EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY! OOPS! WE JUST HAD THE MEETING! YOU MISSED IT!!!
Massive injustice by way of confusion and corruption await all owners, Senate Bill 528 is just what the industry ordered
by D. Vanitzian, JD., Arbitrator
May 20, 2007
So THIS is what the California Senate calls an "Open Meeting." How many Open Meetings have THEY been to? Obviously not many. ROTFLMAO!
Of the several areas of law where this Senate Bill 528 will cause massive problems for owners, time only permits a cursory discussion below.
How dangerous is this Bill? Very dangerous!
In one fell swoop, this bill hands the board more control and does so on a silver platter. The Bill FAILS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD’S OWN PREEMPTION! That is, the very minute the board hears that they are going to be removed from office (that's just one example) and a meeting has been called to accomplish that end, hey! Why not ELIMINATE THE NOTICE REQUIREMENT ALTOGETHER?
Ponder this: Once Senate Bill 528 passes, the board need only give FOUR DAYS NOTICE BEFORE ***ANY*** ***OTHER*** meeting that may have already been (1) planned, (2) noticed, (3) scheduled AND the board can do this while you are waiting for your PLANNED MEETING:
-AMEND THE BYLAWS
-FINE AND PENALIZE THE OWNERS (Senate Bill 528 gives the board time to disqualify any candidates that will be replace them)
-SIGN EXISTING CONTRACTS
-ENTER INTO NEW BINDING CONTRACTS
-CREATE AND IMPLEMENT NEW PROJECTS
-SPEND RESERVES
-SELL PROPERTY
-DEVELOP LAND
-DESTROY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND LAND
-CHANGE "FEE" REQUIREMENTS
-FILE SMALL CLAIMS ACTIONS
-MAKE A REQUEST FOR ARBITRATION
-CHANGE THE CCRS (puh-leeze don't say this doesn't and can't happen! IT DOES with or without the owners consent, I’ve seen it happen!, and there’s MORE) The effect of this bill will send the owners to the galleys.
--There's so much more -- believe me, there is SO MUCH MORE -- I didn't even tell you about the electronic disenfranchisement of owners, it is rampant!
One problem with THIS Legislature and the ones before it, all the way back to the Davis-Stupid Act, is that Legislators throw-up on paper and call it "law" and do so all in the name of "For The People."
In my book, Common Interest Developments--Homeowners Guide, Section 1:7 et seq., (Thomson/West 2006-2008) I discuss the many problems surrounding "notice" and "meetings" and the deleterious effect these two (and other) issues have on PROPERTY OWNERS.
For reasons known only to them, California's legislature fails to understand the concept of fair play and justice!
They fail to legislate through LAW - safeguards - to PROTECT deed-restricted property owners. The laws they are passing are for CORPORATIONS NOT PEOPLE. When a law is in place for the BOARD, the board is a corporation, whether it is incorporated or not, it falls under the jurisdiction of corporate laws. [Common Interest Developments--Homeowners Guide, (Thomson/West 2006-2008)]
There are NO "TITLEHOLDER" laws to assist OWNERS in protecting their P-R-O-P-E-R-T-Y. Instead our property rights (if there are any) are handed over to a board.
There are more sections in the Davis-Stupid Act that guarantee LAWYERS THEIR FEES, than there is a mention of the word "HOMEOWNER." The word "homeowner" is mentioned: THREE TIMES. Go count how many times the word ATTORNEY FEES shows up. The law is NOT written for us.
One of the FEW ---believe me when I tell you F-E-W--- laws on the books that came close to protecting the interests of the OWNERS, was a TEN-DAY NOTICE REQUIREMENT FOR THE ASSOCIATION BOARD MEETING. If anything, it should be REQUIRED it should TEN DAYS NOTICE AND THAT TWO NOTICES BE SENT AND PROOF THEY WERE "RECEIVED" BY THE RECIPIENT. Instead, our Legislature spends taxpayer dollars disenfranchising us. Further, any management company personnel that interfere with these requirements should be prosecuted.
Senator Aanestad, if you care about how your Bill will effect millions of owners, please, pull this bill now, so that we don’t have to beg you to fix it after we’re forced to live by it. That is what's happened with another BAD BAD BILL: Civil Code Section 1363.03 - taking the lead for BAD BILLS.
Pulling Senate Bill 528 won’t make you look bad, it will put you at the top of our list as A GOOD SENATOR, it will show the public and most especially the OWNERS that you are stronger than all the other Legislators because you will be doing what is RIGHT and not what is expected of you by the industry.
Senate Bill 528 will come to be known as the "Let's Not But Say We Did" Bill. Senate Bill 528 is duplicative, not only of the Corporations Code but other similar statutes that address the same issue (and conflicting case laws).
Senate Bill 528 is a waste of taxpayer money because this LAW ALREADY EXISTS. In Corporations Code Section 7211 "Special meetings of the board shall be held upon four days' notice by first-class mail or 48 hours' notice delivered personally or by telephone, including a voice messaging system or by electronic transmission by the corporation (Section 20). The articles or bylaws may not dispense with notice of a special meeting. A notice, or waiver of notice, need not specify the purpose of any regular or special meeting of the board." Boards use this law ALL THE TIME, special meeting or not! ASK ME WHY THEY USE IT? BECAUSE THEY ":CAN" - THERE AIN'T NO PENALTIES FOR RECALCITRANT BOARDS AND THEIR AIDER AND ABETTOR MANAGEMENT COMPANIES!!!
The requirements under Corporations Code Section 7211 for calling a special meeting, aren’t special at all! Boards can merely CALL IT a special meeting, the rules are loose. BUT, the reason Corporations Code Section 7211 terms the FOUR-DAY NOTICE a "special meeting" is because THAT IS NOT ENOUGH TIME FOR A REGULAR MEETING TO BE CONVENED. [this is ALL discussed AT LENGTH, in my book (Common Interest Developments--Homeowners Guide)]
Senate Bill 528 will destroy what LITTLE owner protections that MAY exist in the law.
Again, from my book, there is NO STATUTORY DEFINITION in either the Davis-Stupid Act or the Corporations Code for "Regular" Meetings. [See Common Interest Developments--Homeowners Guide] The reason for that is: THE LEGISLATURE DID NOT WANT TO BOX THE BOARD IN, let alone subject a board to being placed behind bars where too many of the criminal DO belong.
Furthermore, if there is NO DEFINITION FOR A "REGULAR MEETING" Guess what? NO JUDGE WILL FAULT THE BOARD FOR THEIR ILLEGAL MEETINGS - this is the blank check the boards have been waiting for. As it is these judges do not understand the law, they look to association advisors FOR THE LAW and accept at face value what they are told. IF THESE STATUTES ARE NOT IPSO FACTO CRYSTAL CLEAR OWNERS WILL CONTINUE TO LOSE THEIR CASES IN COURT. This is NOT affordable housing, there is NOTHING "affordable" about it.
ALL of these statutes are geared toward giving the board MORE LEVERAGE. My question is this: WHAT THE HELL DO BOARDS NEED MORE LEVERAGE FOR?
Herein lies another BIG problem with Senate Bill 528.
All you owners out there need to understand what’s REALLY SCARY about this: Effective May 17, 2007, a third reading of this Senate Bill PASSED THE SENATE WITH 38 AYES. THOSE 38 SENATORS NEED TO BE BOYCOTTED. It is damn frightening that this bill passed.
It is frightening because we will be forced to live under this bad law with no hope of correcting it.
Senate Bill 528 purports to codify "notice’ requirements WITHOUT DEFINING "NOTICE" but also, this type of notice is as useless as the paper it is written on.
Here’s why.
WHAT THE HELL IS THE DEFINITION OF "NOTICE" IN THE DAVIS-STUPID ACT?
--Is the notice effective when the board sticks a stamp on the envelope?
--Is the notice effective when the board actually places the notice in a U.S. Post Box?
--Is the notice effective when the board sticks a post-it on top of a telephone pole at 3:am?
--Is the notice effective when the board gives it to a third party vendor who might be a
manager, and say, "here, its your problem, do something with this?"
--Is the notice effective when the titleholder gets a flyer placed their cluster f**k mailbox but the manager has the key so the owner can’t access it until after the meeting?
"Nothing stops a board from claiming they gave notice, when they did not." See Vanitzian, Common Interest Developments--Homeowners Guide, Section 1:7 (Thomson/West 2006-2008).
