The CotoBuzz Journal, Community Journalism

The CotoBuzz Journal

Community Journalism, Newsletters and Blogs Covering South Orange County, CA

The CotoBuzz Journal is a member of Investigative Reporters and Editors (IRE) and NAHJ

June 2007 Issue

We do not make jokes, we simply watch the LA Times, the Orange County Register and the Coto de Caza Board of directors and report the facts!

One More Near Miss Avoided - Clueless in My CID/HOA

May 10, 2007

The number one rule in the Australian Aviation Magazine’s list of Flight Rules is the one about airplane take off and landing: Every takeoff is optional, Every landing is mandatory!

It is safe to say that most travelers know that takeoffs and landings are the most dangerous part of flying, and we regularly hear news reports of “near misses. A study by Forbes.com finds that hundreds of commercial jets have come within eight seconds of colliding on runways. The study details the top most dangerous airports in the U.S., based on incident reports to the FAA. For example:

1. North Las Vegas, a small airport not, Vegas airport. It has had 63 runway incidents and six deaths since 2001.

2. Long Beach/Dougherty Field, with 78 incidents.

3. Charlotte/Douglas International, N.C., , shot into third place due to a single serious incident.

4 Los Angeles International, with 95 serious incidents since 2001,

5. Boston's Logan International. The study notes that runway mishaps are up 37 percent since 1995, due in large measure to more flights but inadequate equipment to deal with them. Find the full report here.

It is also fair to say that most of us simply dismisses these reports as “nice trivia”, “who cares, as long as it does not affect me”, or simply dismiss it all together.

Just as dangerous and important is Common Interest Development (CID/HOA) legislation, which some HOA board of directors, such as the CZ BOD simply dismiss as “ micro-managing” due to a small number of poorly managed associations.

There is no better example of such a near-miss as the recent defeat of SB 670, which the California Association of Realtors® announces in a Red Alert as “Home buyers at risk: SB 670 Defeated in Committee” and describes the defeat as “SB 670 (Correa), C.A.R.’s sponsored “Private Transfer Tax Prohibition” bill was defeated today by the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee today”. Then it adds “The legislation would have protected consumers by placing responsible restrictions on private transfer taxes levied by developers and limiting the proceeds to environmental and affordable housing efforts related to the new development on which the private transfer taxes are imposed”.

However; leaders of the anti-SB 670 think differently: “The public will never know how close they came to having permanent liens put on their properties and their hard earned money being diverted to "political charities", they probably don't even know such a thing exists, or that their trade groups would sell them down the river”

What most of us do not know is that anti-SB670 leaders describe Steven Pawera, A CAR member as a person who “ deserves a medal of honor. He looks to serve his clients honorably and to protect their interests. He ventured out and stood up and questioned the real estate industry that is vested with the power and the money through their association dues, to protect real estate professionals”, dared not to openly question the wisdom of such bill, but do so openly and taking on powerful CAR Senior Vice President and Chief Lobbyist, Alexander E. Creel

Some of Mr. Pawera’s questions to CAR are:

· Please tell me, what was the pressing need for this bill that caused CAR to sponsor it?

· Who came to CAR and said ‘please help us do this’?

· When exactly did CAR think it was a good idea to volunteer its members to become the disclosure police and deep-pockets of liability for this bill (and the eight related bills) that only will hurt the members by subjecting us to more lawsuits and higher E&O fees?

· Why is this bill being rushed through on a fast track, without adequate time for AN INFORMED analysis and response?

· Why as the sponsor, did CAR wait until almost the last minute to solicit the support of members?

· Given the deleterious effect this bill will have on members, let alone the public in general, why didn’t CAR solicit member opinions prior to ever sponsoring the bill?

· As for the bill(s) itself, SB670 completely undermines Civil Code Section 711 (even with the more recent proposed change of “adding” a subsection rather than full amendment to the actual code section), which has been in existence and served Californians well since the late 1800s.

· Why do you think it would be a good to create legislation to protect one class of homeownership but not another?

· You do realize that excluding owners of CIDs from this bill will serve only to validate, if not exacerbate, the abuses they have suffered under the Davis-Stirling Act?

· Why do you think any realtor would support legislation where he/she will be responsible for enforcing the new disclosure laws, and assuming the various risks attached to statute, all to protect a third party, unrelated to the transaction, and the private liens and transfer taxes that benefit those parties?

· If the goal of the bills was really to protect Californians from the problems we’ve seen with runaway and unaccountable private liens and transfer taxes, there are definitely better ways to do it than deceiving the membership, and rushing poorly thought out legislation into law, for which we will all inevitably pay the price.

So now that SB 670 has been defeated and that Mr. Pawera will surely be labeled as a “traitor” by CAR, all those living in CID/HOA environments can go back to a state of “Clueless in my CID/HOA”, right? If you think so, perhaps you can also consider other popular wisdom such as: