Power hungry association steals home from mentally ill person for $540 in Assessments
The monthly fees for the home paid in full for nearly 20 years ago is only $183 a month. Brother tried to pay the money but the board would not accept it.
May 18, 2007
My brother lost his home in Coldwater North Cooperative, Inc because he is mentally ill and didn't know he had to pay $540 in dues. My mother left her home to us to protect my brother. The monthly fees for the home she paid in full for nearly 20 years ago is only $183 a month. I tried to pay the money for him when I found out, and they would not accept it. He will never be able to support himself and is currently on the streets with nowhere to go.
My mother passed away last July. My mother and my brother lived in their cooperative (like a condo) prior to her passing on. He is mentally ill and did not pay the association fees for 3 months, so they used the Unlawful Detainer process to evict him and take away our interest in the CID. They then sold the membership to someone else for about $50,000 less than its worth on the open market. I was told, originally it was going to be sold to the sister of one of our board of directors, but my lawyers and others called them on it and they sold it to someone else a few days later. I am told that the association will not give me the money that they got for the "illegal" sale until my mentally ill brother signs a settlement offer that removes the association of any liability for their wrongdoing. In my book that's called blackmail no matter how you look at it.
I have racked up over $4,000 in attorney fees (on just letters and fax responses alone) and still cannot get any results. Doesn't it seem like the attorneys are the only ones who seem to profit from methods like this. In this transaction I'm referring to the association where my mother's homes is, have a law firm by the name of Swedelson & Gotlieb. My understanding is that the HOA attorneys are charging me almost $40,000 in fees and additional charges to "process" this against us. I stated in our cease and desist letters that the Davis-Stirling Act prohibits this and the association through their counsel say the Davis Stirling act does not apply (it does apply see: CA Civil Code 1367.4) Looking back at 1367.4 it was my understanding that that the reason for this law is that several lawyers were stealing property for fines and assessments and profiting by reselling them.
Imagine having a home and losing it because you were behind in only $540 in dues, then have them strong-arm you into loosing nearly 30% of its value and then also charging you $45,000 for the pleasure of it. We lose our lifetime home and the HOA lawyer gets to buy a new Hummer. Sad, very sad indeed!
I sent letters to the Assembly and Legislators (Sheila Kuel, Jane Harmon and Diane Watson) and have received nothing. How can this happen, Who are the people to go to when this happens? I am at a loss to how to deal with it. I don't have $25,000 to hire an attorney who will only take the case on retainer at $375+ an hour. Our HOA broke the law, period, Who are the "police" we call when we get raped in this manner? I've tried every avenue available; Legal Aid, ADA , HUD, Attorney General, etc and am told that I should just walk away because unless I can pay to hire a private attorney it is just a lost cause. The HOA attorneys are just thinking that we will give up and they will get away with it.
Can anybody help me?
Sincerely yours
Jay Goldstein
SIMPLESOLU@aol.com
310 387 6055
Note: From Buzz:
We are publishing Jay Goldstein's contact information in case CotoBuzz Journal readers want to contact him and provide any type of support.
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:
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, May 18, 2007
Orange County Piano Man Arrested In Canada
Orange County Piano Man Arrested In Canada
May 18, 2007
A fugitive piano teacher accused of sexually assaulting an 8-year-old girl was arrested yesterday at 7:30 p.m. in Canada after fleeing Orange County in 2006 in an effort to avoid prosecution on child molest charges.
Daniel Peter Gaudin, 68, if convicted on all counts, faces a maximum sentence of 18 years in state prison. Gaudin is appearing this morning in a Canadian court and an extradition request will be filed by the Orange County District Attorney's office within 60 days.
Gaudin fled the state to Germany while has was out on bail and awaiting trial for the child molest, and was arrested trying to enter Canada yesterday from Germany on an immigration hold.
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
May 18, 2007
A fugitive piano teacher accused of sexually assaulting an 8-year-old girl was arrested yesterday at 7:30 p.m. in Canada after fleeing Orange County in 2006 in an effort to avoid prosecution on child molest charges.
Daniel Peter Gaudin, 68, if convicted on all counts, faces a maximum sentence of 18 years in state prison. Gaudin is appearing this morning in a Canadian court and an extradition request will be filed by the Orange County District Attorney's office within 60 days.
Gaudin fled the state to Germany while has was out on bail and awaiting trial for the child molest, and was arrested trying to enter Canada yesterday from Germany on an immigration hold.
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
Paraphrasing the OC Register on coverage of CZ Master Association Candidate’s Night.
Paraphrasing the OC Register on coverage of CZ Master Association Candidate’s Night.
May 18, 2007
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 lights at the Wagon Wheel Sports Park, and speed limits on Coto de Caza Drive” – the “moderator” was none other than CZ BOD/Keystone employee Vinnie Davies.
The most interesting comment in the article is that according to the reporter, the “candidates agreed on most of the topics, except the possibility of the board meetings being videotaped”
Perhaps the reporter was not present during the discussion pertaining to direct elections. According to incumbent Jerry Mezger, he is against direct elections because it requires the board to be proactive, to prevent fraud. Not to mention the discussion on pro-active traffic patrol by the CHP.
New community reporter, same tenet
RELATED STORIES:
CZ Master Association - Varo & Mezger Should NOT Be Re-elected - 11 Reasons Possible Scenarios and the Keystone Effect
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...
CZ Master Association Board of Directors Candidates Night ? A Voice Of Reason
Vince Hylka emerges as a breadth of fresh air, not seen in a CZ board of directors in years! The traditional annual meeting where delegates meet to hear candidates to the CZ Master Association board of directors prior to deciding how to cast their...
CZ Master Association Board of Directors Candidate's Night Questions
I regret that I will be out of town for CZ Master Candidate?s Night on May 10, however as a former CZ Board Member who is knowledgeable about CZ issues, I thought I would provide a list of questions to pose to the Candidates for those interested. This...
Coto CHP Pro-active Traffic Patrol Cause-EffectMay
The CHP enforcement hours for March 2007 are 60% below the monthly enforcement hours since the Varo/Mezger board was coerced intro bringing back the CHP (after 2005 traffic fatality). This significant drop in enforcement hours just happens to coincide...
OCR Paraphrasing in Laguna Woods Village - Clarification
We 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...
How to Communicate with the CZ Master Association (and other HOAs)
Recently a CotoBuzz contributor received a stupid lawyer letter stating that the CZ Master Association board would no longer accept his requests via email.
Who Decides 2007 CZ Master Association BOD Composition? You Do Not
Who decides if incumbents Varo, Mezger and Schlieder get another term in the CZ Master Association Board of Directors May 24, 2007? Contrary to the spirit of California CID legislation reform, as of now, CZ residents have not say in the outcome.
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
May 18, 2007
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 lights at the Wagon Wheel Sports Park, and speed limits on Coto de Caza Drive” – the “moderator” was none other than CZ BOD/Keystone employee Vinnie Davies.
The most interesting comment in the article is that according to the reporter, the “candidates agreed on most of the topics, except the possibility of the board meetings being videotaped”
Perhaps the reporter was not present during the discussion pertaining to direct elections. According to incumbent Jerry Mezger, he is against direct elections because it requires the board to be proactive, to prevent fraud. Not to mention the discussion on pro-active traffic patrol by the CHP.
New community reporter, same tenet
RELATED STORIES:
CZ Master Association - Varo & Mezger Should NOT Be Re-elected - 11 Reasons Possible Scenarios and the Keystone Effect
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...
CZ Master Association Board of Directors Candidates Night ? A Voice Of Reason
Vince Hylka emerges as a breadth of fresh air, not seen in a CZ board of directors in years! The traditional annual meeting where delegates meet to hear candidates to the CZ Master Association board of directors prior to deciding how to cast their...
CZ Master Association Board of Directors Candidate's Night Questions
I regret that I will be out of town for CZ Master Candidate?s Night on May 10, however as a former CZ Board Member who is knowledgeable about CZ issues, I thought I would provide a list of questions to pose to the Candidates for those interested. This...
Coto CHP Pro-active Traffic Patrol Cause-EffectMay
The CHP enforcement hours for March 2007 are 60% below the monthly enforcement hours since the Varo/Mezger board was coerced intro bringing back the CHP (after 2005 traffic fatality). This significant drop in enforcement hours just happens to coincide...
OCR Paraphrasing in Laguna Woods Village - Clarification
We 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...
How to Communicate with the CZ Master Association (and other HOAs)
Recently a CotoBuzz contributor received a stupid lawyer letter stating that the CZ Master Association board would no longer accept his requests via email.
Who Decides 2007 CZ Master Association BOD Composition? You Do Not
Who decides if incumbents Varo, Mezger and Schlieder get another term in the CZ Master Association Board of Directors May 24, 2007? Contrary to the spirit of California CID legislation reform, as of now, CZ residents have not say in the outcome.
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
Coto de Caza is Not an Orange County Island! – Or is it?
Coto de Caza is Not an Orange County Island! – Or is it?
May 18, 2007
Following up on comments from Joseph Morabito, former member of the CZ Master Association board of directors on what Coto de Caza needs from the Orange County board of supervisors, we asked the President of the Orange County Taxpayers Association, Reed Royalty what he thought of Mr. Morabito’s suggestions. He declined to comment because he did not have “first-hand knowledge of the issues raised in Mr. Morabito’s letter” to Supervisor Pat Bates’ spokesperson.
So we turned our attention to the Orange County Recorder’s office for information pertaining to funding requests to the 5th district by residents/leaders of the unincorporated areas of Ladera Ranch and Coto de Caza: We promptly received a definitive response, as we usually do, stating there was nothing associated with requests for funding on the County’s Agenda Search, and suggested we contact supervisor Bates directly.
We then turned to Supervisor Bates’ spokesperson, Sergio Prince, asking him to let us view all requests for funding from Coto de Caza and Ladera Ranch. We did not get a response. We then called Supervisor Bates’ Office Manager, Justin McCusker for the same information – We did not get a response.
Lastly, we sent the same request to Orange County Chairman Chris Norby and eureka! We got a response from Orange County Cerk Darlene Bloom asking for clarification.
Given the simplicity of the request, and the hoops we are having to jump through, we are now wondering whether the un-incorporated area of Coto de Caza IS an island of Orange County! You know, like when the CZ master association board of directors does not want to provide us with information associated with the activities/decisions of the landscaping or public safety committees, all they do is ask the attorneys to write letters saying these committees are not association committees!
I never did get a response or even an acknowledgement of my e-mail from Sergio Prince, Supervisor Bates spokesperson. It would appear that some common sense training concerning customer service is in order. Perhaps, since Bob Varo inappropriately endorsed Supervisor Bates for election as CZ Board President, he might have better luck. After all, Mr. Varo did get Bates to waste $25,000 of our tax and dues money to fund a study to tell us that we all pay a lot in various taxes. Go figure. Joe Morabito
Hi Joe:
Something that perhaps is not obvious to the Varo/Mezger movement to turn Coto into as City, is that by statute, correspondence to and from government officials is presumed open to the public. Hence, as soon as we communicated with the OC Supervisor’s chairman and copied the OC Supervisor’s legal council, we had an immediate response from the County’s Clerk. We should have access to the information we requested early next week (based on our availability) !
Once Coto is turned into a city, by law, there should no longer be this double-talk about “these were association committees, before they were not”! - Buzz
RELATED STORIES
WHAT COTO DE CAZA NEEDS FROM SUPERVISOR BATES
The reality is that we need just two things from Supervisor Pat Bates that should justifiably be funded by the county given the tax dollars that we pay. They are about $240,000 a year of pro-active Sheriff and/or CHP traffic patrols in Coto to deal with...
How many times must the CZ safety committee be formed before it can be called an association committee?
A 2006 CZ newsletter proudly announces that the ?CZ Master Association Champions Public Safety Committee?, During 2006 general CZ board meetings, the board appoints a chairman and various public safety committee members.A 2007 CZ stupid lawyer letter...
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
May 18, 2007
Following up on comments from Joseph Morabito, former member of the CZ Master Association board of directors on what Coto de Caza needs from the Orange County board of supervisors, we asked the President of the Orange County Taxpayers Association, Reed Royalty what he thought of Mr. Morabito’s suggestions. He declined to comment because he did not have “first-hand knowledge of the issues raised in Mr. Morabito’s letter” to Supervisor Pat Bates’ spokesperson.
So we turned our attention to the Orange County Recorder’s office for information pertaining to funding requests to the 5th district by residents/leaders of the unincorporated areas of Ladera Ranch and Coto de Caza: We promptly received a definitive response, as we usually do, stating there was nothing associated with requests for funding on the County’s Agenda Search, and suggested we contact supervisor Bates directly.
We then turned to Supervisor Bates’ spokesperson, Sergio Prince, asking him to let us view all requests for funding from Coto de Caza and Ladera Ranch. We did not get a response. We then called Supervisor Bates’ Office Manager, Justin McCusker for the same information – We did not get a response.
Lastly, we sent the same request to Orange County Chairman Chris Norby and eureka! We got a response from Orange County Cerk Darlene Bloom asking for clarification.
Given the simplicity of the request, and the hoops we are having to jump through, we are now wondering whether the un-incorporated area of Coto de Caza IS an island of Orange County! You know, like when the CZ master association board of directors does not want to provide us with information associated with the activities/decisions of the landscaping or public safety committees, all they do is ask the attorneys to write letters saying these committees are not association committees!