Nothing could be more detrimental, nor dangerous than a ..... It is scandalous that the notice requirement is whittled down to four (4) days. This code section will prejudice and disenfranchise every titleholder in a common interest development from San Francisco to San Diego and back again. Owners who rely on mailed notices or do not reside at a given property, are ipso facto disenfranchised.
Presently the Open Meeting Act is a farce for a variety of reasons, far too many to list here. For too many owners the board meeting is the only forum where they can actually see their Wizards at work. That is, actually see them face-to-face and watch them conduct business. This Senate Bill will cut into what little time (and believe me it is LITTLE TIME) that owners get to speak at these sham meetings to begin with. NOW, with this Senate Bill, individuals who are not owners can speak. [more on this later]
Owners don’t need this kind of help.
Here’s Senator Aanestad’s Bill, that is FLYING through the Legislature with flying colors. Everyone voting for something THEY HAVE NO DAMN CLUE ABOUT. And who will be left to abide by these BAD BAD BAD LAWS...take a guess. It ain’t gonna be Senator Aanestad.
Owners, please contact the Senator's office and make him aware of your views. Then call those 38 numbnuts and tell them: WE'RE NOT GONNA TAKE IT ANYMORE!
Take a look at this BAD BILL - effective at the time I wrote this article, please check www.senate.ca.gov for the most current version of this proposed Senate Bill 528:
RELATED STORIES
Two of the Worst & Most Detrimental Laws to Hit California are Sponsored by None Other than: California Association of Realtors (R) The Gold is Gone --No more gold in the Golden State!
Dear Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger,
SHATZI! PLEASE REMEMBER YOUR PROMISE TO US. Please listen to the people who support you and look to you to help us! When you first began buying property in California NO ONE told you what you could or could not do...
THE LAW OF INTENDED CONSEQUENCES - WHAT A DIFFERENCE A "WORD" MAKES: NO! ON ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 563
It apparently does not matter that titleholders with a vested interest in their property cannot get their legislators to carry legislation to help US, but, they can waste taxpayer funds by preventing the bills WE WANT and NEED by CHANGING *ONE* WORD in an...
EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY! OOPS! WE JUST HAD THE MEETING! YOU MISSED IT!!
So THIS is what the Senate calls an "Open Meeting." How many Open Meetings have THEY been to? Obviously not many. ROTFLMAO!
CAN YOU OUTSWIM YOUR HOA SHARKS? or will you drown trying?
Owning, let alone living in an HOA is a tough JOB and requires you be physically fit, possess a certain sophistication of the processes, and have the character let alone stamina, that allows you to be persistent in a manner that indescribable to REAL...
HEY GRAY PANTHERS! YOU GOT IT WRONG!
(c) D. Vanitzian
May 16, 2007The 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?
The Law of Unintended Consequences: Legislation and HOA BOD Cause and Effect: Clueless in my CAR
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...
Paraphrasing the LA Times on Defeat of SB670 & Wicked Twin Witches of the West - SB 127 & AB-980
Taking a page out of the OC Register?s ?paraphrased reporting?, an article written by LA Times staff writer Diane Weder titled ?Bill to limit transfer fee founders?, published appropriately on May 13, 2007, quotes the president of the statewide Realtors...
One More Near Miss Avoided - Clueless in My CID/HOA
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
Private Transfer Tax - Good for the Common Interest Development (HOA/CID) Industry or Good for the Politicians?
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),...
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.
OCR Paraphrasing in Laguna Woods Village
The CotoBuzz Journal previously reported on a brewing scandal related to alleged misuse of credit card by property management company employees in an article titled Laguna Woods Residents Outraged by Use of Credit Cards Issued to Property Manager...
Letters to the editor
Letters- Unreal State of Real Estate Bills
Regarding "Bill to Limit Transfer Fees Founders," May 13, on Senate Bill 670: The measure left the illusion of limiting the use of transfer fees, while in reality it would have undermined Civil Code Section 711, which has existed to protect Californians...
Power hungry association steals home from mentally ill person for $540 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.
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...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 24, 2007
SENATE BILL No. 528
Introduced by Senator Aanestad
February 22, 2007
An act to amend Section 1363.05 of the Civil Code, relating to common interest developments.
legislative counsel’s digest
SB 528, as amended, Aanestad. Common interest developments: open meetings.
Existing law requires that a common interest development be managed by an association. The Common Interest Development Open Meeting Act provides that any member of the governing association of a common interest development may attend meetings of the board of directors of the association, except as specified. The act also requires that notice of the time and place of a meeting be given to members at least 4 days prior to the meeting, except in the case of an emergency meeting, as described.
This bill would require the above notice to contain the agenda for the meeting. It would prohibit the board of directors from discussing or taking action on any subject matter at a nonemergency
meeting unless the subject matter was placed on the agenda included in the notice. The bill would provide that these provisions do not prohibit a resident who is not a member of the board from speaking on issues not on the agenda. The bill would also make technical changes.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no.
State-mandated local program: no.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
SECTION 1. Section 1363.05 of the Civil Code is amended to read:
1363.05. (a) This section shall be known and may be cited as the Common Interest Development Open Meeting Act.
(b) Any member of the association may attend meetings of the board of directors of the association, except when the board adjourns to executive session to consider litigation, matters relating to the formation of contracts with third parties, member discipline, personnel matters, or to meet with a member, upon the member’s request, regarding the member’s payment of assessments, as specified in Section 1367 or 1367.1. The board of directors of the association shall meet in executive session, if requested by a member who may be subject to a fine, penalty, or other form of discipline, and the member shall be entitled to attend the executive session.
(c) Any matter discussed in executive session shall be generally noted in the minutes of the immediately following meeting that is open to the entire membership.
(d) The minutes, minutes proposed for adoption that are marked to indicate draft status, or a summary of the minutes, of any meeting of the board of directors of an association, other than an executive session, shall be available to members within 30 days of the meeting. The minutes, proposed minutes, or summary minutes shall be distributed to any member of the association upon request and upon reimbursement of the association’s costs for making that distribution.
(e) Members of the association shall be notified in writing at the time that the pro forma budget required in Section 1365 is distributed, or at the time of any general mailing to the entire membership of the association, of their right to have copies of the minutes of meetings of the board of directors, and how and where those minutes may be obtained.
(f) Unless the time and place of meeting is fixed by the bylaws, or unless the bylaws provide for a longer period of notice, members shall be given notice of the time and place of a meeting as defined in subdivision (j), except for an emergency meeting, at least four days prior to the meeting. Notice shall be given by posting the notice in a prominent place or places within the common area and by mail to any owner who had requested notification of board meetings by mail, at the address requested by the owner. Notice may also be given, by mail or delivery of the notice to each unit in the development or by newsletter or similar means of communication. The notice shall contain the agenda for the meeting.
(g) An emergency meeting of the board may be called by the president of the association, or by any two members of the governing body other than the president, if there are circumstances that could not have been reasonably foreseen which require immediate attention and possible action by the board, and which of necessity make it impracticable to provide notice as required by this section.
(h) The board of directors of the association shall permit any member of the association to speak at any meeting of the association or the board of directors, except for meetings of the board held in executive session. A reasonable time limit for all members of the association to speak to the board of directors or before a meeting of the association shall be established by the board of directors.
(i) The board of directors of the association may not discuss or take action on any subject matter at a nonemergency meeting unless the subject matter was placed on the agenda included in the notice that was posted and distributed pursuant to subdivision (f). This subdivision does not prohibit a resident who is not a member of the board from speaking on issues not on the agenda.
(j) As used in this section, "meeting" includes any congregation of a majority of the members of the board at the same time and place to hear, discuss, or deliberate upon any item of business scheduled to be heard by the board, except those matters that may be discussed in executive session.
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
Sunday, May 20, 2007
CAN YOU OUTSWIM YOUR HOA SHARKS?
CAN YOU OUTSWIM YOUR HOA SHARKS?
or will you drown trying?
by D. Vanitzian
May 20, 2007
Owning, let alone living in an HOA is a tough JOB and requires you be physically fit, possess a certain sophistication of the processes, and have the character let alone stamina, that allows you to be persistent in a manner that indescribable to REAL real-property owners.
The majority of homeowners are unable to keep up with it. Its another reason why purchasing this type of "property" is not for everybody. It takes more than "money" - it takes the time and mental awareness to be and keep informed, and unfortunately again, the majority of homeowners think "someone else is going to do that for them." I'm still fighting the SHARKS - seven BAD Senate and Assembly bills.
