|
|
|
|
|
The DaVaro Deception: Wrong and Misleading Information RE: Public Safety Within Coto de Caza June
30, 2006 TO: Coto de Caza Property Management Company. Coto de Caza Legal Counsel C.C.
Coto de Caza Discussion Forum The
Information being distributed to residents by Keystone (undated and with no
title), regarding public safety, like the information provided to the Orange
County Register is misleading and plain wrong:
Traffic
Enforcement: The
letter Keystone is distributing reads in part:
“ Traffic statistics tell us that Coto is one of the safest areas in
Orange County....” The
statistics the CZ Master Association board started to publish over the last few
months are identical to the ones CotoBuzz has been publishing for years, and are
identical in format we worked out with the Capistrano CHP.
Our data shows a significantly different picture.
If the board has credible data that proves us wrong, we would like to see
it, otherwise, please issue errata.. Law
Enforcement The
letter Keystone is distributing reads in part:
“ Crime statistics show that Coto has one of the lowest crime rates
in Orange County....”
The CZ Master Association has NEVER published ANY crime statistics,
whereas CotoBuzz has been publishing Crime and Vandalism rates for Coto de Caza
and neighboring communities for years. Our
data shows a significantly different picture.
If the board has credible data that proves us wrong, we would like to see
it, otherwise, please issue errata..
Buzz, One of
the proposals for the "Public Safety Committee" to perform is to
"determine the public safety expectations of Coto's residents and prepare
a plan to meet those needs and expectations. If additional services may or
should be acquired, how much additional cost are Coto's residents willing to
bear, and how would they be financed?" The only dollar expenditure
referred to in this letter is the "approximately $10,000 per month for
about 160 hours of patrol on Coto's major streets" paid to the CHP. There
is no other mention of where the rest of the $1,500,000 security budget is
being spent! Does this mean that there will be a full disclosure and
accounting of the disbursement of security budget funds so that the
"Public Safety Committee" can make an intelligent decision as to
where Coto's security monies are going and what Coto residents are receiving
for their money?
It is also
interesting to note under "Resources available to the Committee
include" access to "expert" consultants, such as retired Orange
County Sheriff's from Pacific Oak Security. Hopefully it will be disclosed how
much of our Security budget has already been given to these "expert
consultants" which could have been invested in additional CHP patrols.
Are these the "expert consultants" who did such a fabulous job of
the transponder replacement, the patrol reductions and implemented the
"Party Pass" rules at our gates, etc.? I think that there are a lot
of private citizens in Coto, starting with former BOD members who could shed a
lot better light on what the security needs of Coto are and how to
put these needs into action and stop wasting our security budget dollars now.
If UPS does know what Coto needs and how to provide it, then get a security
company in here that can meet the needs of Coto residents without paying some
outrageous consultant fees!
Hi Bob: We are
glad that you noticed the reference to increased costs.
That really speaks volume about the Varo/Mezger/Hill mentality.
Ditto with respect to “resource availability”:
Rather than focusing on responsibility and accountability, they
immediately go for the weakest link: Threats
to increase monthly dues – that is sure to keep un-informed residents quiet! Consider
that we have on good authority that certain security employees take supplies
home on a regular basis – guess who pays for these?
Although these expenses are inconsequential considering the bigger
picture, the Varo/Mezger/Hill approach to supplier accountability and fiscal
transparency is “..if the supplier’s contract is renewed, then they are
doing a good job”! Honestly
we have lost track of all the consultants involved in the public safety
debacle, but certainly one of them was involved in the transponder fiasco. NOTE:
One of the components of a pro-active traffic control program we have
been advocating for years is public awareness – something the CHP would love
to do, at no charge.
However. when CHP management approached the Varo/Mezger/Hill board for
meeting time, the bard not only refused, but it would not even take calls from
CHP management.
Instead, the board turned over control of a meeting to the producers of
the Desperate Housewives! – does this indicate where priorities lie?
FOR ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION COTO
DE CAZA CHP TRAFFIC REPORT FOR MAY 2006 COTO
DE CAZA CRIME AND VANDALISM REPORT - 1Q2006 COTO
DE CAZA- SecurityAreNotUs COTO
DE CAZA TICKLER FILE ITEM- PRIVATE SECURITY GUARD STATUS [COTO
DE CAZA] United Protection Services Missing in Action [COTO
DE CAZA] MERIT CHARGES HAVE NO MERIT: MERIT INTENSIVE
VS. PENSIVE PUBLIC SAFETY: COTO DE CAZA Vs. LADERA RANCH COTO
DE CAZA PUBLIC SAFETY STATISTICS – A BRIEF OVERVIEW
Post Comments | Read Comments |
THREE Blog Platforms (Bravenet, Yahoo 360 & BlogNet With AudioBlog), one Mission:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
TERMS OF USE: 
:
Coto de Caza ™, Rancho Santa Margarita ™
and CZ™ are trademarks of @WEBO.
Fair Use Notice
|
FAIR USE NOTICE |
