required by law)

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Spouse Occupation (if joint contribution, required by law)                                Spouse Employer (if joint contribution, required by law)

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Signature                                                                                                 Spouse Signature (if joint contribution, required by law

The Gated Community Security Fallacy - the Dough is For Show – Coto de Caza

Posted By CotoBlogzz 07-24-2010

Did you know that contrary to local governance’s assertions, gated communities are not safer than non-gated communities? – In fact, the gated community in many instances can be a crime-enabler,  for a number of reasons, including the ease with which a person can predict who comes and goes, for instance.

No wonder most gated communities’ “security budget” is usually published with a disclaimer such as:  "The community is not responsible for security....Security is the responsibility of the city/county law enforcement agencies……”  Take for instance the $1.7 million/year Coto de Caza “security budget”, used mostly for gate access “un-control,” glorified meter maids and personal courier services.  Un-control, because it is harder for a resident to enter through the gates than a visitor or a service provider, or anyone who want to enter the community for that matter.

If you want to confirm the assertions above drive a car with a disabled transponder or no transponder at all.  Use a blank index card and drive through the middle gate holding the blank index card.  It is almost a certainty that the “security guard” will simply open the gates and let you in.  If this is too daring for you, use the gate by the security personnel and the guard on duty know that you are visiting any of the community’s venues, such as the restaurant, the golf course, the stables and or the arena.  Again, you are almost guaranteed access, no questions asked.  However, if you are a resident and you just got a new car , the transponder is non-function and or you are simply renting a car.  You must give the guard in charge your address, your security code and perhaps your first-born.

The rest of the Coto de Caza’s “security budget” goes to the meter-maids:  Making sure no RVs are parked in one place for more than 24 hours, for example.  When not busy on meter-maid duty, the patrols may be used as personal couriers by local governance.

We are considering giving away some five personalized license plates with either the Coto de Caza ® and or the Dove Canyon® marks to the first five individuals who test the assertions above – if you are interested, send us an e-mail to cotoblogzz@gmail.com.  See details below.

Proposed CotoBuzz Gated-Community Contest

MUST BE LEGAL RESIDENT OF ONE OF CALIFORNIA,  18 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER OR AGE AT DATE OF ENTRY INTO CONTEST. VOID IN OTHER STATEES PUERTO RICO, ALL U.S. TERRITORIES AND POSSESSIONS AND WHERE PROHIBITED BY LAW. 

1. Acceptance of Rules. By entering the CotoBuzz Journal Gate Community Contest,  (the "Contest"), you hereby accept and agree to these official rules (the "Official Rules") of this Contest, and the decisions of the CotoBuzz Joural in connection with thisContest, whose decisions are final. 



2. Eligibility. This Contest is offered and open to persons who  (a) Send in their observations trying to enter the community to cotobuzz@yahoo.com no later than July 30. 2010  (b) legal residents of California  (c) at least 18 years of age or older or age of majority and d) do not brake any Santa Margarita or Orange County laws in the process of trying access to the community 



3. Contest Period. The Contest begins on July 24, 2010 at 12:00:00 PM PST and ends at 11:59:59 PM PST on August  15, 2010 (the "Contest Period"). 


4. Entering. To enter this Contest during the Contest Period, try to gain access to the community letting the guard(s) on duty know that you are visiting any of the venues listed:  stables, restaurant, golf club


5. Prize. One metal license plate frame with either Coto de Caza® or Dove Canyon® marks, your choice,  with an approximate retail value of $49.00 Forty Nine Dollars ($49.00).  Prize must be picked up in person at a designated venue in Coto de Caza and or Rancho Santa Margarita.


6. Prize Restrictions. Only first five qualified respondents - No assignment, transfer, conversion to cash or cash redemption or substitution of Prize is permitted, except Administrator reserves the right to substitute the Prize with a prize of comparable or greater value should the Prize becomes unavailable. Prize is solely for personal use. .
7. Prize Taxes. All federal, state, local and other tax liabilities arising from this Contest, will be the sole responsibility of the Prize recipients.


8. Affidavit of Eligibility/Liability Release and Publicity Release. Prize Winner may be required to complete, execute and return an Affidavit of Eligibility/Liability Release, and where lawful, a Publicity Release (collectively, the "Release Forms") within five (5) days of notification of winning. Failure to return Release Forms timely, or if Prize notification or the Prize is not picked up when mutually agreed upon, or if the Prize Winner is found not to be eligible or not in compliance with these Official Rules, may result in disqualification with an alternate Prize Winner selected in accordance with these Official Rules.