Still the MAJORITY of deed-restricted property owners did NOT bother (or could not be bothered, whichever the case may be) to send ME a vote of confidence (mind you, not asking them for money!) in representing their voice against these BAD legislative decisions (bills) NOR did THEY themselves BOTHER to write to their Senators and Assemblymen. But, many of them will continue to look for assistance on/with their problems thinking they can solve them without a lawyer or knowledge of the laws -- that is, until they are hit from behind -- then where do they turn?
RELATED STORIES
Two of the Worst & Most Detrimental Laws to Hit California are Sponsored by None Other than: California Association of Realtors (R) The Gold is Gone --No more gold in the Golden State!
Dear Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger,
SHATZI! PLEASE REMEMBER YOUR PROMISE TO US. Please listen to the people who support you and look to you to help us! When you first began buying property in California NO ONE told you what you could or could not do...
THE LAW OF INTENDED CONSEQUENCES - WHAT A DIFFERENCE A "WORD" MAKES: NO! ON ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 563
It apparently does not matter that titleholders with a vested interest in their property cannot get their legislators to carry legislation to help US, but, they can waste taxpayer funds by preventing the bills WE WANT and NEED by CHANGING *ONE* WORD in an...
EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY! OOPS! WE JUST HAD THE MEETING! YOU MISSED IT!!
So THIS is what the Senate calls an "Open Meeting." How many Open Meetings have THEY been to? Obviously not many. ROTFLMAO!
CAN YOU OUTSWIM YOUR HOA SHARKS? or will you drown trying?
Owning, let alone living in an HOA is a tough JOB and requires you be physically fit, possess a certain sophistication of the processes, and have the character let alone stamina, that allows you to be persistent in a manner that indescribable to REAL...
HEY GRAY PANTHERS! YOU GOT IT WRONG!
(c) D. Vanitzian
May 16, 2007The 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?
The Law of Unintended Consequences: Legislation and HOA BOD Cause and Effect: Clueless in my CAR
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...
Paraphrasing the LA Times on Defeat of SB670 & Wicked Twin Witches of the West - SB 127 & AB-980
Taking a page out of the OC Register?s ?paraphrased reporting?, an article written by LA Times staff writer Diane Weder titled ?Bill to limit transfer fee founders?, published appropriately on May 13, 2007, quotes the president of the statewide Realtors...
One More Near Miss Avoided - Clueless in My CID/HOA
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
Private Transfer Tax - Good for the Common Interest Development (HOA/CID) Industry or Good for the Politicians?
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),...
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.
OCR Paraphrasing in Laguna Woods Village
The CotoBuzz Journal previously reported on a brewing scandal related to alleged misuse of credit card by property management company employees in an article titled Laguna Woods Residents Outraged by Use of Credit Cards Issued to Property Manager...
Letters to the editor
Letters- Unreal State of Real Estate Bills
Regarding "Bill to Limit Transfer Fees Founders," May 13, on Senate Bill 670: The measure left the illusion of limiting the use of transfer fees, while in reality it would have undermined Civil Code Section 711, which has existed to protect Californians...
Power hungry association steals home from mentally ill person for $540 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.
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...
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
or will you drown trying?
by D. Vanitzian
May 20, 2007
Owning, let alone living in an HOA is a tough JOB and requires you be physically fit, possess a certain sophistication of the processes, and have the character let alone stamina, that allows you to be persistent in a manner that indescribable to REAL real-property owners.
The majority of homeowners are unable to keep up with it. Its another reason why purchasing this type of "property" is not for everybody. It takes more than "money" - it takes the time and mental awareness to be and keep informed, and unfortunately again, the majority of homeowners think "someone else is going to do that for them." I'm still fighting the SHARKS - seven BAD Senate and Assembly bills.
Still the MAJORITY of deed-restricted property owners did NOT bother (or could not be bothered, whichever the case may be) to send ME a vote of confidence (mind you, not asking them for money!) in representing their voice against these BAD legislative decisions (bills) NOR did THEY themselves BOTHER to write to their Senators and Assemblymen. But, many of them will continue to look for assistance on/with their problems thinking they can solve them without a lawyer or knowledge of the laws -- that is, until they are hit from behind -- then where do they turn?
RELATED STORIES
Two of the Worst & Most Detrimental Laws to Hit California are Sponsored by None Other than: California Association of Realtors (R) The Gold is Gone --No more gold in the Golden State!
Dear Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger,
SHATZI! PLEASE REMEMBER YOUR PROMISE TO US. Please listen to the people who support you and look to you to help us! When you first began buying property in California NO ONE told you what you could or could not do...
THE LAW OF INTENDED CONSEQUENCES - WHAT A DIFFERENCE A "WORD" MAKES: NO! ON ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 563
It apparently does not matter that titleholders with a vested interest in their property cannot get their legislators to carry legislation to help US, but, they can waste taxpayer funds by preventing the bills WE WANT and NEED by CHANGING *ONE* WORD in an...
EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY! OOPS! WE JUST HAD THE MEETING! YOU MISSED IT!!
So THIS is what the Senate calls an "Open Meeting." How many Open Meetings have THEY been to? Obviously not many. ROTFLMAO!
CAN YOU OUTSWIM YOUR HOA SHARKS? or will you drown trying?
Owning, let alone living in an HOA is a tough JOB and requires you be physically fit, possess a certain sophistication of the processes, and have the character let alone stamina, that allows you to be persistent in a manner that indescribable to REAL...
HEY GRAY PANTHERS! YOU GOT IT WRONG!
(c) D. Vanitzian
May 16, 2007The 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?
The Law of Unintended Consequences: Legislation and HOA BOD Cause and Effect: Clueless in my CAR
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...
Paraphrasing the LA Times on Defeat of SB670 & Wicked Twin Witches of the West - SB 127 & AB-980
Taking a page out of the OC Register?s ?paraphrased reporting?, an article written by LA Times staff writer Diane Weder titled ?Bill to limit transfer fee founders?, published appropriately on May 13, 2007, quotes the president of the statewide Realtors...
One More Near Miss Avoided - Clueless in My CID/HOA
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
Private Transfer Tax - Good for the Common Interest Development (HOA/CID) Industry or Good for the Politicians?
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),...
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.
OCR Paraphrasing in Laguna Woods Village
The CotoBuzz Journal previously reported on a brewing scandal related to alleged misuse of credit card by property management company employees in an article titled Laguna Woods Residents Outraged by Use of Credit Cards Issued to Property Manager...
Letters to the editor
Letters- Unreal State of Real Estate Bills
Regarding "Bill to Limit Transfer Fees Founders," May 13, on Senate Bill 670: The measure left the illusion of limiting the use of transfer fees, while in reality it would have undermined Civil Code Section 711, which has existed to protect Californians...
Power hungry association steals home from mentally ill person for $540 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.
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...
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
THE LAW OF INTENDED CONSEQUENCES - WHAT A DIFFERENCE A "WORD" MAKES:
THE LAW OF INTENDED CONSEQUENCES - WHAT A DIFFERENCE A "WORD" MAKES:
NO! ON ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 563
by D. Vanitzian, J.D., Arbitrator
May 20, 2007
It apparently does not matter that titleholders with a vested interest in their property cannot get their legislators to carry legislation to help US, but, they can waste taxpayer funds by preventing the bills WE WANT and NEED by CHANGING *ONE* WORD in an existing statute.
ONE WORD! AT WHAT COST?
My first question:
Why the hell didn't they have their overpaid so-called legislative analysts catch that so-called problem when they got their buddies to vote YES on its passage the first time around?
My second question:
Is this the bill that your office was referring to when I asked LAST YEAR if you and/or your cohorts would consider carrying a bill to impose PENALTIES AGAINST RECALCITRANT BOARDS AND THEIR LAWYER ADVISORS, and was told, "oh, I’m sorry, the Assemblyman already has all the bills he’s going to carry for next year, you’ll have to try back in 2008."
Not to put too fine a point on it, but Assemblyman Villines is carrying a Bill (Ass. Bill. 563) that USED to read as follows (in pertinent part):
"has been approved by the required number of owners, trustees, beneficiaries, and mortgagees pursuant to Section 66452.10 of the Government Code, the certificate need ONLY be signed by those owners, trustees, beneficiaries, and mortgagees approving the conversion."
Assemblyman Villines is proposing to DELETE the word "ONLY" and MOVE IT as follows:
"has been approved by the required number of owners, trustees, beneficiaries, and mortgagees pursuant to Section 66452.10 of the Government Code, the certificate need be signed ONLY by those owners, trustees, beneficiaries, and mortgagees approving the conversion."
You say, "what’s wrong with that?" Let’s REWIND for one minute . . . . .