I never did get a response or even an acknowledgement of my e-mail from Sergio Prince, Supervisor Bates spokesperson. It would appear that some common sense training concerning customer service is in order. Perhaps, since Bob Varo inappropriately endorsed Supervisor Bates for election as CZ Board President, he might have better luck. After all, Mr. Varo did get Bates to waste $25,000 of our tax and dues money to fund a study to tell us that we all pay a lot in various taxes. Go figure. Joe Morabito
Hi Joe:
Something that perhaps is not obvious to the Varo/Mezger movement to turn Coto into as City, is that by statute, correspondence to and from government officials is presumed open to the public. Hence, as soon as we communicated with the OC Supervisor’s chairman and copied the OC Supervisor’s legal council, we had an immediate response from the County’s Clerk. We should have access to the information we requested early next week (based on our availability) !
Once Coto is turned into a city, by law, there should no longer be this double-talk about “these were association committees, before they were not”! - Buzz
RELATED STORIES
WHAT COTO DE CAZA NEEDS FROM SUPERVISOR BATES
The reality is that we need just two things from Supervisor Pat Bates that should justifiably be funded by the county given the tax dollars that we pay. They are about $240,000 a year of pro-active Sheriff and/or CHP traffic patrols in Coto to deal with...
How many times must the CZ safety committee be formed before it can be called an association committee?
A 2006 CZ newsletter proudly announces that the ?CZ Master Association Champions Public Safety Committee?, During 2006 general CZ board meetings, the board appoints a chairman and various public safety committee members.A 2007 CZ stupid lawyer letter...
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:
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, May 16, 2007
HEY GRAY PANTHERS! YOU GOT IT WRONG!
HEY GRAY PANTHERS! YOU GOT IT WRONG!
(c) D. Vanitzian
May 16, 2007
The Gray Panthers are on record as SUPPORTING A BAD BAD BAD BAD BILL: Senate Bill Number 948. SHAME ON YOU. Where the heck are you getting your information from?
Because it is so difficult to keep up with California’s Legislature and their DIRTY TRICKS, too many groups including SENIOR GROUPS are merely taking the word of people whom they [think they] trust, as to what Senate and Assembly Bills they will support or oppose. That is a dangerous thing to do -- AND IT IS A MISTAKE!
Every common interest development owner that is subject to a homeowner association and/or a board of directors NEEDS TO remember this: Whenever you see a mandated dollar amount, that is, ANY dollar amount, even ONE DOLLAR written into a Senate or Assembly Bill:
--it automatically becomes an assessment.
--because it automatically becomes an “assessment” you cannot NOT pay it.
--because it is an assessment your property is subject to NONJUDICIAL FORECLOSURE.
--once that Senate or Assembly Bill passes it can change tomorrow.
Remember that $1.00 fee that you didn’t think was so bad, well, tomorrow it just became $100, and two months later it became $1,000, and it won’t EVER stop.
Senate Bill 948 is NOT about classes. It is about INDUSTRY SUBSIDIES and CONTROL OVER YOUR ASSETS THROUGH FORECLOSURE.
SENATE BILL 948: BAIT (HARMAN) SWITCH (LOWENTHAL)
He’s baaaaaaaaaaaaaaack . . . . . . YOU ALL REMEMBER LOWENTHAL BACK IN 2001 DON’T YOU? He was responsible for this deceitful little trick on common interest development deed-restricted owners: It took him a year to pull it off, but by golly he did it! FLASHBACK: [FN1]
This began in 2001:
AB 643 started out by Lowenthal selling it to the Senate and the Assembly co-horts that it was an Act to amend Section 12955 of the Government Code . . .
AB 643, as introduced, by Lowenthal to prevent “housing discrimination” . . .
AB 643, as amended to expand the definition of “fireman” . . .
AB 643, a year after its introduction, like a snake, Lowenthal changes it again: “An act to amend Section 1366 of the Civil Code, relating to housing” . . .
AB643, its new name: “Common interest developments: community association assessments”. . .
THE FINAL PRODUCT? THE REAL INTENT OF THAT (2001) AB643: TRANSFER FEES!!
FAST FORWARD TO 2007:
BAIT (HARMAN) SWITCH (LOWENTHAL)
Senate SNAKE Bill No. 948 states:
This bill would, in addition, as of January 1, 2009, require every member of the board of directors of an association that is comprised solely of residential separate interests complete at least one course during his or her first full term of office, and at least one course every 3 calendar years after becoming a member of the board, relating to decisional and statutory law regarding common interest developments, subject to a requirement that the course not exceed $25. !HA!
The bill would require such a course to be approved by the Department of Real Estate.* !HA! The bill would allow an association to pay for or reimburse board members for expenses associated with this requirement, as specified, and would exempt the declarant and the developer of a common interest development from this requirement until the board of directors governing that development is composed of a majority of separate interest owners. !HA! HA! HA!
*Is that the same sort of requirement for becoming a certified common interest development manager? If so, the embezzlements are UP, the theft is unabated, and the costs to homeowners is incalculable. WE DON’T NEED THAT TYPE OF APPROVAL, THANK YOU!
HOW MANY WAYS CAN YOU SPELL “FISCAL IMPACT ON THE STATE?” The laws change EVERY YEAR: How stupid is it to make the classes every THREE years?
--The DRE must have the budget to handle this.
--Will the DRE be subsidizing this education?
--The DRE must include a statutory mechanism for payment reimbursement.
--The DRE must also enforce this bill.
--The DRE must also handle complaints regarding these classes.
WHAT’S THE REAL REASON FOR THIS STUPID BILL? MONEY AND INDUSTRY CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS.
Our legislators are passing laws that at first blush look, and feel, "innocuous." They look and feel "inconsequential." They look and feel as if they are truly there to "help" *US*. But, they are "feel good" legislation with a deadly consequence and deadly cost to all deed-restricted property owners.
Our legislators USED to work for US. But, you, like me, know, that is no longer the case.
Those days are gone. Our legislators today merely pass bills as a "doorstop" --- meaning, they pass the bill in order to “hold” that place in the statute for the REAL bill that they intend to sneak in later, say maybe in a few months, a year, or a year down the line.
The legislators accomplish that by AMENDING THE BILL that they FIRST PASSED. Meaning, the Bill that everyone was CONVINCED was a "GOOD IDEA" and passed because it sounded good, will soon be amended right after it passes and when all of us relax and let our hair down. What will be said then? Well, it “sounded good at the time.”
Meanwhile, you and I pay the price for these DOORSTOPS. Boy do we ever pay a price! You probably have no idea how dear that price really is! The other problem that is plaguing us, is that we are being *USED* to assist these senators and legislators in passing these BAD bills. All of a sudden *WE* become THEIR *CAUSE.* Be we aren't REALLY their cause at all. WE (you and me) are the NEW *deep-pockets.* Why?
Because we live and own in a common interest development with a homeowners association.
This is about MONEY. OUR money. THEY want OUR money. NEARLY EVERY SENATE AND ASSEMBLY BILL PASSED, WHETHER IT STATES SO OR NOT, IS A MEANS TO THAT END: MONEY.
This nonsense about board members taking "classes" is so patently transparent to those of us in the know -- but it is sailing through the legislature. The bill is a RUSE as so many other CID and HOA bills have become -- they morph into something else later down the line when we think it is safe to come out of the water and are not paying attention. Read my new book, I write at length about that) [FN1]
Now, here's the rest of the bad news: We're losing that fight.
READ MY LETTER TO SENATOR HARMON AND LOWENTHAL BELOW TO SEE HOW BAD THIS IS. This guy's moving really fast -- I wonder what his campaign contributions were to take this bill and run with it? Call and Fax his both offices [and ALL Senators] and don't stop. and don't let him convince you we need this, we DON'T -- these guys are really smooth -- its the industry that wants it.
TELL THIS GUY: WE DON'T WANT NO STINKIN' SENATE BILL NO. 948 and to drop it.
Capitol Office Info
State Capitol, Room 2052
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 651-4035
Fax: (916) 445-9263
Costa Mesa Office Info
950 South Coast Dr., Ste 240
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Phone: (714) 957-4555
Fax: (714) 957-4560
Date: April 17, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Senator Harmon and Staff,
Thank you very much for speaking with me today. As mentioned on the phone, I have SERIOUS CONCERNS regarding several bills, in particular the aforementioned. The problem with all three bills mentioned above, is that absolutely no one in the California Legislature that I have tried to contact, will discuss these logically. I was told by a CAI LOBBYIST THAT THESE BILLS WERE A "DONE DEAL." What does THAT mean?
I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, HOMEOWNERS DO NOT WANT TO BE ANOTHER ATM FOR INDUSTRY BILLS. WE ARE TIRED OF PAYING FOR THESE GRANDIOSE PLANS PUT FORTH BY LOBBYISTS TO FURTHER THEIR OWN INDUSTRY.
It appears that these bills are headed for passing based not on logic, but on a "sound bite." However, when the sound bites disappear, and the Senators and Assemblypersons go home to their families and pension plans, those of us in residential deed-restricted common interest developments are left holding the money bag that funding those BAD BILLS.
I. Senate Bill 948: Very briefly (no room for my full analysis) The problems with this bill are foreseeable and they will clash with equal protection laws. This bill raises several red flags, and it should in my opinion, be withdrawn QUICKLY BEFORE MORE DAMAGE IS DONE. The problem involves crossover laws that will necessitate rewriting several areas of Codes because of the way the subdivision land acts are written and present mandated disclosures and internal management statutes for the operations of statutory homeowner associations, the Business and Professions Codes, Corporations Codes, etc. For full discussion please see, Vanitzian, Common Interest Developments—Homeowners Guide, (Thomson/West, 2006-2007).
Mandating even ONE HOUR of classroom instruction places a CONTINGENCY ON THE PURCHASE AND SALE of a residential deed-restricted property -- that did not exist before. Presently, all buyers are equal and can sit on their association board, just like any of the other titleholders in that development. BUT, once Senate Bill 948 passes, it places an automatic contingency on the PURCHASES AND SALES -- ONLY CAI WILL BE ABLE TO SIT ON THE BOARDS BECAUSE THE EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS WILL BE IN THEIR HANDS.
THE FUNDING FOR THIS FIASCO WILL COME FROM INCREASED ASSOCIATION DUES PAID FOR BY OWNERS WHO CAN LEAST AFFORD IT. IT WILL PREVENT THE GOOD GUYS FROM GETTING ON THEIR OWN BOARDS.
There is no proof that these INDUSTRY sponsored and taught classes will help minority titleholders -- they will just help the bad boards stay in place with help from the industry. What about those OWNERS who cannot attend classes, who do not have computers, who do not have transportation? Your bill also fails to address PARKING FEES.
Soon there will be talk of "exemptions" to taking classes, and the ball keeps rolling getting bigger and more complicated from there on. It is difficult enough to sell these monsters -- pork it up some more, and it will be impossible. This bill porks up, and complicates the purchase.
Briefly, it is poorly drafted; costly to implement; chilling effect; undue burden on buyers and owners; contradicted by crossover laws; unequivocally subject to challenge; and has a fiscal impact. California presently has millions of individuals that are unemployed, it is difficult enough to get a job, let alone find the time away from one’s own responsibilities to sit in a class -- SOMEWHERE in California.
Just GETTING there is a PROBLEM. This type of home-ownership is becoming way too complicated and this will exacerbate an already volatile situation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
References
[FN1] [See Vanitzian, Common Interest Developments—Homeowners Guide (Thomson/West)]
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
(c) D. Vanitzian
May 16, 2007
The Gray Panthers are on record as SUPPORTING A BAD BAD BAD BAD BILL: Senate Bill Number 948. SHAME ON YOU. Where the heck are you getting your information from?
Because it is so difficult to keep up with California’s Legislature and their DIRTY TRICKS, too many groups including SENIOR GROUPS are merely taking the word of people whom they [think they] trust, as to what Senate and Assembly Bills they will support or oppose. That is a dangerous thing to do -- AND IT IS A MISTAKE!
Every common interest development owner that is subject to a homeowner association and/or a board of directors NEEDS TO remember this: Whenever you see a mandated dollar amount, that is, ANY dollar amount, even ONE DOLLAR written into a Senate or Assembly Bill:
--it automatically becomes an assessment.
--because it automatically becomes an “assessment” you cannot NOT pay it.
--because it is an assessment your property is subject to NONJUDICIAL FORECLOSURE.
--once that Senate or Assembly Bill passes it can change tomorrow.
Remember that $1.00 fee that you didn’t think was so bad, well, tomorrow it just became $100, and two months later it became $1,000, and it won’t EVER stop.
Senate Bill 948 is NOT about classes. It is about INDUSTRY SUBSIDIES and CONTROL OVER YOUR ASSETS THROUGH FORECLOSURE.
SENATE BILL 948: BAIT (HARMAN) SWITCH (LOWENTHAL)
He’s baaaaaaaaaaaaaaack . . . . . . YOU ALL REMEMBER LOWENTHAL BACK IN 2001 DON’T YOU? He was responsible for this deceitful little trick on common interest development deed-restricted owners: It took him a year to pull it off, but by golly he did it! FLASHBACK: [FN1]
This began in 2001:
AB 643 started out by Lowenthal selling it to the Senate and the Assembly co-horts that it was an Act to amend Section 12955 of the Government Code . . .
AB 643, as introduced, by Lowenthal to prevent “housing discrimination” . . .
AB 643, as amended to expand the definition of “fireman” . . .
AB 643, a year after its introduction, like a snake, Lowenthal changes it again: “An act to amend Section 1366 of the Civil Code, relating to housing” . . .
AB643, its new name: “Common interest developments: community association assessments”. . .
THE FINAL PRODUCT? THE REAL INTENT OF THAT (2001) AB643: TRANSFER FEES!!