9. Publicity Release Terms. Except where prohibited by law, the Prize Winner's acceptance of the Prize constitutes permission for the Contest Entities to use Prize Winner's name, photograph, likeness, statements, biographical information, voice, and address (city and state) worldwide and in all forms of media, in perpetuity, without further compensation.


10. Improper Conduct. Administrator, in its sole discretion, may disqualify any entrant from participation in or use of any or all portions of this Contest, and refuse to award the Prize, if entrant engages in any conduct Administrator deems to be improper, unfair or otherwise adverse to the operation of the Contest or detrimental to other entrants of the Contest. Such improper conduct includes, without limitation, falsifying personal information required during entrant registration or Prize claim, violating any term or condition stated herein, accumulating entries through methods such as automated computer scripts or any other programming techniques, allowing others to use entrant's personal information for the purpose of accumulating entries, or intentionally trying to defraud, reverse engineer, disassemble or otherwise tamper with the computer programs in connection with this Contest. Entrants agree that Administrator may void any part of the Prize that entrant may have won and/or require the return of any part of the Prize that entrant may have won as a result of such improper conduct. Entrant further acknowledges that any forfeiture of the Prize and/or return of the Prize shall in no way prevent Administrator from pursuing other avenues of recourse such as criminal or civil proceedings in connection with such conduct. WARNING: ANY ATTEMPT TO DELIBERATELY DAMAGE OR UNDERMINE THE LEGITIMATE OPERATION OF THIS SURVEY MAY BE A VIOLATION OF CRIMINAL AND CIVIL LAWS AND SHOULD SUCH AN ATTEMPT BE MADE, THE COTOBUZZ JOURNAL  RESERVES THE RIGHT TO SEEK DAMAGES OR OTHER REMEDIES FROM ANY SUCH PERSON(S) RESPONSIBLE FOR SUCH ATTEMPT TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW. 


11. Integrity of Contest. If, for any reason, the Contest is not capable of running as planned by reason of infection by computer virus, worms, bugs, tampering, unauthorized intervention, fraud, technical failures, or any other causes which Administrator, in its sole opinion believes could corrupt or affect the administration, security, fairness, integrity or proper conduct of this Contest, Administrator reserves the right at its sole discretion to cancel, terminate, modify or suspend this Contest and select the Prize Winner from among all eligible entries received prior to the action taken or in such other manner as Administrator may deem fair and appropriate. 


12. Lost or Corrupted Entries. The CotoBuzz Journal, and its  parents, affiliated and subsidiary companies and advertising and promotion agencies, assume no liability and are not responsible for, and you hereby forever waive any rights to any claim in connection with, lost, late, incomplete, corrupted, stolen, misdirected, illegible or postage due entries or mail, if applicable; or for any computer, telephone, cable, network, satellite, electronic or Internet hardware or software malfunctions, unauthorized human intervention, or the incorrect or inaccurate capture of entry or other information, or the failure to capture any such information. The CotoBuzz Journal,  parents, affiliated and subsidiary companies, advertising and promotion agencies, are not responsible for any incorrect or inaccurate information, whether caused by registration information submitted by end users or tampering, hacking, or by any of the equipment or programming associated with or utilized in this Contest, and assumes no responsibility for any error, omission, interruption, deletion, defect, delay in operation or transmission, communications line failure, theft or destruction or unauthorized access to the Contest. 


13. Damaged Property. The CotoBuzz Journal and its parents, affiliated and subsidiary companies and advertising and promotion agencies, assume no liability and are not responsible for, and you hereby forever waive any rights to any claim in connection with, injury or damage to any entrants or to any other person's computer or property related to or resulting from participating in this Contest or downloading materials from this Contest.


14. Contest Errors. The CotoBuzz Journal and its parents, affiliated and subsidiary companies and advertising and promotion agencies, assume no liability and are not responsible for, and you hereby forever waive any rights to any claim in connection with, errors and/or ambiguity: (a) in the Contest; (b) in any related advertising or promotions of this Contest; and/or (c) in these Official Rules. In the event of any ambiguity(s) or error(s) in these Official Rules, Administrator reserves the right to modify these Official Rules for clarification purposes or to correct any such ambiguity or error(s) without materially affecting the terms and conditions of the Contest.
16. Prize and Survey Winner. The CotoBuzz Journal and its parents, affiliated and subsidiary companies and advertising and promotion agencies, assume no liability and are not responsible for, and you/entrant hereby forever waive/s any rights to any claim in connection with, the selection and announcement of the Prize Winner, the distribution of the Prize, the acceptance/possession and/or use/misuse of any part of the Prize and/or any injury or damage to any entrant's or third person's property related to or resulting from any part of the Prize or any part of this Contest.