Government Code Section 66452.10 is located in Article 2 (Tentative Maps) and addresses: stock cooperative or community apartment project; conversions to condominium; required number of favorable votes of owners, trustees or beneficiaries.
Here’s Government Code Section 66452.10 as it stands as of May 17, 2007:
"A stock cooperative, as defined in Section 11003.2 of the Business and Professions Code, or a community apartment project, as defined in Section 11004 of the Business and Professions Code, shall not be converted to a condominium, as defined in Section 783 of the Civil Code, unless the required number of (1) owners and (2) trustees or beneficiaries of each recorded deed of trust and mortgagees of each recorded mortgage in the cooperative or project, as specified in the bylaws, or other organizational documents, have voted in favor of the conversion. If the bylaws or other organizational documents do not expressly specify the number of votes required to approve the conversion, a majority vote of the (1) owners and (2) trustees or beneficiaries of each recorded deed of trust and mortgagees of each recorded mortgage in the cooperative or project shall be required. Upon approval of the conversion as set forth above and in compliance with subdivision (e) of Section 1351 of the Civil Code, all conveyances and other documents necessary to effectuate the conversion shall be executed by the required number of owners in the cooperative or project as specified in the bylaws or other organizational documents. If the bylaws or other organizational documents do not expressly specify the number of owners necessary to execute the conveyances or other documents, a majority of owners in the cooperative or project shall be required to execute the conveyances and other documents. Conveyances and other documents executed under the foregoing provisions shall be binding upon and affect the interests of all parties in the cooperative or project. The provisions of Section 66499.31 shall not apply to a violation of this section."
After reading Government Code Section 66452.10, IN MY LAY OPINION, it appears that the LEGAL SIGNIFICANCE OF RELOCATING the word "ONLY" to its new position is HUGE.
If that code section is amended to read as Assemblyman Villines wants, then ONLY those who APPROVE of the conversion (already a topic of contention statewide) need sign. It eliminates ALL OTHER OWNERS from the democratic process. It also has the potential of creating a liability for the association, because of its selective enforcement of that document.
Again, I believe that this bill FAVORS the LAWYERS and/or THOSE INDUSTRIES WHO INITIATE CONVERSIONS. Period. IT HAS THE INTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF DISENFRANCISING ALL THE MINORITY SHAREHOLDERS WHO DISAGREE.
There is much more to this than meets the eye. Will save the rest for later. Does the public want or need Assembly Bill 563?
In one word: NO!
RELATED STORIES
Two of the Worst & Most Detrimental Laws to Hit California are Sponsored by None Other than: California Association of Realtors (R) The Gold is Gone --No more gold in the Golden State!
Dear Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger,
SHATZI! PLEASE REMEMBER YOUR PROMISE TO US. Please listen to the people who support you and look to you to help us! When you first began buying property in California NO ONE told you what you could or could not do...
THE LAW OF INTENDED CONSEQUENCES - WHAT A DIFFERENCE A "WORD" MAKES: NO! ON ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 563
It apparently does not matter that titleholders with a vested interest in their property cannot get their legislators to carry legislation to help US, but, they can waste taxpayer funds by preventing the bills WE WANT and NEED by CHANGING *ONE* WORD in an...
EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY! OOPS! WE JUST HAD THE MEETING! YOU MISSED IT!!
So THIS is what the Senate calls an "Open Meeting." How many Open Meetings have THEY been to? Obviously not many. ROTFLMAO!
CAN YOU OUTSWIM YOUR HOA SHARKS? or will you drown trying?
Owning, let alone living in an HOA is a tough JOB and requires you be physically fit, possess a certain sophistication of the processes, and have the character let alone stamina, that allows you to be persistent in a manner that indescribable to REAL...
HEY GRAY PANTHERS! YOU GOT IT WRONG!
(c) D. Vanitzian
May 16, 2007The 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?
The Law of Unintended Consequences: Legislation and HOA BOD Cause and Effect: Clueless in my CAR
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...
Paraphrasing the LA Times on Defeat of SB670 & Wicked Twin Witches of the West - SB 127 & AB-980
Taking a page out of the OC Register?s ?paraphrased reporting?, an article written by LA Times staff writer Diane Weder titled ?Bill to limit transfer fee founders?, published appropriately on May 13, 2007, quotes the president of the statewide Realtors...
One More Near Miss Avoided - Clueless in My CID/HOA
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
Private Transfer Tax - Good for the Common Interest Development (HOA/CID) Industry or Good for the Politicians?
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),...
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.
OCR Paraphrasing in Laguna Woods Village
The CotoBuzz Journal previously reported on a brewing scandal related to alleged misuse of credit card by property management company employees in an article titled Laguna Woods Residents Outraged by Use of Credit Cards Issued to Property Manager...
Letters to the editor
Letters- Unreal State of Real Estate Bills
Regarding "Bill to Limit Transfer Fees Founders," May 13, on Senate Bill 670: The measure left the illusion of limiting the use of transfer fees, while in reality it would have undermined Civil Code Section 711, which has existed to protect Californians...
Power hungry association steals home from mentally ill person for $540 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.
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...
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
NO! ON ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 563
by D. Vanitzian, J.D., Arbitrator
May 20, 2007
It apparently does not matter that titleholders with a vested interest in their property cannot get their legislators to carry legislation to help US, but, they can waste taxpayer funds by preventing the bills WE WANT and NEED by CHANGING *ONE* WORD in an existing statute.
ONE WORD! AT WHAT COST?
My first question:
Why the hell didn't they have their overpaid so-called legislative analysts catch that so-called problem when they got their buddies to vote YES on its passage the first time around?
My second question:
Is this the bill that your office was referring to when I asked LAST YEAR if you and/or your cohorts would consider carrying a bill to impose PENALTIES AGAINST RECALCITRANT BOARDS AND THEIR LAWYER ADVISORS, and was told, "oh, I’m sorry, the Assemblyman already has all the bills he’s going to carry for next year, you’ll have to try back in 2008."
Not to put too fine a point on it, but Assemblyman Villines is carrying a Bill (Ass. Bill. 563) that USED to read as follows (in pertinent part):
"has been approved by the required number of owners, trustees, beneficiaries, and mortgagees pursuant to Section 66452.10 of the Government Code, the certificate need ONLY be signed by those owners, trustees, beneficiaries, and mortgagees approving the conversion."
Assemblyman Villines is proposing to DELETE the word "ONLY" and MOVE IT as follows:
"has been approved by the required number of owners, trustees, beneficiaries, and mortgagees pursuant to Section 66452.10 of the Government Code, the certificate need be signed ONLY by those owners, trustees, beneficiaries, and mortgagees approving the conversion."
You say, "what’s wrong with that?" Let’s REWIND for one minute . . . . .
Government Code Section 66452.10 is located in Article 2 (Tentative Maps) and addresses: stock cooperative or community apartment project; conversions to condominium; required number of favorable votes of owners, trustees or beneficiaries.
Here’s Government Code Section 66452.10 as it stands as of May 17, 2007:
"A stock cooperative, as defined in Section 11003.2 of the Business and Professions Code, or a community apartment project, as defined in Section 11004 of the Business and Professions Code, shall not be converted to a condominium, as defined in Section 783 of the Civil Code, unless the required number of (1) owners and (2) trustees or beneficiaries of each recorded deed of trust and mortgagees of each recorded mortgage in the cooperative or project, as specified in the bylaws, or other organizational documents, have voted in favor of the conversion. If the bylaws or other organizational documents do not expressly specify the number of votes required to approve the conversion, a majority vote of the (1) owners and (2) trustees or beneficiaries of each recorded deed of trust and mortgagees of each recorded mortgage in the cooperative or project shall be required. Upon approval of the conversion as set forth above and in compliance with subdivision (e) of Section 1351 of the Civil Code, all conveyances and other documents necessary to effectuate the conversion shall be executed by the required number of owners in the cooperative or project as specified in the bylaws or other organizational documents. If the bylaws or other organizational documents do not expressly specify the number of owners necessary to execute the conveyances or other documents, a majority of owners in the cooperative or project shall be required to execute the conveyances and other documents. Conveyances and other documents executed under the foregoing provisions shall be binding upon and affect the interests of all parties in the cooperative or project. The provisions of Section 66499.31 shall not apply to a violation of this section."
After reading Government Code Section 66452.10, IN MY LAY OPINION, it appears that the LEGAL SIGNIFICANCE OF RELOCATING the word "ONLY" to its new position is HUGE.