FAST FORWARD TO 2007:
BAIT (HARMAN) SWITCH (LOWENTHAL)
Senate SNAKE Bill No. 948 states:
This bill would, in addition, as of January 1, 2009, require every member of the board of directors of an association that is comprised solely of residential separate interests complete at least one course during his or her first full term of office, and at least one course every 3 calendar years after becoming a member of the board, relating to decisional and statutory law regarding common interest developments, subject to a requirement that the course not exceed $25. !HA!
The bill would require such a course to be approved by the Department of Real Estate.* !HA! The bill would allow an association to pay for or reimburse board members for expenses associated with this requirement, as specified, and would exempt the declarant and the developer of a common interest development from this requirement until the board of directors governing that development is composed of a majority of separate interest owners. !HA! HA! HA!
*Is that the same sort of requirement for becoming a certified common interest development manager? If so, the embezzlements are UP, the theft is unabated, and the costs to homeowners is incalculable. WE DON’T NEED THAT TYPE OF APPROVAL, THANK YOU!
HOW MANY WAYS CAN YOU SPELL “FISCAL IMPACT ON THE STATE?” The laws change EVERY YEAR: How stupid is it to make the classes every THREE years?
--The DRE must have the budget to handle this.
--Will the DRE be subsidizing this education?
--The DRE must include a statutory mechanism for payment reimbursement.
--The DRE must also enforce this bill.
--The DRE must also handle complaints regarding these classes.
WHAT’S THE REAL REASON FOR THIS STUPID BILL? MONEY AND INDUSTRY CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS.
Our legislators are passing laws that at first blush look, and feel, "innocuous." They look and feel "inconsequential." They look and feel as if they are truly there to "help" *US*. But, they are "feel good" legislation with a deadly consequence and deadly cost to all deed-restricted property owners.
Our legislators USED to work for US. But, you, like me, know, that is no longer the case.
Those days are gone. Our legislators today merely pass bills as a "doorstop" --- meaning, they pass the bill in order to “hold” that place in the statute for the REAL bill that they intend to sneak in later, say maybe in a few months, a year, or a year down the line.
The legislators accomplish that by AMENDING THE BILL that they FIRST PASSED. Meaning, the Bill that everyone was CONVINCED was a "GOOD IDEA" and passed because it sounded good, will soon be amended right after it passes and when all of us relax and let our hair down. What will be said then? Well, it “sounded good at the time.”
Meanwhile, you and I pay the price for these DOORSTOPS. Boy do we ever pay a price! You probably have no idea how dear that price really is! The other problem that is plaguing us, is that we are being *USED* to assist these senators and legislators in passing these BAD bills. All of a sudden *WE* become THEIR *CAUSE.* Be we aren't REALLY their cause at all. WE (you and me) are the NEW *deep-pockets.* Why?
Because we live and own in a common interest development with a homeowners association.
This is about MONEY. OUR money. THEY want OUR money. NEARLY EVERY SENATE AND ASSEMBLY BILL PASSED, WHETHER IT STATES SO OR NOT, IS A MEANS TO THAT END: MONEY.
This nonsense about board members taking "classes" is so patently transparent to those of us in the know -- but it is sailing through the legislature. The bill is a RUSE as so many other CID and HOA bills have become -- they morph into something else later down the line when we think it is safe to come out of the water and are not paying attention. Read my new book, I write at length about that) [FN1]
Now, here's the rest of the bad news: We're losing that fight.
READ MY LETTER TO SENATOR HARMON AND LOWENTHAL BELOW TO SEE HOW BAD THIS IS. This guy's moving really fast -- I wonder what his campaign contributions were to take this bill and run with it? Call and Fax his both offices [and ALL Senators] and don't stop. and don't let him convince you we need this, we DON'T -- these guys are really smooth -- its the industry that wants it.
TELL THIS GUY: WE DON'T WANT NO STINKIN' SENATE BILL NO. 948 and to drop it.
Capitol Office Info
State Capitol, Room 2052
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 651-4035
Fax: (916) 445-9263
Costa Mesa Office Info
950 South Coast Dr., Ste 240
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Phone: (714) 957-4555
Fax: (714) 957-4560
Date: April 17, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Senator Harmon and Staff,
Thank you very much for speaking with me today. As mentioned on the phone, I have SERIOUS CONCERNS regarding several bills, in particular the aforementioned. The problem with all three bills mentioned above, is that absolutely no one in the California Legislature that I have tried to contact, will discuss these logically. I was told by a CAI LOBBYIST THAT THESE BILLS WERE A "DONE DEAL." What does THAT mean?
I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, HOMEOWNERS DO NOT WANT TO BE ANOTHER ATM FOR INDUSTRY BILLS. WE ARE TIRED OF PAYING FOR THESE GRANDIOSE PLANS PUT FORTH BY LOBBYISTS TO FURTHER THEIR OWN INDUSTRY.
It appears that these bills are headed for passing based not on logic, but on a "sound bite." However, when the sound bites disappear, and the Senators and Assemblypersons go home to their families and pension plans, those of us in residential deed-restricted common interest developments are left holding the money bag that funding those BAD BILLS.
I. Senate Bill 948: Very briefly (no room for my full analysis) The problems with this bill are foreseeable and they will clash with equal protection laws. This bill raises several red flags, and it should in my opinion, be withdrawn QUICKLY BEFORE MORE DAMAGE IS DONE. The problem involves crossover laws that will necessitate rewriting several areas of Codes because of the way the subdivision land acts are written and present mandated disclosures and internal management statutes for the operations of statutory homeowner associations, the Business and Professions Codes, Corporations Codes, etc. For full discussion please see, Vanitzian, Common Interest Developments—Homeowners Guide, (Thomson/West, 2006-2007).
Mandating even ONE HOUR of classroom instruction places a CONTINGENCY ON THE PURCHASE AND SALE of a residential deed-restricted property -- that did not exist before. Presently, all buyers are equal and can sit on their association board, just like any of the other titleholders in that development. BUT, once Senate Bill 948 passes, it places an automatic contingency on the PURCHASES AND SALES -- ONLY CAI WILL BE ABLE TO SIT ON THE BOARDS BECAUSE THE EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS WILL BE IN THEIR HANDS.
THE FUNDING FOR THIS FIASCO WILL COME FROM INCREASED ASSOCIATION DUES PAID FOR BY OWNERS WHO CAN LEAST AFFORD IT. IT WILL PREVENT THE GOOD GUYS FROM GETTING ON THEIR OWN BOARDS.
There is no proof that these INDUSTRY sponsored and taught classes will help minority titleholders -- they will just help the bad boards stay in place with help from the industry. What about those OWNERS who cannot attend classes, who do not have computers, who do not have transportation? Your bill also fails to address PARKING FEES.
Soon there will be talk of "exemptions" to taking classes, and the ball keeps rolling getting bigger and more complicated from there on. It is difficult enough to sell these monsters -- pork it up some more, and it will be impossible. This bill porks up, and complicates the purchase.
Briefly, it is poorly drafted; costly to implement; chilling effect; undue burden on buyers and owners; contradicted by crossover laws; unequivocally subject to challenge; and has a fiscal impact. California presently has millions of individuals that are unemployed, it is difficult enough to get a job, let alone find the time away from one’s own responsibilities to sit in a class -- SOMEWHERE in California.
Just GETTING there is a PROBLEM. This type of home-ownership is becoming way too complicated and this will exacerbate an already volatile situation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
References
[FN1] [See Vanitzian, Common Interest Developments—Homeowners Guide (Thomson/West)]
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
The Law of Unintended Consequences: Legislation and HOA BOD Cause and Effect: Clueless in my CAR
The Law of Unintended Consequences: Legislation and HOA BOD Cause and Effect: Clueless in my CAR
May 16, 2007
Coming off a most improbable but successful campaign to defeat SB 670 author and HOA advocate Vanitizian thanks supporters making a connection between the quality of legislation being passed in Sacramento, and the quality of life in most homeowners associations as a function of association board of directors. It is not too big of a leap to see that resident apathy within homeowners associations, is not much different that with typical real estate agents in relationship to CAR.
Following is a letter from Vanitzian thanking a number of volunteers who collaborated in the recent defeat of SB 670
"How we live - how much we pay - and IF we pay - depends on killing these bad bills and others like them this year 2007.
Unless the people who are directly affected by this bad legislation speak up - or have a spokesperson that they support to speak up for and with the
We will continue to be condensed like high-density sardines left to fight the establishment and our tyrannical management companies and boards of directors who ARE supported by the Legislature and the industries who fund their campaigns.
It is a miserable existence and a rough place to be without unlimited disposable funds.
But it is also a "mentality" that California's legislature fashions its legislation to. That is, because the response by owners is PREDICTABLE, there is more often than not, NO response.
For those who did not fax me or get their neighbors to fax me, or did not write or contact their Senators and Assemblypersons on-the-record, ask yourself this:
Are you having difficulties in your homeowner associations?
If you are, WHERE DO, OR DID YOU, TURN FOR ASSISTANCE?
WHAT DID IT COST YOU?
---> There is no Free Tech Support for Owner's with HOA problems
If you did not turn to your Senator or Assemblyperson then WHERE DID YOU GET HELP? WHAT DID THAT HELP **COST** YOU? WHAT WILL IT COST YOU TOMORROW?
Did you receive "ACCURATE INFORMATION" and HELP that "WORKED"? How will you continue to get accurate information for FREE? Do you know ANYONE who works for free?
This legislature is using YOUR MONEY to make your living conditions as bad as it could possibly be and they are doing that because you are a sitting duck if you own ANY property in a common interest development.
You are, effectively in a "parking lot" of people for the Legislature to legislate EASILY.
The laws they are passing that affect common interest developments and properties subject to homeowners associations - IN MY OPINION - is equivalent to laws that contain and house prisoners. They want to contain US [parking lot] and do so at our expense. At least prisoners' accommodations are paid for by TAX dollars. Ours are not.
If the owners who are subject to these bad laws ARE NOT MORE VOCAL, **QUICKLY** -- THEY HAVE NO BUSINESS COMPLAINING later when they are forced to LIVE UNDER the bad legislation.
I see it ALL THE TIME, people write me and call:
"I have a problem with blah blah blah blah blah."
Me, Question: Do you know who your Senator and Assemblyperson are?
Them, Answer: No, why do I need that?!! I'm asking YOU a question regarding my board, can they do this to me?
Me, Question: At a minimum have you read the Davis-Stirling Act?
Them, Answer: No, what's that? And anyway I don't have the money to get that. [never mind that they have the money to hire lawyer after lawyer and take vacations and dine out]
Me, Question: Did you read all the governing documents pertaining to the common interest development where you bought that property?
Them, Answer: Well, I thought I did, I mean, I think I did. How would I know?
Me, Question: Do you have all of the governing documents in your possession?
Them, Answer: I have what they gave me in escrow, I think I have them somewhere.
Me, Question: Do you realize you have a deed-restricted title?"
Them, Answer: No. What's that? I'm just having a problem with my BOARD.
and the beat goes on . . . . . . . ." - D. Vanitizian
Clueless in my HOA, clueless in my CAR!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neither the LA Times nor CAR address the Wicked Twin-Witches of the West: SB 127 AND AB 980 - see below:
For legislation contact information, click here, find your representative and let them know how you feel – unless you are Clueless in my CID/HOA!
Other contact information:
James W. Litz
Government Affairs Director
Beverly Hills Greater Los Angeles Association of REALTORS®
8501 Wilshire Blvd. #340
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
P: 310-704-2767
F: 310-652-4451
Alexander E. Creel
Senior Vice President and Chief Lobbyist
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®
980 Ninth Street
Sacramento Ca. 95814
(916) 492-5201
(916) 444-2033 (Fax)
alexc@car.org
ACTIVE LEGISLATION
NO on Senate Bill 948
NO on Senate Bill 127
NO on Senate Bill 528
NO on Assembly Bill 563
NO on Assembly Bill 567
NO on Assembly Bill 952
NO on Assembly Bill 980
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO
May 16, 2007
Coming off a most improbable but successful campaign to defeat SB 670 author and HOA advocate Vanitizian thanks supporters making a connection between the quality of legislation being passed in Sacramento, and the quality of life in most homeowners associations as a function of association board of directors. It is not too big of a leap to see that resident apathy within homeowners associations, is not much different that with typical real estate agents in relationship to CAR.
Following is a letter from Vanitzian thanking a number of volunteers who collaborated in the recent defeat of SB 670
"How we live - how much we pay - and IF we pay - depends on killing these bad bills and others like them this year 2007.
Unless the people who are directly affected by this bad legislation speak up - or have a spokesperson that they support to speak up for and with the
We will continue to be condensed like high-density sardines left to fight the establishment and our tyrannical management companies and boards of directors who ARE supported by the Legislature and the industries who fund their campaigns.
It is a miserable existence and a rough place to be without unlimited disposable funds.
But it is also a "mentality" that California's legislature fashions its legislation to. That is, because the response by owners is PREDICTABLE, there is more often than not, NO response.
For those who did not fax me or get their neighbors to fax me, or did not write or contact their Senators and Assemblypersons on-the-record, ask yourself this:
Are you having difficulties in your homeowner associations?
If you are, WHERE DO, OR DID YOU, TURN FOR ASSISTANCE?
WHAT DID IT COST YOU?
---> There is no Free Tech Support for Owner's with HOA problems
If you did not turn to your Senator or Assemblyperson then WHERE DID YOU GET HELP? WHAT DID THAT HELP **COST** YOU? WHAT WILL IT COST YOU TOMORROW?
Did you receive "ACCURATE INFORMATION" and HELP that "WORKED"? How will you continue to get accurate information for FREE? Do you know ANYONE who works for free?