15. Release and Indemnity. Each entrant in this Contest, including, without limitation, the Prize Winner, hereby releases and agrees to hold harmless The CotoBuzz Journal and its parents, affiliates, subsidiaries, advertising and promotion agencies and their respective directors, officers, employees, representatives and agents from any and all liability for any injuries, loss or damage of any kind to person, including death, and property, arising in whole or in part, directly or indirectly, from acceptance, possession, use or misuse of the Prize, participation in this Contest and participation in any activity related to this Contest.
18. Limitation of Liability. IN NO EVENT WILL The CotoBuzz Journal and its parents,AFFILIATES, SUBSIDIARIES AND RELATED COMPANIES, THEIR ADVERTISING OR PROMOTION AGENCIES OR THEIR RESPECTIVE OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, EMPLOYEES, REPRESENTATIVES AND AGENTS, BE RESPONSIBLE OR LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES OR LOSSES OF ANY KIND, INCLUDING DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF YOUR ACCESS TO AND USE OF THE CONTEST OR THE DOWNLOADING FROM AND/OR PRINTING MATERIAL DOWNLOADED FROM THE CONTEST. SOME JURISDICTIONS MAY NOT ALLOW THE LIMITATIONS OR EXCLUSION OF LIABILITY FOR INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR EXCLUSION OF IMPLIED WARRANTIES SO SOME OF THE ABOVE LIMITATIONS OR EXCLUSIONS MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU. CHECK YOUR LOCAL LAWS FOR ANY RESTRICTIONS OR LIMITATIONS REGARDING THESE LIMITATIONS OR EXCLUSIONS. 


16 Disclaimer of Warranties. EXCEPT FOR ANY MANUFACTURER WARRANTY THAT MAY APPLY, THE CONTEST AND PRIZE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR NON-INFRINGEMENT. 


17. Identity Disputes. In the event of a dispute as to the identity of a winner based on an email address, the winning entry will be declared made by the Authorized Account Holder of the email address submitted at time of entry. For purposes of these Official Rules, "Authorized Account Holder" is defined as the natural person who is assigned to an email address by an Internet access provider, online service provider or other organization (e.g., business, educational, institution, etc.) that is responsible for assigning email addresses for the domain associated with the submitted email address. 


18. Binding Arbitration. The parties waive all rights to trial in any action or proceeding instituted in connection with these Official Rules and/or this Contest. Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to these Official Rules and/or this Contest shall be settled by binding arbitration in accordance with the commercial arbitration rules of the American Arbitration Association. Any such controversy or claim shall be arbitrated on an individual basis, and shall not be consolidated in any arbitration with any claim or controversy of any other party. The arbitration shall be conducted in the State of California in the City of Santa Ana nd judgment on the arbitration award may be entered into any court having jurisdiction thereof. 


19. Governing Law and Jurisdiction. This promotion is governed by US law and is subject to all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations. Void where prohibited by law. All issues and questions concerning the construction, validity, interpretation and enforceability of these Official Rules, or the rights and obligations of entrant and Administrator in connection with this Contest, shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws of the State of CaliforniaU.S.A., without giving effect to the conflict of laws rules thereof, and any matters or proceedings which are not subject to arbitration as set forth in Section 21 of these Official Rules and/or for entering any judgment on an arbitration award, shall take place in the State of California, in the City of Santa Ana.


20. Winner List/Official Rules: For the name of the Prize Winner send a self-addressed stamped envelope for receipt by August 31, 2010 to the CotoBuzz Journal, PO Box 154, Trabuco Canyon CA.  92678 .
For Official Rules mail a self-addressed stamped envelope to the above address marked "The CotoBuzz Gate Entry Survey” Contest for receipt by July 30, 2010. The name of the Prize Winner may be posted and the Official Rules will be posted on the CotoBuzz Journal

LA City Hall and DWP – Poster Children For Parasitic Bureaucracies

Posted By CotoBlogzz 07-23-2010

What does it take to terminate an incompetent teacher, or a public sector employee for that matter? – an act of God.  Consider that of six DWP employees suspended with pay,  in April, 2010  after a KCBS Channel 2 / KCAL Channel 9 aired an undercover story showing  the  workers buying beer, drinking in a park, drinking while driving and entering a strip club, while on the job, said employees not only would have  two weeks to respond to the charges, but said employees would be represented by International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers attorneys, the union that represents the employees.  If these attorneys are worth their weight in gold, such as the ones used by the California Teachers Association, chances are the employees will not be terminated, and id they are, they can retire with a golden parachute to boot.