If that code section is amended to read as Assemblyman Villines wants, then ONLY those who APPROVE of the conversion (already a topic of contention statewide) need sign. It eliminates ALL OTHER OWNERS from the democratic process. It also has the potential of creating a liability for the association, because of its selective enforcement of that document.
Again, I believe that this bill FAVORS the LAWYERS and/or THOSE INDUSTRIES WHO INITIATE CONVERSIONS. Period. IT HAS THE INTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF DISENFRANCISING ALL THE MINORITY SHAREHOLDERS WHO DISAGREE.
There is much more to this than meets the eye. Will save the rest for later. Does the public want or need Assembly Bill 563?
In one word: NO!
RELATED STORIES
Two of the Worst & Most Detrimental Laws to Hit California are Sponsored by None Other than: California Association of Realtors (R) The Gold is Gone --No more gold in the Golden State!
Dear Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger,
SHATZI! PLEASE REMEMBER YOUR PROMISE TO US. Please listen to the people who support you and look to you to help us! When you first began buying property in California NO ONE told you what you could or could not do...
THE LAW OF INTENDED CONSEQUENCES - WHAT A DIFFERENCE A "WORD" MAKES: NO! ON ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 563
It apparently does not matter that titleholders with a vested interest in their property cannot get their legislators to carry legislation to help US, but, they can waste taxpayer funds by preventing the bills WE WANT and NEED by CHANGING *ONE* WORD in an...
EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY! OOPS! WE JUST HAD THE MEETING! YOU MISSED IT!!
So THIS is what the Senate calls an "Open Meeting." How many Open Meetings have THEY been to? Obviously not many. ROTFLMAO!
CAN YOU OUTSWIM YOUR HOA SHARKS? or will you drown trying?
Owning, let alone living in an HOA is a tough JOB and requires you be physically fit, possess a certain sophistication of the processes, and have the character let alone stamina, that allows you to be persistent in a manner that indescribable to REAL...
HEY GRAY PANTHERS! YOU GOT IT WRONG!
(c) D. Vanitzian
May 16, 2007The 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?
The Law of Unintended Consequences: Legislation and HOA BOD Cause and Effect: Clueless in my CAR
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...
Paraphrasing the LA Times on Defeat of SB670 & Wicked Twin Witches of the West - SB 127 & AB-980
Taking a page out of the OC Register?s ?paraphrased reporting?, an article written by LA Times staff writer Diane Weder titled ?Bill to limit transfer fee founders?, published appropriately on May 13, 2007, quotes the president of the statewide Realtors...
One More Near Miss Avoided - Clueless in My CID/HOA
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
Private Transfer Tax - Good for the Common Interest Development (HOA/CID) Industry or Good for the Politicians?
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),...
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.
OCR Paraphrasing in Laguna Woods Village
The CotoBuzz Journal previously reported on a brewing scandal related to alleged misuse of credit card by property management company employees in an article titled Laguna Woods Residents Outraged by Use of Credit Cards Issued to Property Manager...
Letters to the editor
Letters- Unreal State of Real Estate Bills
Regarding "Bill to Limit Transfer Fees Founders," May 13, on Senate Bill 670: The measure left the illusion of limiting the use of transfer fees, while in reality it would have undermined Civil Code Section 711, which has existed to protect Californians...
Power hungry association steals home from mentally ill person for $540 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.
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...
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
Two of the Worst & Most Detrimental Laws to Hit California are Sponsored by None Other than: California Association of Realtors (R)
Two of the Worst & Most Detrimental Laws to Hit California are Sponsored by None Other than: California Association of Realtors (R)
The Gold is Gone --No more gold in the Golden State!
(c)2007 D. Vanitzian, J.D., Arbitrator
May 20, 2007
Dear Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger,
SHATZI! PLEASE REMEMBER YOUR PROMISE TO US. Please listen to the people who support you and look to you to help us! When you first began buying property in California NO ONE told you what you could or could not do with it. Don’t let California change that! Property ownership and the freedoms that go with it IS THE AMERICAN DREAM. Please help us keep it that way.
Our group, HOAATM now has well over 55,000 members who want their voices to be heard, they want the Governor to VETO Assembly Bill 980 and Assembly Bill 1574. (you can join this group for free, there is no fee to join. email: villaappalling@earthlink.net. Put in the SUBJECT LINE: JOIN HOAATM.)
No on Assembly Bill 980. No on Assembly Bill 1574.
Veto Assembly Bill 980. Veto Assembly Bill 1574.
We don’t want anymore documents recorded on our titles!
Consumers:
BOYCOTT these legislators now. As of May 15, 2007 THESE LEGISLATORS VOTED YES FOR LIENS TO BE PUT ON YOUR TITLES: Jones, Tran, Adams, Saldana, Garcia, Bass, Evans, Feuer, Keene, Hancock, Mullin, Sharon, Krekorian, Laird, Levine, Runner, Lieber.
Even when the public is sorely in need of honing in attorney advertising, we still get no justice. Take a look at an anatomy of deceit and fraud perpetrated on the public.
REPUBLICAN ASSEMBLYMAN GUY HOUSTON DID THIS, read this closely:
February 23, 2007 - Introduced
An act to add Section 6157.8 to Business and Professions Code relating to Attorneys. As introduced, Houston, Attorney advertising; residential construction defects.
March 29, 2007 - Amended (i.e., changed it to this)
An act to add Section 11026e to the Civil Code relating to real estate disclosures. As amended, Houston, Real estate disclosures.
April 29, 2007 - Amended (changed again)
An act to add Sections 11098 and 11026e to the Civil Code relating to real estate. As amended, Houston, Real estate.
May 3, 2007 - Amended (changed again)
An act to add Sections 11098 and 11026e to the Civil Code relating to real estate. As amended, Houston, Real estate: fees.
May 15, 2007 (changed again AND adds a co-author)
An act to add Sections 11098 and 11026e to the Civil Code relating to real estate. As amended, Houston, Real property: transfer fees.
How do you spell “$ET-UP”?
Guy Houston conveniently picks up a co-conspirator co-author: SENATOR DUTTON just in time to get votes in the Senate to pass this BAD bill
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consumers will not be able to fight these liens once Ass. Bill 1574 and Ass. Bill 980 pass. Don’t Wait. Write, call, email, the Governor AND Assemblyman Charles Calderon, tell him NO on Ass. Bill 980! NO on Ass. Bill 1574 California consumers cannot afford it.
Assemblyman Charles Calderon’s brother is Senator R. Calderon (think: votes).
[source 5/20/2007: http://www.ucop.edu/state/advocacy/biographies/ADCalderon58.pdf]
Ass. Bill 1574 and Ass Bill 980 will ruin your life forever; want to see just how BAD a really “bad” bill is? They will:
All but halt 1031 property exchanges
By default, alter and/or prevent EVERY existing and future homestead exemption
Complicate homeownership
Complicate ownership of ANY property - including residences, and do so “absolutely”
Complicate any and all property purchases - including COMMERCIAL properties
Change the way everyone does business in this state
Cause restrictions, if not altogether eliminate the already fragile “rental” market
Cause an influx of litigation like California has never seen
(guess who benefits from litigation?)
Cause a FISCAL IMPACT ON THIS STATE that California could not imagine
Cost you and me money, money, money, money, money, and more money
Determine what you can and can’t do with your property
Finish off mobile homeownership, sales, existing and/or otherwise
Give every lawyer in California a pay raise
Have a chilling effect on commerce [who would want to buy California property!]
Increase necessary paperwork related to owning, buying, or selling ANY property
Increase insurance costs for owners, buyers, and sellers
Increase insurance costs for real estate professionals
Increase costs of escrow
Increase dues that are paid mandatorily to trade organizations
Place unnecessary compliance requirements on Real Estate professionals
Raise the cost of doing business in California - this is absolute
Very likely have a deleterious effect on those who are “homeless” or who will become homeless
Work with other laws to handcuff the hands of consumers
SPONSOR for Ass. Bill 980, California Association of Realtors (CAR) states:
“CAR is sponsoring Assembly Bill Number 980 to REQUIRE THAT A SEPARATE DOCUMENT BE RECORDED that discloses the transfer fee payment obligation. Recordation of a separate document will insure that the transfer fee payment requirement is brought to the attention of prospective homebuyers.”
[source: www.senate.ca.gov]
Attention Real Estate Professionals:
Better budget some extra money for “TROUBLE.”
Better budget some extra money for “NEW LIABILITY INSURANCE.”