This legislature is using YOUR MONEY to make your living conditions as bad as it could possibly be and they are doing that because you are a sitting duck if you own ANY property in a common interest development.
You are, effectively in a "parking lot" of people for the Legislature to legislate EASILY.
The laws they are passing that affect common interest developments and properties subject to homeowners associations - IN MY OPINION - is equivalent to laws that contain and house prisoners. They want to contain US [parking lot] and do so at our expense. At least prisoners' accommodations are paid for by TAX dollars. Ours are not.
If the owners who are subject to these bad laws ARE NOT MORE VOCAL, **QUICKLY** -- THEY HAVE NO BUSINESS COMPLAINING later when they are forced to LIVE UNDER the bad legislation.
I see it ALL THE TIME, people write me and call:
"I have a problem with blah blah blah blah blah."
Me, Question: Do you know who your Senator and Assemblyperson are?
Them, Answer: No, why do I need that?!! I'm asking YOU a question regarding my board, can they do this to me?
Me, Question: At a minimum have you read the Davis-Stirling Act?
Them, Answer: No, what's that? And anyway I don't have the money to get that. [never mind that they have the money to hire lawyer after lawyer and take vacations and dine out]
Me, Question: Did you read all the governing documents pertaining to the common interest development where you bought that property?
Them, Answer: Well, I thought I did, I mean, I think I did. How would I know?
Me, Question: Do you have all of the governing documents in your possession?
Them, Answer: I have what they gave me in escrow, I think I have them somewhere.
Me, Question: Do you realize you have a deed-restricted title?"
Them, Answer: No. What's that? I'm just having a problem with my BOARD.
and the beat goes on . . . . . . . ." - D. Vanitizian
Clueless in my HOA, clueless in my CAR!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neither the LA Times nor CAR address the Wicked Twin-Witches of the West: SB 127 AND AB 980 - see below:
For legislation contact information, click here, find your representative and let them know how you feel – unless you are Clueless in my CID/HOA!
Other contact information:
James W. Litz
Government Affairs Director
Beverly Hills Greater Los Angeles Association of REALTORS®
8501 Wilshire Blvd. #340
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
P: 310-704-2767
F: 310-652-4451
Alexander E. Creel
Senior Vice President and Chief Lobbyist
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®
980 Ninth Street
Sacramento Ca. 95814
(916) 492-5201
(916) 444-2033 (Fax)
alexc@car.org
ACTIVE LEGISLATION
NO on Senate Bill 948
NO on Senate Bill 127
NO on Senate Bill 528
NO on Assembly Bill 563
NO on Assembly Bill 567
NO on Assembly Bill 952
NO on Assembly Bill 980
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO
Saturday, May 12, 2007
CZ Master Association - Varo & Mezger Should NOT Be Re-elected - 11 Reasons -Possible Scenarios and the Keystone Effect
CZ Master Association - Varo & Mezger Should NOT Be Re-elected - 11 Reasons
By former member of the CZ board of directors, Joseph Morabito, and Analysis by CotoBuzz
May 12, 2007
Possible Scenarios and the Keystone Effect
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. To be more specific and to demonstrate what I am saying Varo and Mezger should not be re-elected for the following 11 reasons:
Due Increases: Varo & Mezger raised dues twice in two years because of fiscal mismanagement. Rather than deal with subsidies going to outsiders, cutting expenses like high priced Consultants and getting our water cost under control, implementing proper competitive processes to bid out contracts and seeking contribution from the county to maintain our Sports Park and pay for the CHP, they extracted more than $800,000 in additional dues from CZ Members through dues increases both of which could have been avoided if these options had been implemented.
Manipulation of 2006 CZ Board Election: In 2006, Varo & Mezger conspired to deny a candidate a Board seat. They knew very well that Sean Larkin, another CZ Board Member had relocated to take another job; yet rather than ask him to resign before the election, they convinced him to tender his resignation the week after the election so Varo & Mezger could appoint a Board Member of their liking rather than have one elected by our Delegates. That was despicable.
Firing the CHP: Varo and Mezger fired the CHP knowing full well of the dangers on our streets from speeders with nothing to replace pro-active traffic patrols in Coto. They did this to protect their friends at the country club from potential DUI’s. During the CHP absence, the accident rate went up dramatically and we experienced two tragic deaths on our streets. Firing the CHP constituted a reckless action. And, Varo publicly calling the CHP “extortionists” has damaged CZ’s relationship with the CHP so much so that the CHP is not willing to commit the additional hours to Coto that we need. This will not change as long as Varo & Mezger serve on the CZ Board.
Universal Patrol Contract: Varo & Mezger awarded a $1.5 million contract to UPS without a proper due diligence process. Joe Aguirre and I saw the materials used to choose Universal and I can tell all from 27 years of solid business experience in supplier selection and management that the process used was bogus. In essence, Varo & Mezger fired the largest most sophisticated security firm in the world and hired one of the smallest as a result of the smooze factor not a qualitative analysis of data. One of the UPS Vice Presidents lives in Coto which is no reason to select a supplier. If this is happening with UPS one of our largest contracts, it is reasonable to assume that proper competitive bidding processes are not being implemented concerning other goods and services purchased by CZ.
Keystone Property Management: It has now been about 6 years since CZ has gone out to bid for Property Management Services even though their fees have gone up since I first took the Association out to bid for these services and Keystone was selected. This contract and all major contracts should be bid on a regular three year bid cycle to ensure that we are always getting the best contract terms and conditions and pricing in the marketplace as would occur in any business. There are also new approaches that could be implemented to save us money. This is the only way to keep expenses under control and avoid pre-mature dues increases. Varo & Mezger have purposefully failed to put proper Supplier Selection and Contract Management procedures and practices in place that are common in business. I have offered my help concerning this process many times since I have substantial experience at doing this, but to no avail.
Increased Liability: Varo & Mezger have increased liability exposure for our Members by their actions. First, they have co-mingled the affairs of CotoCAN with CZ. Second, they have converted the Keystone Executive Director into a CZ employee in fact. Third, they have allowed the Oakview/Oakknoll gates to remain open in violation of the legal agreement that was a condition of development of those tracts. And, fourth, they fired the CHP with no replacement. All of these actions increase the potential for litigation against CZ and through it our Members. And, in fact CZ is being sued for a serious accident related case during the period we had no CHP coverage.
Subsidies and Give Aways: Varo & Mezger have given away CZ revenues that legitimately belong to our Members. The money going to CotoCAN for advertising in CotoVoice and the maps at our gates belongs to CZ Members who are the basis for that revenue. In addition, Varo & Mezger have refused to charge significantly higher fees to non-CZ Members who pay no CZ dues to use our facilities and for transponders and otherwise cause CZ expense which has contributed to the last two dues increases. Further, at one point Varo & Mezger funded a Keystone staff member to act as Activities Coordinator for CotoCAN which is completely inappropriate.
Welcome Home Center Fiasco: Varo & Mezger implemented an unprecedented Special Assessment that had to be rescinded because they had no deal to purchase the Welcome Home Center . This is just one example of many of their failure to do their homework.
Landscaping Mess: The river rock work along Coto de Caza Drive does not conform to the overall design palate along that street which is an example of just plain incompetence. And, there is no strategic plan in place to deal with Landscaping Renovation all over Coto which is a serious issue. Investment in Landscaping Replacement, a critical Association function, has actually gone down under Varo & Mezger when compared with the Glisson/Rose years even with the two Varo/Mezger dues increases.
Inappropriate Political Actions: Varo recently endorsed a political candidate as President of CZ which is entirely inappropriate. In addition, Varo & Mezger are pushing for formation of a Community Services District, which is both unneeded and would absolutely raise our property taxes.
Conflict of Interest: Mezger is using the guards that we all pay for at our gates to hand out maps selling his wife’s real estate services to benefit his family income. No CZ Board Member in the history of the Association has ever used it to advance their personal financial interests.
Folks, it is time for a change. We need fresh ideas on the CZ Board. I served my 2 ½ years, made a contribution and that was enough. Most important, we need CZ Board Members who understand the concepts of fiduciary responsibility, ethical behavior and conflict of interest. As such and based on all the issues I have outlined, Bob Varo and Jerry Mezger should NOT be re-elected to the CZ Board. Joe Morabito
P.S. Other former CZ Board Members who are very knowledgeable about CZ issues are also opposed to the re-election of Varo & Mezger. That should increase the alarm bells.
Hi Joe:
We are in violent agreement – but do not see what you suggest to come even close to reality, unless there is a calculated and coordinated effort by independent delegates to take advantage of cumulative voting – this effort should also make sure that for the duration and during election night, the Keystone Effect is neutralized – see below.
As CotoBuzz readers know, we have a perfect record forecasting results of the CZ board of director’s elections ever since Varo/Mezger got to the board.
Unless there is an organized group of delegates that can coordinate their collective cumulative vote, we are predicting a Varo/Mezger re-election. At the moment, we can guarantee there is no organized opposition.
So here is a brief analysis with the possible scenarios – (see table below) , worse case (status quo in gray), palatable (in yellow) and best case (in green).
Analysis:
In fact and deed, Yocham and Zipperman have shown that for whatever reason, they have not strayed far from the Varo/Mezger delineated path. A restraining force (leadership) is required for Yocham and Zipperman to change their alliance.
Zurovski does not seem to have passion or conviction and we are absolutely sure that he will follow the Mezger/Varo line, unless there is a restraining force.
Hylka exudes common sense and conviction – the only possible Varo/Mezger restraining force (and leader) to come along in the last fours years.
Consider the “Keystone Syndrome: (“accidents” seem to happen around election time, favoring the house) – The stated reason Mezger does not like direct elections (according to his statement during Candidate’s Night), is that with direct elections, “the board needs to take measures to prevent fraud”, whereas with the current delegate system, corruption is OK.
Hence, because of the Keystone Effect and cumulative voting, the most likely scenario for change is for a coordinated effort (independent delegates should cast ALL their votes) for Hylka.
If there is a coordinated effort with sufficient votes, then independent delegates should case their votes in such a proportion that both Hylka and Zurovski are elected.
Seat 1
Seat 2
Seat 3
Seat 4
Seat 5
Zipperman
Yocham
Varo
Mezger
Schlieder
Zipperman
Yocham
Varo
Mezger
Zurovski
Zipperman
Yocham
Varo
Mezger
Hylka
Zipperman
Yocham
Varo
Schlieder
Zurovski
Zipperman
Yocham
Varo
Schlieder
Hylka
Zipperman
Yocham
Mezger
Schlieder
Zurovski
Zipperman
Yocham
Mezger
Schlieder
Hylka
Zipperman
Yocham
Varo
Hylka
Zurovski
Zipperman
Yocham
Mezger
Hylka
Zurovski
Zipperman
Yocham
Schlieder
Hylka
Zurovski
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
One More Near Miss Avoided - Clueless in My CID/HOA
One More Near Miss Avoided - Clueless in My CID/HOA
May 10, 2007
The number one rule in the Australian Aviation Magazine’s list of Flight Rules is the one about airplane take off and landing: Every takeoff is optional, Every landing is mandatory!
It is safe to say that most travelers know that takeoffs and landings are the most dangerous part of flying, and we regularly hear news reports of “near misses. A study by Forbes.com finds that hundreds of commercial jets have come within eight seconds of colliding on runways. The study details the top most dangerous airports in the U.S., based on incident reports to the FAA. For example:
1. North Las Vegas, a small airport not, Vegas airport. It has had 63 runway incidents and six deaths since 2001.
2. Long Beach/Dougherty Field, with 78 incidents.
3. Charlotte/Douglas International, N.C., , shot into third place due to a single serious incident.
4 Los Angeles International, with 95 serious incidents since 2001,
5. Boston's Logan International. The study notes that runway mishaps are up 37 percent since 1995, due in large measure to more flights but inadequate equipment to deal with them. Find the full report here.
It is also fair to say that most of us simply dismisses these reports as “nice trivia”, “who cares, as long as it does not affect me”, or simply dismiss it all together.
Just as dangerous and important is Common Interest Development (CID/HOA) legislation, which some HOA board of directors, such as the CZ BOD simply dismiss as “ micro-managing” due to a small number of poorly managed associations.
There is no better example of such a near-miss as the recent defeat of SB 670, which the California Association of Realtors® announces in a Red Alert as “Home buyers at risk: SB 670 Defeated in Committee” and describes the defeat as “SB 670 (Correa), C.A.R.’s sponsored “Private Transfer Tax Prohibition” bill was defeated today by the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee today”. Then it adds “The legislation would have protected consumers by placing responsible restrictions on private transfer taxes levied by developers and limiting the proceeds to environmental and affordable housing efforts related to the new development on which the private transfer taxes are imposed”.
However; leaders of the anti-SB 670 think differently: “The public will never know how close they came to having permanent liens put on their properties and their hard earned money being diverted to "political charities", they probably don't even know such a thing exists, or that their trade groups would sell them down the river”
What most of us do not know is that anti-SB670 leaders describe Steven Pawera, A CAR member as a person who “ deserves a medal of honor. He looks to serve his clients honorably and to protect their interests. He ventured out and stood up and questioned the real estate industry that is vested with the power and the money through their association dues, to protect real estate professionals”, dared not to openly question the wisdom of such bill, but do so openly and taking on powerful CAR Senior Vice President and Chief Lobbyist, Alexander E. Creel
Some of Mr. Pawera’s questions to CAR are:
· Please tell me, what was the pressing need for this bill that caused CAR to sponsor it?
· Who came to CAR and said ‘please help us do this’?
· When exactly did CAR think it was a good idea to volunteer its members to become the disclosure police and deep-pockets of liability for this bill (and the eight related bills) that only will hurt the members by subjecting us to more lawsuits and higher E&O fees?