After the KCBS expose, DWP General Manager Austin Beutner not only said that of the roughly 10.000 workers at the DWP, he thinks the bulk of them do their job, but also complained that KCBS was not sharing all the information to help him with his own investigation – implying that he has no clue as to what is going on in his own barn.

The KCBS report implied that the behavior at the DWP is cultural- contrary to Mr. Beutner’s assertions -  not unlike the behavior at the USPTO, the DMV, the SEC, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, or even the OCSD.  If confirmed, this also implies that in order to change the behavior, union leadership have to agree to change and take an active role in the change process, in addition to having outstanding management and leadership from the elected officials responsible.  Based on a new KCBS  report, it seems like the cultural assertions have more merit than Mr. Beutner’s:  “making nearly $100,000 a year -- money coming from the pockets of DWP ratepayers -- chugging down a Bud Light on the job,” writes David Goldstein’s report published July 12, 2010

Then there is the sparring between the DWP and the Los Angeles City Council over a $600,000 consultant fee – remember the $800,000 annual salary being paid to a Bell City official with city council’s approval.  Ironically, Los Angeles Mayo Villaraigosa, claims to be frustrated with DWP high-level bureaucrats.  “Part of the problem, said the mayor, is that almost everyone working at the DWP—more than 90%--belongs to the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 18,” according to the Mayor.  We disagree – More than 90% of the problem is because of the union.  Ironic, because the mayor defends his play-to-play approach to managing the city – that is, he accepts freebies in the name of requirements for properly managing the city, while the Los Angeles Ethics Commission is looking at adding stronger language – to appease the public.

So what happens now?  Apparently the Los Angeles City Council is following the lead from the Financial Reform Legislation:  Simply add more bureaucracy by adding a Rate Payer Advocate to do what Los Angeles City politicians are supposed to do, but have been incompetent to do!

There should be universal agreement among reasonable taxpayers that the LA City Hall and DWP are excellent examples of parasitic bureaucracies and why we continue to argue the need for fiscally responsible politicians to adopt a Bureau Realignment and Closure Initiative to close and or merge over 80% of existing bureaucracies.

Snookered Into Apology-Palooza - Sherrod Ain't No Saint

Posted By CotoBlogzz 07-22-2010

With much experience apologizing to world leaders and bowing to kings, the President’s apology to hastily fired Agriculture Department's Shirley Sherrod for racists remarks made pre-rebirth are anit-climatic.

Most news accounts paint Ms. Sherrod as a victim caught in the political cross-fires. No argument here, other than actions have consequences, whether we repent for previous sins or not.  Hold this thought.

The comedy of errors starts with the NAACP gratuitously vilifying Tea Party Members, and as stated above, actions have consequences – in this case, the NAACP fell on its own trap, and quickly dug itself a deeper hole, by blaming Fox New and other “conservatives,”  perhaps lending credence to the old adage that “if you have done nothing wrong, you should fear no evil”, or act in haste to correct the evil you claim you have not done, we might add.  Ditto for the White House:  The latter continues to underline the also old adage:  “Do as I say, not as I do.”

Let’s be clear, we are all individuals, we are unique, and consequently various forces of influence have an impact on our decision-making, such as gender, age, race, education, and so on.  That is to say that we can all expect to find a number of racists in the United States of America, regardless of political affiliation and or skin tone.  However, when the first line of defense for demagogues and self-describes victims, is the race card,  such as the Reverend Wright, Reverend Sharpton and even Senator Byrd, we all should try to connect the dots, and perhaps follow the money.

The point here is that while Ms. Sherrod is the victim in the Snookered case, she does not get a pass from us.  When she was asked to speak to Fox News, Ms. Sherrod in essence accused the network of being racist – that is, we are back to where we started from – from the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.

In other words, although it appears that Ms. Sherrod has seen the light and no longer resembles the remarks –taken out of context, as the media accounts assert - her heart appears to dwell in a very dark place, still.

The Financial Reform Legislation Ruse

Dems, RINOS (Republicans in Name) and GAGAs (Go Along to Get Along) Oh My! - with Graham as chairman of the board of the meme (with Snowe, Collins and Brown).