Better budget some extra money for “MORE EDUCATIONAL CLASSES
Better budget some extra money for “LOSS OF CLIENTS
Your trade organization just sold you down the Rio Grande without a paddle, life jacket, or lifeline. Get ready to pay some serious fee-money on ALL REAL ESTATE TRANSACTIONS because DEMOCRAT ASS. CHARLES CALDERON a CALIFORNIA LICENSED ATTORNEY ain’t gonna stop it--instead he’s requiring these liens be recorded on your property retroactive and the California Association of Realtors is helping him do it!! Imagine that!
Start asking more questions, how about these for a start:
* Are California’s State licensed attorneys held to a different standard than the rest of us?
* How many of our State Senators and Assemblypersons:
--are licensed attorneys while on the State payrolls?
--are using State resources to that end?
--have been suspended from the practice of law?
--have reinstated their “active status” with the State Bar in time to run for office?
While we’re at it, how many lobbyists are State Licensed attorneys?
Charles Calderon, representing the 58th Assembly District, is in the process of making a law that will effect EVERY BUYER, SELLER, OWNER OF ANY PROPERTY in the state. Why doesn’t he just stick to his district! A list of Assemblyman Calderon’s Assembly Bills are listed below. Assembly Bill 980 sticks out like a sore thumb. Don’t you think the public should question Calderon’s involvement with this bill?
The Analysis from the Assembly Floor states:
“Generally, the minimum length of time these transfer fees are being imposed ranges from 20 to 25 years; however, many are imposed in perpetuity.” The analysis goes on to say that Calderon’s Assembly Bill 980 COMPLEMENTS Assemblyman Guy Houston’s Assembly Bill 1574. REPUBLICAN Assemblyman Guy Houston’s District #15.
[source: www.senate.ca.gov - effective: 5/20/2007]
“Assembly Bill 980 by contrast LOOKS BACKWARD TO TRANSFER FEES already established in order to ensure that they are likewise disclosed and recorded so that prospective purchasers are aware of the costs before agreeing to the transaction.”
[source: www.senate.ca.gov]
SAY WHAT?
Ass. Charles Calderon [source: http://democrats.assembly.ca.gov/members/a58/]
Capitol Office: State Capitol; P.O. Box 942849
Sacramento, CA 94249-0058
Tel: (916) 319-2058
Fax: (916) 319-2158
Ass. Charles Calderon
District Office: 13181 N. Crossroads Parkway, Suite 160
City of Industry, CA 91746
Tel: (562) 692-5858
Fax: (562) 695-5852
PUBLIC INFORMATION
[source: www.calbar.ca.gov] effective May 20, 2007
STATE BAR: Number 70359
STATE BAR: Address: Hon. Charles M Calderon
STATE BAR: LISTED ADDRESS: State Capitol, Room 2117, Sacramento, CA 95814
STATE BAR: Phone Number (916) 319-2058 [look familiar to anyone?]
STATE BAR: Fax Number (562) 692-9755
STATE BAR: Bar Number 70359
STATE BAR: e-mail ccalderon@nossaman.com
Author note: www.nossaman.com (Nossaman, Guthner, Knox, & Elliott LLP)[FN1]
STATE BAR: Present ACTIVE
STATE BAR: 8/6/1981 Active
STATE BAR: 7/6/1981 NOT ELIGIBLE TO PRACTICE LAW
STATE BAR: 12/22/1976 Admitted to The State Bar of California
STATE BAR: Disciplinary and Related Actions
STATE BAR: This member has no PUBLIC record of discipline.
STATE BAR: Administrative Actions
STATE BAR: 7/6/1981 SUSPENDED, FAILED TO PAY BAR MEMBER FEES
STATE BAR: NOT ELIGIBLE TO PRACTICE LAW
[FN1] (Nossaman, Guthner, Knox, & Elliott LLP) [source: www.nossaman.com] effective May 20, 2007
**PRACTICE AREAS**
Business and Corporate Transactions
Eminent Domain
Employment
Environmental
Government Relations
Healthcare
Infrastructure
Insurance Coverage
Land Use and Natural Resources
Litigation
Public Agency Law
Public Utility Regulation
**KEY INDUSTRIES**
Banking and Financial Services
Construction
Energy
Food and Beverage
Home Building
Insurance Broker
Land Development
Real Estate
Telecommunications
Transportation
Water
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[source: effective: may 20, 2007
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery/?sess=CUR&house=A&hits=All&member=calderon]
1. AB 266 - Charles Calderon
* Tribal gaming: compact ratification.
2. AB 267 - Charles Calderon
* Annuity sales: seniors.
3. AB 268 - Charles Calderon
* Hearsay evidence: unavailable declarant.
4. AB 489 - Charles Calderon
* Public employment: State Bargaining Unit 19:
5. AB 502 - Charles Calderon
* Domestic violence.
6. AB 634 - Charles Calderon
* Deferred deposit transaction licensees.
7. AB 674 - Charles Calderon
* CalWORKs: aid payment increase: parental invo
8. AB 733 - Charles Calderon
* Gambling: exclusion from gambling establishme
9. AB 885 - Charles Calderon
* Metropolitan Water District of Southern Calif
10. AB 938 - Charles Calderon
* Water districts: urban runoff.
11. AB 943 - Charles Calderon
* Initiative petitions: signature requirement.
12. AB 976 - Charles Calderon
* Tenancy: tenant's characteristics.
13. AB 980 - Charles Calderon
* Real estate transfer fees: residential property <=== * * * *
14. AB 988 - Charles Calderon
* Federal homeland security grant funds.
15. AB 991 - Charles Calderon
* Public employees' retirement: Deferred Retire
16. AB 1008 - Charles Calderon
* Insurance: vehicle service contracts.
17. AB 1012 - Charles Calderon
* Oil and gas deposits: property tax assessment
18. AB 1305 - Charles Calderon
* Community colleges: employment of full-time f
19. AB 1309 - Charles Calderon
* Mobilehomes: rent control.
20. AB 1313 - Charles Calderon
* Credit cards: cancellations.
21. AB 1447 - Charles Calderon
* Hazardous waste: major appliances.
22. AB 1486 - Charles Calderon
* Licensed professional counselors.
23. AB 1546 - Charles Calderon
* Income taxes: limited liability companies: ap
24. AB 1551 - Charles Calderon
* Sales tax: Adult Entertainment Venue Impact F
25. AB 1561 - Charles Calderon
* Income taxes: pensions.
26. AB 1582 - Charles Calderon
* Crimes: marijuana: possession: penalty.
27. AB 1677 - Charles Calderon
* Internet transactions: verification: banking
28. ACA 6 - Charles Calderon
* Initiative measures: legislative review.
29. ACR 27 - Charles Calderon
* Los Angeles County Deputy Sheriff Jerry Orti
------------------------------------------------------------
REPUBLICAN GUY HOUSTON
[source http://maplight.org/?q=map/ca/legislator/77] effective May 20, 2007
HOUSTON’S TOP 10 FUNDING INTERESTS.
Interest: Contributions: Voted with this Interest :
Real estate developers & subdividers $80,750 20%(1 out of 5 bills)
Construction, unclassified $77,175 41% (7 out of 17 bills)
Residential construction $71,933 43% (3 out of 7 bills)
Real estate $66,028 23% (7 out of 31 bills)
Insurance companies, general $59,125 36% (16 out of 44 bills)
Builders associations $38,500 40% (21 out of 52 bills)
Mortgage bankers & brokers $35,425 100% (9 out of 9 bills)
Food stores $34,042 14% (3 out of 21 bills)
Real estate agents & managers $28,575 61% (11 out of 18 bills)
Auto dealers, new & used $27,700 22% (4 out of 18 bills)
RELATED STORIES
Two of the Worst & Most Detrimental Laws to Hit California are Sponsored by None Other than: California Association of Realtors (R) The Gold is Gone --No more gold in the Golden State!
Dear Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger,
SHATZI! PLEASE REMEMBER YOUR PROMISE TO US. Please listen to the people who support you and look to you to help us! When you first began buying property in California NO ONE told you what you could or could not do...
THE LAW OF INTENDED CONSEQUENCES - WHAT A DIFFERENCE A "WORD" MAKES: NO! ON ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 563
It apparently does not matter that titleholders with a vested interest in their property cannot get their legislators to carry legislation to help US, but, they can waste taxpayer funds by preventing the bills WE WANT and NEED by CHANGING *ONE* WORD in an...
EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY! OOPS! WE JUST HAD THE MEETING! YOU MISSED IT!!
So THIS is what the Senate calls an "Open Meeting." How many Open Meetings have THEY been to? Obviously not many. ROTFLMAO!