· Why is this bill being rushed through on a fast track, without adequate time for AN INFORMED analysis and response?
· Why as the sponsor, did CAR wait until almost the last minute to solicit the support of members?
· Given the deleterious effect this bill will have on members, let alone the public in general, why didn’t CAR solicit member opinions prior to ever sponsoring the bill?
· As for the bill(s) itself, SB670 completely undermines Civil Code Section 711 (even with the more recent proposed change of “adding” a subsection rather than full amendment to the actual code section), which has been in existence and served Californians well since the late 1800s.
· Why do you think it would be a good to create legislation to protect one class of homeownership but not another?
· You do realize that excluding owners of CIDs from this bill will serve only to validate, if not exacerbate, the abuses they have suffered under the Davis-Stirling Act?
· Why do you think any realtor would support legislation where he/she will be responsible for enforcing the new disclosure laws, and assuming the various risks attached to statute, all to protect a third party, unrelated to the transaction, and the private liens and transfer taxes that benefit those parties?
· If the goal of the bills was really to protect Californians from the problems we’ve seen with runaway and unaccountable private liens and transfer taxes, there are definitely better ways to do it than deceiving the membership, and rushing poorly thought out legislation into law, for which we will all inevitably pay the price.
So now that SB 670 has been defeated and that Mr. Pawera will surely be labeled as a “traitor” by CAR, all those living in CID/HOA environments can go back to a state of “Clueless in my CID/HOA”, right? If you think so, perhaps you can also consider other popular wisdom such as:
Ignorance is Bliss
What conflict of Interest?
Stupid is as stupid does
Micro-management
And if you think that way, you may want to consider that just like all those airport near misses, this is just the tip of the iceberg!
For legislation contact information, click here, find your representative and let them know how you feel – unless you are Clueless in my CID/HOA!
Other contact information:
James W. Litz
Government Affairs Director
Beverly Hills Greater Los Angeles Association of REALTORS®
8501 Wilshire Blvd. #340
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
P: 310-704-2767
F: 310-652-4451
Alexander E. Creel
Senior Vice President and Chief Lobbyist
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®
980 Ninth Street
Sacramento Ca. 95814
(916) 492-5201
(916) 444-2033 (Fax)
alexc@car.org
ACTIVE LEGISLATION
NO on Senate Bill 670
NO on Senate Bill 948
NO on Senate Bill 127
NO on Senate Bill 528
NO on Assembly Bill 563
NO on Assembly Bill 567
NO on Assembly Bill 952
NO on Assembly Bill 980
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
May 10, 2007
The number one rule in the Australian Aviation Magazine’s list of Flight Rules is the one about airplane take off and landing: Every takeoff is optional, Every landing is mandatory!
It is safe to say that most travelers know that takeoffs and landings are the most dangerous part of flying, and we regularly hear news reports of “near misses. A study by Forbes.com finds that hundreds of commercial jets have come within eight seconds of colliding on runways. The study details the top most dangerous airports in the U.S., based on incident reports to the FAA. For example:
1. North Las Vegas, a small airport not, Vegas airport. It has had 63 runway incidents and six deaths since 2001.
2. Long Beach/Dougherty Field, with 78 incidents.
3. Charlotte/Douglas International, N.C., , shot into third place due to a single serious incident.
4 Los Angeles International, with 95 serious incidents since 2001,
5. Boston's Logan International. The study notes that runway mishaps are up 37 percent since 1995, due in large measure to more flights but inadequate equipment to deal with them. Find the full report here.
It is also fair to say that most of us simply dismisses these reports as “nice trivia”, “who cares, as long as it does not affect me”, or simply dismiss it all together.
Just as dangerous and important is Common Interest Development (CID/HOA) legislation, which some HOA board of directors, such as the CZ BOD simply dismiss as “ micro-managing” due to a small number of poorly managed associations.
There is no better example of such a near-miss as the recent defeat of SB 670, which the California Association of Realtors® announces in a Red Alert as “Home buyers at risk: SB 670 Defeated in Committee” and describes the defeat as “SB 670 (Correa), C.A.R.’s sponsored “Private Transfer Tax Prohibition” bill was defeated today by the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee today”. Then it adds “The legislation would have protected consumers by placing responsible restrictions on private transfer taxes levied by developers and limiting the proceeds to environmental and affordable housing efforts related to the new development on which the private transfer taxes are imposed”.
However; leaders of the anti-SB 670 think differently: “The public will never know how close they came to having permanent liens put on their properties and their hard earned money being diverted to "political charities", they probably don't even know such a thing exists, or that their trade groups would sell them down the river”
What most of us do not know is that anti-SB670 leaders describe Steven Pawera, A CAR member as a person who “ deserves a medal of honor. He looks to serve his clients honorably and to protect their interests. He ventured out and stood up and questioned the real estate industry that is vested with the power and the money through their association dues, to protect real estate professionals”, dared not to openly question the wisdom of such bill, but do so openly and taking on powerful CAR Senior Vice President and Chief Lobbyist, Alexander E. Creel
Some of Mr. Pawera’s questions to CAR are:
· Please tell me, what was the pressing need for this bill that caused CAR to sponsor it?
· Who came to CAR and said ‘please help us do this’?
· When exactly did CAR think it was a good idea to volunteer its members to become the disclosure police and deep-pockets of liability for this bill (and the eight related bills) that only will hurt the members by subjecting us to more lawsuits and higher E&O fees?
· Why is this bill being rushed through on a fast track, without adequate time for AN INFORMED analysis and response?
· Why as the sponsor, did CAR wait until almost the last minute to solicit the support of members?
· Given the deleterious effect this bill will have on members, let alone the public in general, why didn’t CAR solicit member opinions prior to ever sponsoring the bill?
· As for the bill(s) itself, SB670 completely undermines Civil Code Section 711 (even with the more recent proposed change of “adding” a subsection rather than full amendment to the actual code section), which has been in existence and served Californians well since the late 1800s.
· Why do you think it would be a good to create legislation to protect one class of homeownership but not another?
· You do realize that excluding owners of CIDs from this bill will serve only to validate, if not exacerbate, the abuses they have suffered under the Davis-Stirling Act?
· Why do you think any realtor would support legislation where he/she will be responsible for enforcing the new disclosure laws, and assuming the various risks attached to statute, all to protect a third party, unrelated to the transaction, and the private liens and transfer taxes that benefit those parties?
· If the goal of the bills was really to protect Californians from the problems we’ve seen with runaway and unaccountable private liens and transfer taxes, there are definitely better ways to do it than deceiving the membership, and rushing poorly thought out legislation into law, for which we will all inevitably pay the price.
So now that SB 670 has been defeated and that Mr. Pawera will surely be labeled as a “traitor” by CAR, all those living in CID/HOA environments can go back to a state of “Clueless in my CID/HOA”, right? If you think so, perhaps you can also consider other popular wisdom such as:
Ignorance is Bliss
What conflict of Interest?
Stupid is as stupid does
Micro-management
And if you think that way, you may want to consider that just like all those airport near misses, this is just the tip of the iceberg!
For legislation contact information, click here, find your representative and let them know how you feel – unless you are Clueless in my CID/HOA!
Other contact information:
James W. Litz
Government Affairs Director
Beverly Hills Greater Los Angeles Association of REALTORS®
8501 Wilshire Blvd. #340
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
P: 310-704-2767
F: 310-652-4451
Alexander E. Creel
Senior Vice President and Chief Lobbyist
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®
980 Ninth Street
Sacramento Ca. 95814
(916) 492-5201
(916) 444-2033 (Fax)
alexc@car.org
ACTIVE LEGISLATION
NO on Senate Bill 670
NO on Senate Bill 948
NO on Senate Bill 127
NO on Senate Bill 528
NO on Assembly Bill 563
NO on Assembly Bill 567
NO on Assembly Bill 952
NO on Assembly Bill 980
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
DUI Roving Patrol in Aliso Viejo, Laguna Nigel and Laguna Woods
DUI Roving Patrol in Aliso Viejo, Laguna Nigel and Laguna Woods
May 10, 2007
DUI Roving Patrol in Aliso Viejo, Laguna Nigel and Laguna Woods – Stay Alive, Do not Drink And Drive!
The Orange County Sheriff’s Department will be conducting DUI Roving Patrols in the Cities of Aliso Viejo, Laguna Hills, Laguna Niguel and Laguna Woods on Friday, May 11, 2007.
The Tri-City DUI teams will target areas that have a high incidence of DUI related arrests and collisions. The goal of the program is to reduce the rate at which the citizens of Orange County are killed or injured in DUI related collisions. Through implementation of these events, the Orange County Sheriff’s Department hopes to significantly reduce deaths, injuries and property damage.
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
May 10, 2007
DUI Roving Patrol in Aliso Viejo, Laguna Nigel and Laguna Woods – Stay Alive, Do not Drink And Drive!
The Orange County Sheriff’s Department will be conducting DUI Roving Patrols in the Cities of Aliso Viejo, Laguna Hills, Laguna Niguel and Laguna Woods on Friday, May 11, 2007.
The Tri-City DUI teams will target areas that have a high incidence of DUI related arrests and collisions. The goal of the program is to reduce the rate at which the citizens of Orange County are killed or injured in DUI related collisions. Through implementation of these events, the Orange County Sheriff’s Department hopes to significantly reduce deaths, injuries and property damage.
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
CZ Master Association Board of Directors Candidate's Night Questions
CZ Master Association Board of Directors Candidate's Night Questions
Joseph Morabito, former member CZ BOD
May 5, 2007
I regret that I will be out of town for CZ Master Candidate’s Night on May 10, however as a former CZ Board Member who is knowledgeable about CZ issues, I thought I would provide a list of questions to pose to the Candidates for those interested. This list is going to current CZ Board Members since they are on my e-mail list and others including all Delegates that I am aware of so none of these questions should be a surprise for the Candidates should you choose to pose them.
Do you support giving CZ revenues or subsidies to outside groups as is currently occurring?
Do you believe that CZ should otherwise subsidize outside groups if it means dues increases for CZ Members?
Do you support leaving the Oakview/Oakknoll gates open in violation of a legal agreement that was a condition of development thereby breaching our security and exposing CZ Members to additional liability?
In view of two dues increases in just two years, will you take the No New Dues pledge for five years unless there is an emergency that impacts our common areas which could mean that you will look to other revenue sources than CZ members to fund any increases in cost?
Did you support the firing of the CHP with nothing to replace it?
Do you support the formation of a Community Services District advanced by Mr. Varo and Mr. Mezger which is likely to raise our Property taxes?
What initiatives would you advance to lower CZ expenses without cutting services?
How would you deal with the need for landscaping renovation all over Coto?
Do you support expansion of CHP hours in Coto and if so how would you pay for it?
Would you have voted to pay $45,000 to obtain 13 “Free” trees if you had been on the Board when that was approved?
Will you support direct popular elections for the CZ Board in accordance with the spirit of new laws currently on the books in California to replace the current Delegate electoral system?
We are selling various services at our gates, including the services of a sitting CZ Board Member’s wife, using the guards paid for by our Members to distribute advertising with the revenues going to CotoCAN rather than coming back to CZ. Do you support this activity?
What would you do to make the financial dealings of the Association more transparent including revealing the true cost to maintain the Sports Park ?
What does CZ Board Member fiduciary responsibility mean to you?
Are you a strict constructionist or loose constructionist specific to CZ’s governing documents?
What should CZ’s position be specific to the Estates and Village tracts and the Country Club and Equestrian Center that add to CZ expenses yet pay no CZ dues?
How would you deal with critics of the Board? Do you think it is right to send threatening legal letters to critics in an attempt to silence them?
What can CZ do to better our relationship with the CHP? How do you feel about the current CZ Board President referring to the CHP in public as “Extortionists”
How would you fund the maintenance of the Sports Park roughly estimated to be about $300,000 a year?
What is CZ’s mission?
Do you think it was appropriate for CZ’s current Board President to endorse a political candidate as President of CZ?
Do you support the formation of an on-going Supplier Selection and Contract Management Committee headed by a Board Member but composed of CZ Members to deal with buying all goods and services for CZ to extract the best contract terms and conditions and price through use of purchasing department techniques used in business. If not, how do you propose to get this done?
Do you believe that all major contracts should be bid out on a three year basis to test the market?
Do you support positioning Keystone’s Executive Director as a CZ employee reporting to the Board thereby breaching the agent relationship necessary to shield CZ from employment practice liability as is currently occurring?
Do you support spending over $300,000 a year, the current expenditure, on Universal Patrols?
What expense would you cut to put more money into Landscaping Replacement/ Renovation?
What should be done with the Welcome Home Center and/or would you support a Special Assessment to build an office building at the Welcome Home Center ?
What should be done with the final parcel of land at the Sports Park ?
What would you do to deal with speeding on our streets?
What would you do to deal with vandalism in Coto probably committed by Coto kids?
How would you enforce more stringent security at our gates assuming you support the concept?
Would you have voted for two dues increases in the last two years without first dealing with subsidies and revenues going to outside groups?
It would be great if we could have all the answers to these questions and any others of concern dealt with on Candidate’s night so that Delegates can clearly see what each candidate stands for before the voting. Joe Morabito
Excellent list – shows an intimate knowledge of association affairs, and a good argument for new board member to reach out to former board members to make sure the proverbial wheel is not re-invented.
Looking at the CZ board candidates, the responses for the most part are obvious – on one side there is Messes Varo/Mezger/ Schlieder, and then the other candidates.