Posted by Cotoblogzz 07-22-2010 12:45 AM

The just-enacted financial reform legislation is just another Fish-BHO-Nomics ruse.  The name implies that the legislation is aimed at making the US macro-economic system competitive in a global economy – it is not.  A more apt name is Parasitic Feed Reform legislation.  Simply designed not only to increase the size of the government, but when considering that the country is in dire need of a Bureaucracy Realignment and Closure Initiative where some 80% of  the bureaucracies should simply be closed and or merged, such as the Department of Education, the SEC, Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac, expanding sweeping regulations simply fertilizes the parasitic bureaucracy- in the ultimate irony,  the two most likely parasites to be closed:  Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not even touched.

And seems like mainstream media is buying hook, line and sinker.  Consider a parasitic bureaucracy close to home:  Bell, California, arguably a mediocre city as far as California is concerned paying municipal manager Robert Rizzo $800.000/year and part-time city council members some $100.000/year, according to Marcia Fritz, head of the California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility. But Wait, there is more. In today’s interview by CBS2’s Diane Thompson, Ms. Thompson asks”  “this is a capitalistic society, so if the city is willing to pay..”  The statement clearly shows mainstream’s media disconnect.  Bell’s mismanagement is not an artifact of a “capitalistic society” as Ms. Thomson posits, but an artifact of a parasitic bureaucracy.

Remember all the assertions about Health Care Reform Not being socialized medicine and not using tax-payer money to fund abortions?  This is also an artifact of those what want to perpetuate parasitic bureaucracies – use of demagoguery for self-preservation.

Arizona's Own Flotilla Thrilla

Posted By CotoBlogzz 07-20-2010

Hugo Chavez and Colombia’s president have joined a growing number of Latin American countries with dubious human rights records, have joined the US Attorney General in a lawsuit against the state’s attempt to secure its border – not unlike what Israel has been doing for years.

Attorney General Eric Holder, the same one who referred to the United States as a Coward Nation, is not only arguing that the Arizona law  unconstitutional because it is infringing in Department of Justice’s turf and also because other countries criticize the law.

View this as Arizona’s own Flotilla Thrilla – so much so that Arizona official have declared Israel as its Sister State – “because now Arizona understand what it means when Israel’s foes state they want to obliterate Israel from the face of the earth.”

Regardless of which account you believe about exactly what happened during the recent Israel’s raid on a flotilla trying to break Israel’s  blockade illegally,  you are entitled to the facts:

Fact 1:  Radical Islam, including Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Shi'ite creed says mortals can not only influence but also hasten the awaited return of the 12th Imam, known as the Mahdi. Iran's dominant "Twelver" sect holds that this will be Muhammad ibn Hasan, the righteous descendant of the Prophet Muhammad. He is said to have gone into "occlusion" in the 9th century, at age 5. His return will be preceded by cosmic chaos, war, bloodshed and pestilence. After this cataclysmic confrontation between the forces of good and evil, the Mahdi will lead the world to an era of universal peace - standing in the way is Israel.

Fact 2:  Attorney General Eric Holder cannot find a common denominator between the last three " man-made-disasters":  Ft. Hood Murderer Nidal Hassan, Christmas Day Underwear Bomber and Time Square Bomb Square.

Fact 3:  North Korea & Iran have been successfully testing the US's empty "You face serious consequences"  threats.

Fact 4:  Israel has stated unequivocally that anyone who poses an existential threat will face "serious consequences" - this is a case of whether Israel is destroyed again, or not.

Fact 5:  Attorney General Holder has called the United States a Coward nation, dismissed case of voter intimidation Black Panthers, has filed a lawsuit against Arizona because, not unlike Israel, is in an existential struggle.  Further, the Attorney General has failed to sue sanctuary states,

Now Connecting the Dots

Conjecture 1.  Iran is actively pursuing nuclear power - does this have anything to do with the 12th Imam and the destruction of Israel?

Conjecture 2:  US "Serious consequences" have been simply "words" - Has now Turkey decided to challenge a most Wimpy US - say, as in setting up a "flotilla confrontation"?

Conclusions

1.  The AG continues to be wrong and or incompetent in his inability to connect the Radical Islam Dots

2.  The US Administration continues to be wrong with its no so serious "serious consequences" foreign affairs strategy

3. You can argue the facts about the flotilla, but first connect the dots:  Iran, North Korea, Turkey:  What is the common denominator?  

4  You can argue the constitutionality of the Arizona law, but not the states rightful existential battle.  You should not question that the Attorney General is clearly incompetent and should step down.