CAN YOU OUTSWIM YOUR HOA SHARKS? or will you drown trying?
Owning, let alone living in an HOA is a tough JOB and requires you be physically fit, possess a certain sophistication of the processes, and have the character let alone stamina, that allows you to be persistent in a manner that indescribable to REAL...
HEY GRAY PANTHERS! YOU GOT IT WRONG!
(c) D. Vanitzian
May 16, 2007The 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?
The Law of Unintended Consequences: Legislation and HOA BOD Cause and Effect: Clueless in my CAR
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...
Paraphrasing the LA Times on Defeat of SB670 & Wicked Twin Witches of the West - SB 127 & AB-980
Taking a page out of the OC Register?s ?paraphrased reporting?, an article written by LA Times staff writer Diane Weder titled ?Bill to limit transfer fee founders?, published appropriately on May 13, 2007, quotes the president of the statewide Realtors...
One More Near Miss Avoided - Clueless in My CID/HOA
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
Private Transfer Tax - Good for the Common Interest Development (HOA/CID) Industry or Good for the Politicians?
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),...
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.
OCR Paraphrasing in Laguna Woods Village
The CotoBuzz Journal previously reported on a brewing scandal related to alleged misuse of credit card by property management company employees in an article titled Laguna Woods Residents Outraged by Use of Credit Cards Issued to Property Manager...
Letters to the editor
Letters- Unreal State of Real Estate Bills
Regarding "Bill to Limit Transfer Fees Founders," May 13, on Senate Bill 670: The measure left the illusion of limiting the use of transfer fees, while in reality it would have undermined Civil Code Section 711, which has existed to protect Californians...
Power hungry association steals home from mentally ill person for $540 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.
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...
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
The Gold is Gone --No more gold in the Golden State!
(c)2007 D. Vanitzian, J.D., Arbitrator
May 20, 2007
Dear Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger,
SHATZI! PLEASE REMEMBER YOUR PROMISE TO US. Please listen to the people who support you and look to you to help us! When you first began buying property in California NO ONE told you what you could or could not do with it. Don’t let California change that! Property ownership and the freedoms that go with it IS THE AMERICAN DREAM. Please help us keep it that way.
Our group, HOAATM now has well over 55,000 members who want their voices to be heard, they want the Governor to VETO Assembly Bill 980 and Assembly Bill 1574. (you can join this group for free, there is no fee to join. email: villaappalling@earthlink.net. Put in the SUBJECT LINE: JOIN HOAATM.)
No on Assembly Bill 980. No on Assembly Bill 1574.
Veto Assembly Bill 980. Veto Assembly Bill 1574.
We don’t want anymore documents recorded on our titles!
Consumers:
BOYCOTT these legislators now. As of May 15, 2007 THESE LEGISLATORS VOTED YES FOR LIENS TO BE PUT ON YOUR TITLES: Jones, Tran, Adams, Saldana, Garcia, Bass, Evans, Feuer, Keene, Hancock, Mullin, Sharon, Krekorian, Laird, Levine, Runner, Lieber.
Even when the public is sorely in need of honing in attorney advertising, we still get no justice. Take a look at an anatomy of deceit and fraud perpetrated on the public.
REPUBLICAN ASSEMBLYMAN GUY HOUSTON DID THIS, read this closely:
February 23, 2007 - Introduced
An act to add Section 6157.8 to Business and Professions Code relating to Attorneys. As introduced, Houston, Attorney advertising; residential construction defects.
March 29, 2007 - Amended (i.e., changed it to this)
An act to add Section 11026e to the Civil Code relating to real estate disclosures. As amended, Houston, Real estate disclosures.
April 29, 2007 - Amended (changed again)
An act to add Sections 11098 and 11026e to the Civil Code relating to real estate. As amended, Houston, Real estate.
May 3, 2007 - Amended (changed again)
An act to add Sections 11098 and 11026e to the Civil Code relating to real estate. As amended, Houston, Real estate: fees.
May 15, 2007 (changed again AND adds a co-author)
An act to add Sections 11098 and 11026e to the Civil Code relating to real estate. As amended, Houston, Real property: transfer fees.
How do you spell “$ET-UP”?
Guy Houston conveniently picks up a co-conspirator co-author: SENATOR DUTTON just in time to get votes in the Senate to pass this BAD bill
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consumers will not be able to fight these liens once Ass. Bill 1574 and Ass. Bill 980 pass. Don’t Wait. Write, call, email, the Governor AND Assemblyman Charles Calderon, tell him NO on Ass. Bill 980! NO on Ass. Bill 1574 California consumers cannot afford it.
Assemblyman Charles Calderon’s brother is Senator R. Calderon (think: votes).
[source 5/20/2007: http://www.ucop.edu/state/advocacy/biographies/ADCalderon58.pdf]
Ass. Bill 1574 and Ass Bill 980 will ruin your life forever; want to see just how BAD a really “bad” bill is? They will:
All but halt 1031 property exchanges
By default, alter and/or prevent EVERY existing and future homestead exemption
Complicate homeownership
Complicate ownership of ANY property - including residences, and do so “absolutely”
Complicate any and all property purchases - including COMMERCIAL properties
Change the way everyone does business in this state
Cause restrictions, if not altogether eliminate the already fragile “rental” market
Cause an influx of litigation like California has never seen
(guess who benefits from litigation?)
Cause a FISCAL IMPACT ON THIS STATE that California could not imagine
Cost you and me money, money, money, money, money, and more money
Determine what you can and can’t do with your property
Finish off mobile homeownership, sales, existing and/or otherwise
Give every lawyer in California a pay raise
Have a chilling effect on commerce [who would want to buy California property!]
Increase necessary paperwork related to owning, buying, or selling ANY property
Increase insurance costs for owners, buyers, and sellers
Increase insurance costs for real estate professionals
Increase costs of escrow
Increase dues that are paid mandatorily to trade organizations
Place unnecessary compliance requirements on Real Estate professionals
Raise the cost of doing business in California - this is absolute
Very likely have a deleterious effect on those who are “homeless” or who will become homeless
Work with other laws to handcuff the hands of consumers
SPONSOR for Ass. Bill 980, California Association of Realtors (CAR) states:
“CAR is sponsoring Assembly Bill Number 980 to REQUIRE THAT A SEPARATE DOCUMENT BE RECORDED that discloses the transfer fee payment obligation. Recordation of a separate document will insure that the transfer fee payment requirement is brought to the attention of prospective homebuyers.”
[source: www.senate.ca.gov]
Attention Real Estate Professionals:
Better budget some extra money for “TROUBLE.”
Better budget some extra money for “NEW LIABILITY INSURANCE.”
Better budget some extra money for “MORE EDUCATIONAL CLASSES
Better budget some extra money for “LOSS OF CLIENTS
Your trade organization just sold you down the Rio Grande without a paddle, life jacket, or lifeline. Get ready to pay some serious fee-money on ALL REAL ESTATE TRANSACTIONS because DEMOCRAT ASS. CHARLES CALDERON a CALIFORNIA LICENSED ATTORNEY ain’t gonna stop it--instead he’s requiring these liens be recorded on your property retroactive and the California Association of Realtors is helping him do it!! Imagine that!
Start asking more questions, how about these for a start:
* Are California’s State licensed attorneys held to a different standard than the rest of us?
* How many of our State Senators and Assemblypersons:
--are licensed attorneys while on the State payrolls?
--are using State resources to that end?
--have been suspended from the practice of law?
--have reinstated their “active status” with the State Bar in time to run for office?
While we’re at it, how many lobbyists are State Licensed attorneys?
Charles Calderon, representing the 58th Assembly District, is in the process of making a law that will effect EVERY BUYER, SELLER, OWNER OF ANY PROPERTY in the state. Why doesn’t he just stick to his district! A list of Assemblyman Calderon’s Assembly Bills are listed below. Assembly Bill 980 sticks out like a sore thumb. Don’t you think the public should question Calderon’s involvement with this bill?
The Analysis from the Assembly Floor states:
“Generally, the minimum length of time these transfer fees are being imposed ranges from 20 to 25 years; however, many are imposed in perpetuity.” The analysis goes on to say that Calderon’s Assembly Bill 980 COMPLEMENTS Assemblyman Guy Houston’s Assembly Bill 1574. REPUBLICAN Assemblyman Guy Houston’s District #15.
[source: www.senate.ca.gov - effective: 5/20/2007]
“Assembly Bill 980 by contrast LOOKS BACKWARD TO TRANSFER FEES already established in order to ensure that they are likewise disclosed and recorded so that prospective purchasers are aware of the costs before agreeing to the transaction.”