Seems like the questions are designed for the delegates than for the candidates. Depending on how the delegates respond to these questions, then they can choose Messes Varo/Mezger/ Schlieder, or other candidates.- Buzz
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
Joseph Morabito, former member CZ BOD
May 5, 2007
I regret that I will be out of town for CZ Master Candidate’s Night on May 10, however as a former CZ Board Member who is knowledgeable about CZ issues, I thought I would provide a list of questions to pose to the Candidates for those interested. This list is going to current CZ Board Members since they are on my e-mail list and others including all Delegates that I am aware of so none of these questions should be a surprise for the Candidates should you choose to pose them.
Do you support giving CZ revenues or subsidies to outside groups as is currently occurring?
Do you believe that CZ should otherwise subsidize outside groups if it means dues increases for CZ Members?
Do you support leaving the Oakview/Oakknoll gates open in violation of a legal agreement that was a condition of development thereby breaching our security and exposing CZ Members to additional liability?
In view of two dues increases in just two years, will you take the No New Dues pledge for five years unless there is an emergency that impacts our common areas which could mean that you will look to other revenue sources than CZ members to fund any increases in cost?
Did you support the firing of the CHP with nothing to replace it?
Do you support the formation of a Community Services District advanced by Mr. Varo and Mr. Mezger which is likely to raise our Property taxes?
What initiatives would you advance to lower CZ expenses without cutting services?
How would you deal with the need for landscaping renovation all over Coto?
Do you support expansion of CHP hours in Coto and if so how would you pay for it?
Would you have voted to pay $45,000 to obtain 13 “Free” trees if you had been on the Board when that was approved?
Will you support direct popular elections for the CZ Board in accordance with the spirit of new laws currently on the books in California to replace the current Delegate electoral system?
We are selling various services at our gates, including the services of a sitting CZ Board Member’s wife, using the guards paid for by our Members to distribute advertising with the revenues going to CotoCAN rather than coming back to CZ. Do you support this activity?
What would you do to make the financial dealings of the Association more transparent including revealing the true cost to maintain the Sports Park ?
What does CZ Board Member fiduciary responsibility mean to you?
Are you a strict constructionist or loose constructionist specific to CZ’s governing documents?
What should CZ’s position be specific to the Estates and Village tracts and the Country Club and Equestrian Center that add to CZ expenses yet pay no CZ dues?
How would you deal with critics of the Board? Do you think it is right to send threatening legal letters to critics in an attempt to silence them?
What can CZ do to better our relationship with the CHP? How do you feel about the current CZ Board President referring to the CHP in public as “Extortionists”
How would you fund the maintenance of the Sports Park roughly estimated to be about $300,000 a year?
What is CZ’s mission?
Do you think it was appropriate for CZ’s current Board President to endorse a political candidate as President of CZ?
Do you support the formation of an on-going Supplier Selection and Contract Management Committee headed by a Board Member but composed of CZ Members to deal with buying all goods and services for CZ to extract the best contract terms and conditions and price through use of purchasing department techniques used in business. If not, how do you propose to get this done?
Do you believe that all major contracts should be bid out on a three year basis to test the market?
Do you support positioning Keystone’s Executive Director as a CZ employee reporting to the Board thereby breaching the agent relationship necessary to shield CZ from employment practice liability as is currently occurring?
Do you support spending over $300,000 a year, the current expenditure, on Universal Patrols?
What expense would you cut to put more money into Landscaping Replacement/ Renovation?
What should be done with the Welcome Home Center and/or would you support a Special Assessment to build an office building at the Welcome Home Center ?
What should be done with the final parcel of land at the Sports Park ?
What would you do to deal with speeding on our streets?
What would you do to deal with vandalism in Coto probably committed by Coto kids?
How would you enforce more stringent security at our gates assuming you support the concept?
Would you have voted for two dues increases in the last two years without first dealing with subsidies and revenues going to outside groups?
It would be great if we could have all the answers to these questions and any others of concern dealt with on Candidate’s night so that Delegates can clearly see what each candidate stands for before the voting. Joe Morabito
Excellent list – shows an intimate knowledge of association affairs, and a good argument for new board member to reach out to former board members to make sure the proverbial wheel is not re-invented.
Looking at the CZ board candidates, the responses for the most part are obvious – on one side there is Messes Varo/Mezger/ Schlieder, and then the other candidates.
Seems like the questions are designed for the delegates than for the candidates. Depending on how the delegates respond to these questions, then they can choose Messes Varo/Mezger/ Schlieder, or other candidates.- Buzz
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
Coto CHP Pro-active Traffic Patrol Cause-Effect
Coto CHP Pro-active Traffic Patrol Cause-Effect
May 7, 2007
The CHP enforcement hours for March 2007 are 60% below the monthly enforcement hours since the Varo/Mezger board was coerced intro bringing back the CHP (after 2005 traffic fatality). This significant drop in enforcement hours just happens to coincide with the CZ Master Association board of director's decision to change CHP contract renewals from the standard yearly basis to quarterly.
In the past, the number of citations per enforcement hour has been roughly one citation per enforcement hour. In March, the number of citations/CHP enforcement hour increased to almost two per hour!
Might this be because the word on the street is that CHP enforcement is inconsequential?
Let’s face it, Varo’s publicly hostile attitude toward the CHP can’t be good for the relationship. Varo and Mezger never wanted the CHP in Coto and they are getting their wish. Remember, they were concerned that their country club friends might get cited for DUI’s going home from the club. Joe Morabito
We said it before the two recent traffic fatalities (up to one week before the first fatality). We said it after and will say it one more time: This “devil may care” attitude toward public safety in general and pro-active traffic patrol specifically is tantamount to depraved indifference and is begging for the third traffic fatality! - Buzz
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
May 7, 2007
The CHP enforcement hours for March 2007 are 60% below the monthly enforcement hours since the Varo/Mezger board was coerced intro bringing back the CHP (after 2005 traffic fatality). This significant drop in enforcement hours just happens to coincide with the CZ Master Association board of director's decision to change CHP contract renewals from the standard yearly basis to quarterly.
In the past, the number of citations per enforcement hour has been roughly one citation per enforcement hour. In March, the number of citations/CHP enforcement hour increased to almost two per hour!
Might this be because the word on the street is that CHP enforcement is inconsequential?
Let’s face it, Varo’s publicly hostile attitude toward the CHP can’t be good for the relationship. Varo and Mezger never wanted the CHP in Coto and they are getting their wish. Remember, they were concerned that their country club friends might get cited for DUI’s going home from the club. Joe Morabito
We said it before the two recent traffic fatalities (up to one week before the first fatality). We said it after and will say it one more time: This “devil may care” attitude toward public safety in general and pro-active traffic patrol specifically is tantamount to depraved indifference and is begging for the third traffic fatality! - Buzz
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
Monday, May 07, 2007
Private Transfer Tax - Good for the Common Interest Development (HOA/CID) Industry or Good for the Politicians?
Private Transfer Tax - Good for the Common Interest Development (HOA/CID) Industry or Good for the Politicians?
May 7, 2007
When we received our copy of the report that the California Association of Realtors (CAR) used to Sponsor and help draft transfer fees, we were confused. Given that Vanitzian has become an icon in Sacrament (some say a thorn in the legislature's side), we asked her what she thought of the CAR's Final document.
"There's nothing to think about, the document speaks for itself. It's useless. It plays on, and manipulates the vulnerabilities of both unsuspecting real estate salespersons who support and trust their organization, and all consumers who are trying to make a living, feed their families, and pay their mortgages" said Vanitizian. She added "Senate and Assembly Bills like these that CAR sponsors and supports, are bad for the California economy and give industry a bad name."
So, now judge for yourself – following is the Final Report: Private Transfer Tax Task Force
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Report: Private Transfer Tax Task Force
October 5, 2006
The Task Force was appointed in July, 2006, with the following charge:
Mission Statement:
1. Become familiar with how various forms of private transfer taxes (PTTs) operate. Generally, PTTs are fees imposed on sellers and/or buyers by way of a deed restriction requiring the payment of a fee based on some percentage of the purchase price each time the home transfers.
2. Determine what, if any, problems PTTs present for REALTORS® in their role as agents for sellers and buyers.
3. Make recommendations as to what, if any, actions (legislative or otherwise) C.A.R. should take with regard to PTTs and report to the C.A.R. Board of Directors at their October Board meeting.
Members:
Lawrence Fargher, Chair
Ilse Cordoni
Greg Galli
Stephen Hanleigh
Brian Holloway
James Irving
Peter Morris
Leslie Munger
Frank Nelson
Dianne Rath
Meetings:
August 2, Burbank
September 6, Oakland
October 4, Sacramento
Status/Summary. “Private” transfer “taxes” (PTTs) are increasingly being used to settle disputes between environmentalists and builders or, in the alternative, by builders to proactively avoid a lawsuit by environmentalists or to smooth development negotiations with the local government. Typically, in return for an agreement by the environmental group to not pursue a lawsuit based on one of the state’s environmental protection acts, the builder agrees to the imposition of one or more PTTs through a covenant included in the CC&Rs. These PTTs have totaled as much as 1.75 percent of the purchase price of a home and is paid by every buyer of a home in the development for 20 to 25 years or, even, in perpetuity. The monies generated by a PTT can be used for everything from environmental mitigation to the development of affordable housing.
Some believe that PTTs usurp functions that properly belong to local government and, as a result, that the imposition of PTTs should be limited, prohibited or, at a minimum, that the existence of a PTT should be explicitly disclosed to potential home buyers.
Problems. The task force concluded that PTTs present the following problems:
1. A PTT can be imposed by a developer for an excessive number of years. Generally, the minimum length of time that PTTs are currently being imposed ranges from 20 to 25 years; however, many are imposed in perpetuity.
2. The cost of a PTT can be prohibitively expensive for home owners and buyers. PTTs of up to 1.75 percent of a home’s sales price have been seen; however, there is no upper limit on the percentage of a home’s sales price at which a PTT can be set.
3. PTTs can be levied on individuals who already have to stretch financially to buy a home. PTTs imposed on affordable housing only serves to make that housing less affordable.
4. The requirements for disclosing the existence of a PTT are limited at best. In addition, the PTT requirement can be masked by the developer by not having it apply to the first buyer but having it, instead, apply only to subsequent buyers.
5. There is no guarantee that PTTs will be imposed only on what are generally considered legal transfers of title; determining which transfers are exempt from a PTT is the exclusive province of the developer. For example, placing a home into a trust or a transfer between a parent and his or her child could theoretically trigger the requirement to pay a PTT.
6. There is no limit to the number of PTTs a developer can impose. Multiple PTTs have been imposed by developers on each home in a development with each PTT funding a different purported benefit.
7. The funds generated by a PTT can be used to pay for projects that do not directly benefit the development or the immediately surrounding community. Individuals living in a development in which a PTT has been imposed may be shouldering a disproportionate burden in that they are paying for things that, in many instances, benefit the general public.
8. The nonprofit organizations that receive PTT funds are not required to account to any independent oversight entity and, as a result, there are no assurances that these organizations will work to achieve the goals with which they have been entrusted.
9. The nonprofit organizations that receive PTT funds are not required to limit their administrative costs to those that are reasonable and necessary. As a result, funds intended to pay for specific projects may, instead, end up as salary increases for nonprofit administrators.
10. The developers that impose PTTs are not required to coordinate the project benefits for which PTT funds are generated with the general plan of the local city and, as a result, those supposed benefits may be at odds with those in a city’s general plan. For example, land which a city is planning to develop for housing might instead be preserved as open space by the nonprofit receiving PTT funds.
Possible Solutions. The task force considered the following possible solutions:
1. Legal action challenging the legality of PTTs.
2. Legislation imposing restrictions or disclosure requirements on PTTs that would, to an extent, address each of the problems posed by PTTs identified by the Task Force.
3. Legislation prohibiting the imposition of a PTT.
Evaluating Solutions. The task force used the following principal to evaluate possible solutions:
A proposed course of action should be taken only if it will advance REALTOR® and consumer interests, and is the alternative that most completely addresses the problems that have been identified.
Recommendations. The task force made the following recommendations:
1. C.A.R. should sponsor legislation to prohibit the imposition of any PTTs.
2. C.A.R.’s Legislative Committee should determine in January 2007 whether legislation is needed in connection with the disclosure of existing PTTs to avoid real estate licensee liability associated with that disclosure.
C.A.R.’s Standard Forms Committee should determine whether a separate form is needed that would be provided by sellers to buyers at the time a home is listed (or, if not listed, at the same time at which the Transfer Disclosure Statement is required to be provided) disclosing to the buyer the existence, cost and duration of any PTTs. In addition, the Standard Forms Committee should determine if information relating to PTTs should be included in the statewide advisory and/or in the buyer advisory.
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
May 7, 2007
When we received our copy of the report that the California Association of Realtors (CAR) used to Sponsor and help draft transfer fees, we were confused. Given that Vanitzian has become an icon in Sacrament (some say a thorn in the legislature's side), we asked her what she thought of the CAR's Final document.
"There's nothing to think about, the document speaks for itself. It's useless. It plays on, and manipulates the vulnerabilities of both unsuspecting real estate salespersons who support and trust their organization, and all consumers who are trying to make a living, feed their families, and pay their mortgages" said Vanitizian. She added "Senate and Assembly Bills like these that CAR sponsors and supports, are bad for the California economy and give industry a bad name."
So, now judge for yourself – following is the Final Report: Private Transfer Tax Task Force
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Report: Private Transfer Tax Task Force
October 5, 2006
The Task Force was appointed in July, 2006, with the following charge:
Mission Statement:
1. Become familiar with how various forms of private transfer taxes (PTTs) operate. Generally, PTTs are fees imposed on sellers and/or buyers by way of a deed restriction requiring the payment of a fee based on some percentage of the purchase price each time the home transfers.