[source: www.senate.ca.gov]
SAY WHAT?
Ass. Charles Calderon [source: http://democrats.assembly.ca.gov/members/a58/]
Capitol Office: State Capitol; P.O. Box 942849
Sacramento, CA 94249-0058
Tel: (916) 319-2058
Fax: (916) 319-2158
Ass. Charles Calderon
District Office: 13181 N. Crossroads Parkway, Suite 160
City of Industry, CA 91746
Tel: (562) 692-5858
Fax: (562) 695-5852
PUBLIC INFORMATION
[source: www.calbar.ca.gov] effective May 20, 2007
STATE BAR: Number 70359
STATE BAR: Address: Hon. Charles M Calderon
STATE BAR: LISTED ADDRESS: State Capitol, Room 2117, Sacramento, CA 95814
STATE BAR: Phone Number (916) 319-2058 [look familiar to anyone?]
STATE BAR: Fax Number (562) 692-9755
STATE BAR: Bar Number 70359
STATE BAR: e-mail ccalderon@nossaman.com
Author note: www.nossaman.com (Nossaman, Guthner, Knox, & Elliott LLP)[FN1]
STATE BAR: Present ACTIVE
STATE BAR: 8/6/1981 Active
STATE BAR: 7/6/1981 NOT ELIGIBLE TO PRACTICE LAW
STATE BAR: 12/22/1976 Admitted to The State Bar of California
STATE BAR: Disciplinary and Related Actions
STATE BAR: This member has no PUBLIC record of discipline.
STATE BAR: Administrative Actions
STATE BAR: 7/6/1981 SUSPENDED, FAILED TO PAY BAR MEMBER FEES
STATE BAR: NOT ELIGIBLE TO PRACTICE LAW
[FN1] (Nossaman, Guthner, Knox, & Elliott LLP) [source: www.nossaman.com] effective May 20, 2007
**PRACTICE AREAS**
Business and Corporate Transactions
Eminent Domain
Employment
Environmental
Government Relations
Healthcare
Infrastructure
Insurance Coverage
Land Use and Natural Resources
Litigation
Public Agency Law
Public Utility Regulation
**KEY INDUSTRIES**
Banking and Financial Services
Construction
Energy
Food and Beverage
Home Building
Insurance Broker
Land Development
Real Estate
Telecommunications
Transportation
Water
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[source: effective: may 20, 2007
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery/?sess=CUR&house=A&hits=All&member=calderon]
1. AB 266 - Charles Calderon
* Tribal gaming: compact ratification.
2. AB 267 - Charles Calderon
* Annuity sales: seniors.
3. AB 268 - Charles Calderon
* Hearsay evidence: unavailable declarant.
4. AB 489 - Charles Calderon
* Public employment: State Bargaining Unit 19:
5. AB 502 - Charles Calderon
* Domestic violence.
6. AB 634 - Charles Calderon
* Deferred deposit transaction licensees.
7. AB 674 - Charles Calderon
* CalWORKs: aid payment increase: parental invo
8. AB 733 - Charles Calderon
* Gambling: exclusion from gambling establishme
9. AB 885 - Charles Calderon
* Metropolitan Water District of Southern Calif
10. AB 938 - Charles Calderon
* Water districts: urban runoff.
11. AB 943 - Charles Calderon
* Initiative petitions: signature requirement.
12. AB 976 - Charles Calderon
* Tenancy: tenant's characteristics.
13. AB 980 - Charles Calderon
* Real estate transfer fees: residential property <=== * * * *
14. AB 988 - Charles Calderon
* Federal homeland security grant funds.
15. AB 991 - Charles Calderon
* Public employees' retirement: Deferred Retire
16. AB 1008 - Charles Calderon
* Insurance: vehicle service contracts.
17. AB 1012 - Charles Calderon
* Oil and gas deposits: property tax assessment
18. AB 1305 - Charles Calderon
* Community colleges: employment of full-time f
19. AB 1309 - Charles Calderon
* Mobilehomes: rent control.
20. AB 1313 - Charles Calderon
* Credit cards: cancellations.
21. AB 1447 - Charles Calderon
* Hazardous waste: major appliances.
22. AB 1486 - Charles Calderon
* Licensed professional counselors.
23. AB 1546 - Charles Calderon
* Income taxes: limited liability companies: ap
24. AB 1551 - Charles Calderon
* Sales tax: Adult Entertainment Venue Impact F
25. AB 1561 - Charles Calderon
* Income taxes: pensions.
26. AB 1582 - Charles Calderon
* Crimes: marijuana: possession: penalty.
27. AB 1677 - Charles Calderon
* Internet transactions: verification: banking
28. ACA 6 - Charles Calderon
* Initiative measures: legislative review.
29. ACR 27 - Charles Calderon
* Los Angeles County Deputy Sheriff Jerry Orti
------------------------------------------------------------
REPUBLICAN GUY HOUSTON
[source http://maplight.org/?q=map/ca/legislator/77] effective May 20, 2007
HOUSTON’S TOP 10 FUNDING INTERESTS.
Interest: Contributions: Voted with this Interest :
Real estate developers & subdividers $80,750 20%(1 out of 5 bills)
Construction, unclassified $77,175 41% (7 out of 17 bills)
Residential construction $71,933 43% (3 out of 7 bills)
Real estate $66,028 23% (7 out of 31 bills)
Insurance companies, general $59,125 36% (16 out of 44 bills)
Builders associations $38,500 40% (21 out of 52 bills)
Mortgage bankers & brokers $35,425 100% (9 out of 9 bills)
Food stores $34,042 14% (3 out of 21 bills)
Real estate agents & managers $28,575 61% (11 out of 18 bills)
Auto dealers, new & used $27,700 22% (4 out of 18 bills)
RELATED STORIES
Two of the Worst & Most Detrimental Laws to Hit California are Sponsored by None Other than: California Association of Realtors (R) The Gold is Gone --No more gold in the Golden State!
Dear Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger,
SHATZI! PLEASE REMEMBER YOUR PROMISE TO US. Please listen to the people who support you and look to you to help us! When you first began buying property in California NO ONE told you what you could or could not do...
THE LAW OF INTENDED CONSEQUENCES - WHAT A DIFFERENCE A "WORD" MAKES: NO! ON ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 563
It apparently does not matter that titleholders with a vested interest in their property cannot get their legislators to carry legislation to help US, but, they can waste taxpayer funds by preventing the bills WE WANT and NEED by CHANGING *ONE* WORD in an...
EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY! OOPS! WE JUST HAD THE MEETING! YOU MISSED IT!!
So THIS is what the Senate calls an "Open Meeting." How many Open Meetings have THEY been to? Obviously not many. ROTFLMAO!
CAN YOU OUTSWIM YOUR HOA SHARKS? or will you drown trying?
Owning, let alone living in an HOA is a tough JOB and requires you be physically fit, possess a certain sophistication of the processes, and have the character let alone stamina, that allows you to be persistent in a manner that indescribable to REAL...
HEY GRAY PANTHERS! YOU GOT IT WRONG!
(c) D. Vanitzian
May 16, 2007The 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?
The Law of Unintended Consequences: Legislation and HOA BOD Cause and Effect: Clueless in my CAR
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...
Paraphrasing the LA Times on Defeat of SB670 & Wicked Twin Witches of the West - SB 127 & AB-980
Taking a page out of the OC Register?s ?paraphrased reporting?, an article written by LA Times staff writer Diane Weder titled ?Bill to limit transfer fee founders?, published appropriately on May 13, 2007, quotes the president of the statewide Realtors...
One More Near Miss Avoided - Clueless in My CID/HOA
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
Private Transfer Tax - Good for the Common Interest Development (HOA/CID) Industry or Good for the Politicians?
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),...
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.
OCR Paraphrasing in Laguna Woods Village
The CotoBuzz Journal previously reported on a brewing scandal related to alleged misuse of credit card by property management company employees in an article titled Laguna Woods Residents Outraged by Use of Credit Cards Issued to Property Manager...
Letters to the editor
Letters- Unreal State of Real Estate Bills
Regarding "Bill to Limit Transfer Fees Founders," May 13, on Senate Bill 670: The measure left the illusion of limiting the use of transfer fees, while in reality it would have undermined Civil Code Section 711, which has existed to protect Californians...
Power hungry association steals home from mentally ill person for $540 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.
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...
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
Power hungry association steals home from mentally ill person for $540 in Assessments
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
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
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)