2. Determine what, if any, problems PTTs present for REALTORS® in their role as agents for sellers and buyers.
3. Make recommendations as to what, if any, actions (legislative or otherwise) C.A.R. should take with regard to PTTs and report to the C.A.R. Board of Directors at their October Board meeting.
Members:
Lawrence Fargher, Chair
Ilse Cordoni
Greg Galli
Stephen Hanleigh
Brian Holloway
James Irving
Peter Morris
Leslie Munger
Frank Nelson
Dianne Rath
Meetings:
August 2, Burbank
September 6, Oakland
October 4, Sacramento
Status/Summary. “Private” transfer “taxes” (PTTs) are increasingly being used to settle disputes between environmentalists and builders or, in the alternative, by builders to proactively avoid a lawsuit by environmentalists or to smooth development negotiations with the local government. Typically, in return for an agreement by the environmental group to not pursue a lawsuit based on one of the state’s environmental protection acts, the builder agrees to the imposition of one or more PTTs through a covenant included in the CC&Rs. These PTTs have totaled as much as 1.75 percent of the purchase price of a home and is paid by every buyer of a home in the development for 20 to 25 years or, even, in perpetuity. The monies generated by a PTT can be used for everything from environmental mitigation to the development of affordable housing.
Some believe that PTTs usurp functions that properly belong to local government and, as a result, that the imposition of PTTs should be limited, prohibited or, at a minimum, that the existence of a PTT should be explicitly disclosed to potential home buyers.
Problems. The task force concluded that PTTs present the following problems:
1. A PTT can be imposed by a developer for an excessive number of years. Generally, the minimum length of time that PTTs are currently being imposed ranges from 20 to 25 years; however, many are imposed in perpetuity.
2. The cost of a PTT can be prohibitively expensive for home owners and buyers. PTTs of up to 1.75 percent of a home’s sales price have been seen; however, there is no upper limit on the percentage of a home’s sales price at which a PTT can be set.
3. PTTs can be levied on individuals who already have to stretch financially to buy a home. PTTs imposed on affordable housing only serves to make that housing less affordable.
4. The requirements for disclosing the existence of a PTT are limited at best. In addition, the PTT requirement can be masked by the developer by not having it apply to the first buyer but having it, instead, apply only to subsequent buyers.
5. There is no guarantee that PTTs will be imposed only on what are generally considered legal transfers of title; determining which transfers are exempt from a PTT is the exclusive province of the developer. For example, placing a home into a trust or a transfer between a parent and his or her child could theoretically trigger the requirement to pay a PTT.
6. There is no limit to the number of PTTs a developer can impose. Multiple PTTs have been imposed by developers on each home in a development with each PTT funding a different purported benefit.
7. The funds generated by a PTT can be used to pay for projects that do not directly benefit the development or the immediately surrounding community. Individuals living in a development in which a PTT has been imposed may be shouldering a disproportionate burden in that they are paying for things that, in many instances, benefit the general public.
8. The nonprofit organizations that receive PTT funds are not required to account to any independent oversight entity and, as a result, there are no assurances that these organizations will work to achieve the goals with which they have been entrusted.
9. The nonprofit organizations that receive PTT funds are not required to limit their administrative costs to those that are reasonable and necessary. As a result, funds intended to pay for specific projects may, instead, end up as salary increases for nonprofit administrators.
10. The developers that impose PTTs are not required to coordinate the project benefits for which PTT funds are generated with the general plan of the local city and, as a result, those supposed benefits may be at odds with those in a city’s general plan. For example, land which a city is planning to develop for housing might instead be preserved as open space by the nonprofit receiving PTT funds.
Possible Solutions. The task force considered the following possible solutions:
1. Legal action challenging the legality of PTTs.
2. Legislation imposing restrictions or disclosure requirements on PTTs that would, to an extent, address each of the problems posed by PTTs identified by the Task Force.
3. Legislation prohibiting the imposition of a PTT.
Evaluating Solutions. The task force used the following principal to evaluate possible solutions:
A proposed course of action should be taken only if it will advance REALTOR® and consumer interests, and is the alternative that most completely addresses the problems that have been identified.
Recommendations. The task force made the following recommendations:
1. C.A.R. should sponsor legislation to prohibit the imposition of any PTTs.
2. C.A.R.’s Legislative Committee should determine in January 2007 whether legislation is needed in connection with the disclosure of existing PTTs to avoid real estate licensee liability associated with that disclosure.
C.A.R.’s Standard Forms Committee should determine whether a separate form is needed that would be provided by sellers to buyers at the time a home is listed (or, if not listed, at the same time at which the Transfer Disclosure Statement is required to be provided) disclosing to the buyer the existence, cost and duration of any PTTs. In addition, the Standard Forms Committee should determine if information relating to PTTs should be included in the statewide advisory and/or in the buyer advisory.
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
OCR Paraphrasing in Laguna Woods Village - Clarification
OCR Paraphrasing in Laguna Woods Village - Clarification
May 7, 2007
We 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 by the OCR, was hand carried to the LWV Globe. The editor assured the author that the letter would appear in the April 26, 2007 edition of the Globe paper. The letter was not printed as promised. Cheryl Walker (LWV Reporter) was asked why the letter was not published and her response what that they lost it!"
Today (May 7, 2007), the CotoBuzz Journal offices received a call from a person who identified herself as Cheryl Walker and demanded a retraction, otherwise "you will hear from our lawyers"!.
When we asked why a retraction was necessary, the person told us that the letter alluded to above was not "lost", rather mis-filed.
Although we have the information in writing from our sources, (hence no danger of mis-interpretation), we have not attempted to confirm whether these sources heard "lost" or "misfiled", however, to give Ms. Walker the benefit of the doubt, there you have it, we stand corrected - according to Ms. Walker, the letter was not lost, only misfiled
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
May 7, 2007
We 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 by the OCR, was hand carried to the LWV Globe. The editor assured the author that the letter would appear in the April 26, 2007 edition of the Globe paper. The letter was not printed as promised. Cheryl Walker (LWV Reporter) was asked why the letter was not published and her response what that they lost it!"
Today (May 7, 2007), the CotoBuzz Journal offices received a call from a person who identified herself as Cheryl Walker and demanded a retraction, otherwise "you will hear from our lawyers"!.
When we asked why a retraction was necessary, the person told us that the letter alluded to above was not "lost", rather mis-filed.
Although we have the information in writing from our sources, (hence no danger of mis-interpretation), we have not attempted to confirm whether these sources heard "lost" or "misfiled", however, to give Ms. Walker the benefit of the doubt, there you have it, we stand corrected - according to Ms. Walker, the letter was not lost, only misfiled
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
Sunday, May 06, 2007
How to Communicate with the CZ Master Association (and other HOAs)
May 6, 2007
Recently a CotoBuzz contributor received a stupid lawyer letter stating that the CZ Master Association board would no longer accept his requests via email.
A HOA resident addressed a similar question to LA Times Associations columnists Glassman & Vanitizan. This time however, the homeowner’s preferred communication was via snail mail: “The board keeps telling me they sent me an e-mail and if I didn't get it, then that's my problem. I rarely receive the board transmissions, so I've asked them to stop e-mailing me. I want only hard-copy communications, but the board refuses, saying they can send out notices in any medium they want. Is that true?” – LA Times Associations column E-Mail-only policy doesn’t fly, May 6, 2007
The columnist’s response: “Absent that written request, the board must communicate in one of the other ways permitted by Civil Code section 1350.7, which titleholders should review very carefully. It is the owner's responsibility to be aware of them and request a particular method of delivery…. Titleholders should make their preferred method of delivery known in writing to the board in a way that is well documented.”
The official version of Civil Code section 1350.7 can be found at http://www.leginfo. ca.gov . Click on "California Law" and search the Civil Code for sections 1350 to 1378.
Questions to LA Times Associations columnists can may be e-mailed tonoexit@mindspring .com.
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
Recently a CotoBuzz contributor received a stupid lawyer letter stating that the CZ Master Association board would no longer accept his requests via email.
A HOA resident addressed a similar question to LA Times Associations columnists Glassman & Vanitizan. This time however, the homeowner’s preferred communication was via snail mail: “The board keeps telling me they sent me an e-mail and if I didn't get it, then that's my problem. I rarely receive the board transmissions, so I've asked them to stop e-mailing me. I want only hard-copy communications, but the board refuses, saying they can send out notices in any medium they want. Is that true?” – LA Times Associations column E-Mail-only policy doesn’t fly, May 6, 2007
The columnist’s response: “Absent that written request, the board must communicate in one of the other ways permitted by Civil Code section 1350.7, which titleholders should review very carefully. It is the owner's responsibility to be aware of them and request a particular method of delivery…. Titleholders should make their preferred method of delivery known in writing to the board in a way that is well documented.”
The official version of Civil Code section 1350.7 can be found at http://www.leginfo. ca.gov . Click on "California Law" and search the Civil Code for sections 1350 to 1378.
Questions to LA Times Associations columnists can may be e-mailed tonoexit@mindspring .com.
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
Who Decides 2007 CZ Master Association BOD Composition? You Do Not!
Who Decides 2007 CZ Master Association BOD Composition? You Do Not!
May 6, 2007
Who decides if incumbents Varo, Mezger and Schlieder get another term in the CZ Master Association Board of Directors May 24, 2007? Contrary to the spirit of California CID legislation reform, as of now, CZ residents have not say in the outcome.
It is all in the hands of the district delegates (See below for list of delegates)
Here is what CZ residents will get with the 2007-2008 CZ BOD:
Mezger: Despite the first two traffic fatalities in the history of the community recorded in his watch, the CHP& Sheriff’s data showing worst crime & vandalism & DUI at an all time high, a vilified CHP (by Varo/Mezger) and countless stupid lawyer letters to intimidate and ultimately silence critics, the situation with publics safety “has vastly improved over the last four years” - Mezger's candidacy statement
Varo: Continues to make the argument for turning Coto into a city. NOTE: According to state law, all correspondence to and from government officials is presumed open to the public. Supervisor Bates has yet to respond to request for requests for funding from RSM, Ladera Ranch and Coto de Caza leaders.
Schlieder: Wants to work with Keystone (with or without pay, we do not know) on contract and bid preparation and purchasing - (Keystone's job IS to manage vendors!) The Varo/Mezger boards are already helping out Keystone hiring a general manager, “since Keystone is unable to hire the right people”! - Varo's argument for hiring directly a general manager
CZ District delegates who can decide for status quo:
DISTRICT NUMBER
DISTRICT NAME
DISTRICT DELEGATE
1
Ranchos Colinas (sub-association)
Chris Anderson
2
The Forest/Tiara/The Arbours/Lyon
George Thagard
3
The Terrace (sub-association)
Ronald Goulden
4
Grand Coto II
John Smead
5
Coto Country Homes
Darrell Starnes
6
Fairway Oaks (sub-association)
Karen Martin
7
East Hills/East Point
Robert Alberts
8
Los Verdes (sub-association)
Marilyn Carrabino
9
Oakmont
Xochitl Yocham*
10
Stonehedge
Andrea Owen
11
The Trails/Master Collection
Terry Corwin
12
Summerfield
Corey Ferguson
13
Hillsboro
Steve Zipperman*
14
The Greens
Debbie White
15
The Woods/Arroyo Sur
Roy Allen
16
Fairway Estates
Peter Roth
17
Meritage
Preston Walrath
19
The Classics
Andrew Holzmann
20
Chantemar
Lyle Schlieder
21
Canyon Estates
Robert Curran
22
The Legacy/Enclave/Stonefield Estates
23
The Pinnacle
Arlene Kraft
24
Greystone Villas (sub-association)
Don Wegner
25
Andalusia (sub-association)
Ken Bernstein
26
Oak Ridge
NO DELEGATE
27
Tanglewood
Steve Foster
28
Glen Eagles
NO DELEGATE
29
Montecito
Bill Bushek
30
Tapestry
Bob Grich
31
Grand Coto Estates/Part of Atherton/Part of Weatherly
Lea Ann Miller
32
Part of Southern Hills/Fairway Reflections
Jerry Scanlan
33
Glenmere
Wolfgang Greinke
34
Crooked Oak
Elaine Hamill
35
Courante
Terry Kwit
36
Part of Atherton/Part of Weatherly
William Linas
37
Southern Hills Encore
Vincent Hylka
38
Terrazza
Nick Newsom
39
Silver Creek
Mary Spicer
40
Rosewood
Tracy Fortier,
41
Spring Hill/Chatham
Joan Walters
42
Stonefield Private Collection/San Marino
Jerry Mezger*
43
Oak Knoll (sub-association)
Su Walcher
44
Oak View (sub-association)
Mitch Hill
45
Terra Vida
Michael Lane
46
Valle Vista
Bob Varo*
NOTE: * Denotes current member of the CZ Master Association board of directors.
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
May 6, 2007
Who decides if incumbents Varo, Mezger and Schlieder get another term in the CZ Master Association Board of Directors May 24, 2007? Contrary to the spirit of California CID legislation reform, as of now, CZ residents have not say in the outcome.
It is all in the hands of the district delegates (See below for list of delegates)
Here is what CZ residents will get with the 2007-2008 CZ BOD:
Mezger: Despite the first two traffic fatalities in the history of the community recorded in his watch, the CHP& Sheriff’s data showing worst crime & vandalism & DUI at an all time high, a vilified CHP (by Varo/Mezger) and countless stupid lawyer letters to intimidate and ultimately silence critics, the situation with publics safety “has vastly improved over the last four years” - Mezger's candidacy statement
Varo: Continues to make the argument for turning Coto into a city. NOTE: According to state law, all correspondence to and from government officials is presumed open to the public. Supervisor Bates has yet to respond to request for requests for funding from RSM, Ladera Ranch and Coto de Caza leaders.
Schlieder: Wants to work with Keystone (with or without pay, we do not know) on contract and bid preparation and purchasing - (Keystone's job IS to manage vendors!) The Varo/Mezger boards are already helping out Keystone hiring a general manager, “since Keystone is unable to hire the right people”! - Varo's argument for hiring directly a general manager
CZ District delegates who can decide for status quo:
DISTRICT NUMBER
DISTRICT NAME
DISTRICT DELEGATE
1
Ranchos Colinas (sub-association)
Chris Anderson
2
The Forest/Tiara/The Arbours/Lyon
George Thagard
3
The Terrace (sub-association)
Ronald Goulden
4
Grand Coto II
John Smead
5
Coto Country Homes
Darrell Starnes
6
Fairway Oaks (sub-association)
Karen Martin
7
East Hills/East Point
Robert Alberts
8
Los Verdes (sub-association)
Marilyn Carrabino
9
Oakmont
Xochitl Yocham*
10
Stonehedge
Andrea Owen
11
The Trails/Master Collection
Terry Corwin
12
Summerfield
Corey Ferguson
13
Hillsboro
Steve Zipperman*
14
The Greens
Debbie White
15
The Woods/Arroyo Sur
Roy Allen
16
Fairway Estates
Peter Roth
17
Meritage
Preston Walrath
19
The Classics
Andrew Holzmann
20
Chantemar
Lyle Schlieder
21
Canyon Estates
Robert Curran
22
The Legacy/Enclave/Stonefield Estates
23
The Pinnacle
Arlene Kraft
24
Greystone Villas (sub-association)
Don Wegner
25
Andalusia (sub-association)
Ken Bernstein
26
Oak Ridge
NO DELEGATE
27
Tanglewood
Steve Foster
28
Glen Eagles
NO DELEGATE
29
Montecito
Bill Bushek
30
Tapestry
Bob Grich
31
Grand Coto Estates/Part of Atherton/Part of Weatherly
Lea Ann Miller
32
Part of Southern Hills/Fairway Reflections
Jerry Scanlan
33
Glenmere
Wolfgang Greinke
34
Crooked Oak
Elaine Hamill
35
Courante
Terry Kwit
36
Part of Atherton/Part of Weatherly
William Linas
37
Southern Hills Encore
Vincent Hylka
38
Terrazza
Nick Newsom
39
Silver Creek
Mary Spicer
40
Rosewood
Tracy Fortier,
41
Spring Hill/Chatham
Joan Walters
42
Stonefield Private Collection/San Marino
Jerry Mezger*
43
Oak Knoll (sub-association)
Su Walcher
44
Oak View (sub-association)
Mitch Hill
45
Terra Vida
Michael Lane
46
Valle Vista
Bob Varo*
NOTE: * Denotes current member of the CZ Master Association board of directors.
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
Saturday, May 05, 2007
Of Trial Lawyers, the AAJ and the Democratic Party
Of Trial Lawyers, the AAJ and the Democratic Party
May 5, 2007
The National College of Advocacy and AAJ Education maintain two distinct programs that recognize AAJ lawyer member efforts in pursuit of advanced legal learning and professional development—the Achievement Recognition Program and Advanced Studies in Trial Advocacy.
Thanks in part to the AAJ, the Democratic party was able to win the last election – and now it is payback time –so that trial lawyer members can continue their efforts in draining the competitiveness out of the country.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Example of paragon of legal profession questioning:
Attorney: What happened then?
Witness: He told me, he says, "I have to kill you because you can identify me."
Attorney: Did he kill you?
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
May 5, 2007
The National College of Advocacy and AAJ Education maintain two distinct programs that recognize AAJ lawyer member efforts in pursuit of advanced legal learning and professional development—the Achievement Recognition Program and Advanced Studies in Trial Advocacy.
Thanks in part to the AAJ, the Democratic party was able to win the last election – and now it is payback time –so that trial lawyer members can continue their efforts in draining the competitiveness out of the country.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Example of paragon of legal profession questioning:
Attorney: What happened then?
Witness: He told me, he says, "I have to kill you because you can identify me."
Attorney: Did he kill you?
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
Broadcast/Journalism Students - Spend Summer in NYC for free!
May 5, 2007
Spend your summer in New York City and gain the experience needed to start your career as a journalist!
NBC Universal and NAHJ are offering two students the opportunity to
become NBC fellows and join one of the following NBC News programs for the summer of 2007:
America's # 1 morning news program, the Today Show,
The top ranked evening news program, Nightly News with Brian Williams
Primetime NBC's own Dateline
One of NBC's local Owned and Operated Stations
Two students will be provided a stipend in the amount of $500 a week
for 10 weeks to live in New York City, totaling $5,000 for each
student.
For more information visit NAHJ's website: www.nahj.org
To download the application
visit: www.nahj.org/educationalprograms/NBCFellowship.pdf
APPLICATIONS MUST BE POSTMARKED BY May 8, 2007
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
Spend your summer in New York City and gain the experience needed to start your career as a journalist!
NBC Universal and NAHJ are offering two students the opportunity to
become NBC fellows and join one of the following NBC News programs for the summer of 2007:
America's # 1 morning news program, the Today Show,
The top ranked evening news program, Nightly News with Brian Williams
Primetime NBC's own Dateline
One of NBC's local Owned and Operated Stations
Two students will be provided a stipend in the amount of $500 a week
for 10 weeks to live in New York City, totaling $5,000 for each
student.
For more information visit NAHJ's website: www.nahj.org
To download the application
visit: www.nahj.org/educationalprograms/NBCFellowship.pdf
APPLICATIONS MUST BE POSTMARKED BY May 8, 2007
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
Barnum Opens at Saddleback College Civic Light Opera
Barnum Opens at Saddleback College Civic Light Opera
May 5, 2007
Saddleback College Civic Light Opera is opening its 30th anniversary season with Barnum on June 8 – 24, 2007.
Opening Night, Friday, June 8, 2007, at Saddleback College ’s McKinney Theater, will include lively circus activity in the courtyard. Dates: June 8, 9, 15, 16, 22, 23 @ 8:00 p.m. and June 10, 16, 17, 23, 24 @ 3 pm. Ticket prices: $36 for General Admission, $33 for Students, Seniors and members of the Angels Organization, $25 for Children 12 and under, and $30 for groups of 20 or more. For season subscription plans and additional ticket information call the Saddleback College Department of Fine Arts Box Office at (949) 582-4656 Noon to 4:00 p.m. weekdays. Saddleback College is located at 28000 Marguerite Parkway in Mission Viejo .
The Saddleback Civic Light Opera is sponsored by the Angels for the Arts of Saddleback College, whose mission statement is to raise awareness and financial support for the Saddleback College Performing and Visual Arts programs by attracting top artistic talent and funding for the cultural entertainment, education and inspiration of the campus and local communities
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
May 5, 2007
Saddleback College Civic Light Opera is opening its 30th anniversary season with Barnum on June 8 – 24, 2007.
Opening Night, Friday, June 8, 2007, at Saddleback College ’s McKinney Theater, will include lively circus activity in the courtyard. Dates: June 8, 9, 15, 16, 22, 23 @ 8:00 p.m. and June 10, 16, 17, 23, 24 @ 3 pm. Ticket prices: $36 for General Admission, $33 for Students, Seniors and members of the Angels Organization, $25 for Children 12 and under, and $30 for groups of 20 or more. For season subscription plans and additional ticket information call the Saddleback College Department of Fine Arts Box Office at (949) 582-4656 Noon to 4:00 p.m. weekdays. Saddleback College is located at 28000 Marguerite Parkway in Mission Viejo .
The Saddleback Civic Light Opera is sponsored by the Angels for the Arts of Saddleback College, whose mission statement is to raise awareness and financial support for the Saddleback College Performing and Visual Arts programs by attracting top artistic talent and funding for the cultural entertainment, education and inspiration of the campus and local communities
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Privacy Policy | Need Help? | Contact Us | Administrator: cotobuzz@yahoo.com
: Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™, CZ™ ™, the Dove and the Dove Canyon ™, are trademarks of @WEBO.
SADDLEBACK COLLEGE ART STUDENT WINNERS ANNOUNCED
SADDLEBACK COLLEGE ART STUDENT WINNERS ANNOUNCED
May 4, 2007
The winners of the Saddleback College studio art students show have been announced:
Lynn Madison Oliva, Sumo vs. Jacket, Best of Show.
2D First Place: Lindsay Buchman, Manhattan;
2D, Second Place: Joan Sachs, Secrets II;
3D, First Place: Norma Vance, Beginnings I,
3D, Second Place, Emilia Sadeghi, Sleeping Peasants;
Jewelry: First Place, Janine Sun, Queen Hass;
Jewelry, Second Place, Gene Huizenga, Red headed Strangler;
Photography, First Place: Barbara Gorden, Turquoise Door,
Second Place, Katee Heagen, Untitled.
There is still time to see these diverse and innovative works at the Saddleback College Art Gallery . The Gallery hours are Monday – Wednesday, Noon to 4 p.m.; Thursday evenings, 4 – 8 p.m. The last show is Wednesday, May 9, 2007
The Gallery is located adjacent to the McKinney Theatre.
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
May 4, 2007
The winners of the Saddleback College studio art students show have been announced:
Lynn Madison Oliva, Sumo vs. Jacket, Best of Show.
2D First Place: Lindsay Buchman, Manhattan;
2D, Second Place: Joan Sachs, Secrets II;
3D, First Place: Norma Vance, Beginnings I,
3D, Second Place, Emilia Sadeghi, Sleeping Peasants;
Jewelry: First Place, Janine Sun, Queen Hass;
Jewelry, Second Place, Gene Huizenga, Red headed Strangler;
Photography, First Place: Barbara Gorden, Turquoise Door,
Second Place, Katee Heagen, Untitled.
There is still time to see these diverse and innovative works at the Saddleback College Art Gallery . The Gallery hours are Monday – Wednesday, Noon to 4 p.m.; Thursday evenings, 4 – 8 p.m. The last show is Wednesday, May 9, 2007
The Gallery is located adjacent to the McKinney Theatre.
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Cinco de Coto: Name calling Vs. Name Thinking
Cinco de Coto: Name calling Vs. Name Thinking:
May 5, 2007
After defendant has been sentenced to 90 days in jail:
Defendant: Can I address the court?
Judge: Of course.
Defendant: If I called you an extortionist, what would you do?
Judge: I'd hold you in contempt and assess an additional five days in jail.
Defendant: What if I thought you were an extortionist?
Judge: I can't do anything about that. There's no law against thinking.
Defendant: In that case, I think you're an extortionist!
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-
May 5, 2007
After defendant has been sentenced to 90 days in jail:
Defendant: Can I address the court?
Judge: Of course.
Defendant: If I called you an extortionist, what would you do?
Judge: I'd hold you in contempt and assess an additional five days in jail.
Defendant: What if I thought you were an extortionist?
Judge: I can't do anything about that. There's no law against thinking.
Defendant: In that case, I think you're an extortionist!
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-
Paraphrasing President Carter and the OCR
Paraphrasing President Carter and the OCR
May 5, 2007
An article titled Carter Brings Message to UCI published in the March 4, 2007 issue of the OC Register quotes President Carter as saying The Palestinian People are being persecuted horribly” and “are heavily dependent on Arab countries just for food and water”. The article then describes how President Carter offered to help raise money to send University of California Irvine (UCI) leaders to occupied Palestinian territories.
In the March 4, 2007 issue of the Wall Street Journal, the article titled Some Women See Escape in Their Martyrdom, describes how “Palestinian women who sign on to become suicide bombers often are driven by something other than desire for vengeance against Israel. For many, terrorism offers escape from dire circumstance – the looming punishment for an extramarital affairs, or the prospect of an undesired marriage”.
The OCR also quotes President Carter as saying that “In Israel, there is debate. An in Europe. In America, no debate”. On December 14, 2005 the AP reported that “ Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Wednesday the Holocaust is a "myth" in another sharp attack on Israel's right to exist that drew immediate harsh criticism from both the Jewish state and from Germany and the European Commission”
Perhaps President Carter would be willing to raise funds to send Coto de Caza Leaders to Iran to see how to properly manage a community?
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
May 5, 2007
An article titled Carter Brings Message to UCI published in the March 4, 2007 issue of the OC Register quotes President Carter as saying The Palestinian People are being persecuted horribly” and “are heavily dependent on Arab countries just for food and water”. The article then describes how President Carter offered to help raise money to send University of California Irvine (UCI) leaders to occupied Palestinian territories.
In the March 4, 2007 issue of the Wall Street Journal, the article titled Some Women See Escape in Their Martyrdom, describes how “Palestinian women who sign on to become suicide bombers often are driven by something other than desire for vengeance against Israel. For many, terrorism offers escape from dire circumstance – the looming punishment for an extramarital affairs, or the prospect of an undesired marriage”.
The OCR also quotes President Carter as saying that “In Israel, there is debate. An in Europe. In America, no debate”. On December 14, 2005 the AP reported that “ Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Wednesday the Holocaust is a "myth" in another sharp attack on Israel's right to exist that drew immediate harsh criticism from both the Jewish state and from Germany and the European Commission”
Perhaps President Carter would be willing to raise funds to send Coto de Caza Leaders to Iran to see how to properly manage a community?
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:
The CotoBuzz Journal P.O. Box 154 Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 (509) 355-8895
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)