| Author | Post |
|---|
Dorothy7
Member
| Joined: | Mon Sep 18th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 592 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 17th, 2007 01:41 pm |
|
alasbabylon wrote: Dorthy; You said " I ( you ) said that the members of the Board refused an interview." What was ommitted from that fact? The fact " the boards hands are legally tied". They can't give the out information because a of the pending lawsuit. Resulting in the reporter having only your half of the story.
You want an example of OMMISSION!
Maybe the reporter should have been honest & fair and reported: After an interview with dissidents of the Mandatory HOA Membership this reporter requested an interview with the board members. Because of a pending lawsuit by one of the people involved with the dissidents the board could not comment on the subject! So rather than report slanted and bias information I will wait until I can get both sides of the situation. As a reporter I would rather miss a deadline than report half of a story! No. Dear Alas, I stated clearly in the "answers" you were worried about that they had in fact interviewed your attorney....the fact that his answers resulted in a factual exposition is rankling to your side, but nonetheless true. If you listen to Maxwell, you get what you deserve...he has insisted on one lawsuit after another because he will not obey the Statutes or the Rules, and has led the Boards into legally troubled waters again and again!!!
I have tried to give the Boards the facts of the case over and over and they suspend their good judgement and remain silent when they know, all this could have been avoided if they had: 1. Given prior proper notice of their intent. Including mailing out copies of SADR to every affected homeowner in DV. 2. Insisted on the solicitors calling on every lot owner, and recording the No votes, as well as including the fact that they were soliciting to reorganize DV as an HOA with the power to fine, lien, foreclose and evict. They did none of the above. 3. Adjourned the January 13, 2004 meeting when it became apparent that many members would not be able to cast their ballots or recind their signatures.
Failing that, they should have admitted that the vote had failed and stop harassing the so-called "mandatory sections"... 4. The Board should have insisted that Maxwell follow the club rules in place at that meeting, instead of remaining silent and allowing him to stuff the ballot box with signatures collected months earlier before the proposed amendments existed. Now, my friend, we are "in the stew" as it were. In order to get this squared away with the law, we're all going to have to find a way to clear the titles of those who have had their property attached without their knowledge or consent, and face reality about our aging community, and the resources available to keep it up. Dorothy7
|
alasbabylon
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 4th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 414 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 17th, 2007 12:52 pm |
|
Dorthy; You said " I ( you ) said that the members of the Board refused an interview." What was ommitted from that fact? The fact " the boards hands are legally tied". They can't give the out information because a of the pending lawsuit. Resulting in the reporter having only your half of the story.
You want an example of OMMISSION!
Maybe the reporter should have been honest & fair and reported: After an interview with dissidents of the Mandatory HOA Membership this reporter requested an interview with the board members. Because of a pending lawsuit by one of the people involved with the dissidents the board could not comment on the subject! So rather than report slanted and bias information I will wait until I can get both sides of the situation. As a reporter I would rather miss a deadline than report half of a story!
|
csi-the witness
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 26th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 27 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 16th, 2007 02:11 pm |
|
Ron & Cathy Ehninger wrote: TO CT:
Dreamland Property Rights Inc.
PO Box 195
Mesa, AZ 85205
Phone 480-694-6761
Email: dreamlandprop@excite.com
Correction needed ON ADDRESS
Address is : 6040 E Main ST
PO BOX 195
MESA AZ 85205
Thanks for listing: DREAMLAND PROPERTY RIGHTS, INC.
|
Dorothy7
Member
| Joined: | Mon Sep 18th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 592 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 16th, 2007 01:34 pm |
|
alasbabylon wrote: Dorthy;
As I mentioned and you verified, the reporters went off with only your side of the story. As far as diatribes you are the queen. I had to go look up the word! It fits your attacks & verbose comments to a tee! Hearsay and rumors have little bearing on most issues. Usually the second time they are repeated the distorstions are immense. R & C wrote they were offered a copy of the CCR's and that Merle didn't know who they were. A fact! The two that are " running the show" that have been saying people weren't offered the facts. Caught in deciet once.... can lead to a bitter, abusive criticisim or denunciation ( diatribe ) of the complete show! A wise person said " Be sure you are on the side of the fence you want to be, before you close the gate!" Oh! to be that wise!
No, dear that is not what I said. I said that the members of the Board refused an interview. As usual, you are fibbing by ommission. Won't work. Not this time. Dorothy7
|
Dorothy7
Member
| Joined: | Mon Sep 18th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 592 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 16th, 2007 01:06 pm |
|
Dear Alas: What???? You are responding to? Certainly none of the answers you sought. Am I to understand that you assume I do not believe anything the board says because they've been caught in so many wrong statements and outright lies? If so, you got it right.
Now. if you simply did not read the answers...say so. I am aware that there are those who cannot accept the answers...and to avoid internal conflict refuse to read anything that that might burst their confidence bubble, but alas, Alas, truth and facts remain.
This board has denied member's rights to full disclosure, access to club documents, the right to vote, adequate notice, and the right of all citizens to free speech and access to the club bulletin that their dues pay for to express support for the their positions and their candidates....while the Board attacks dissidents, using the bulletin to do so.
This club has created a half-assed association in which 7 Sections are billed for supposedly mandatory dues, which are used to support the activities of a majority 12 sections) who pay nothing if they wish.
This club demands membership for 4,400 owners and has facilities to accommodate no more than 600 if both Read and Farnsworth Hall are used simultaneously.
This club has delusions of grandeur that are awesome. I cannot imagine who, in their right mind with a life to live would sit over there in Read Hall from at least 8 a.m. to 5:30 or 6:00 p.m. every day. Once a month the board meets, at least 9 must be present...usually more than 9 attend, but on a day to day basis they just sit around gabbing with each other....and spending money on maintaining themselves in power.
Their latest, not their first, adventure into delusionary acts, now threatens the entirety of this development, and still they pay their lawyer to keep it going. As I told you, I have reveiwed the Minutes of all the Meetings since 1974. Over the course of those years, this board has spent more money trying to expand its power than to cut weeds, keep up the library, or maintain the swimming pools.
We had legal counsel on this over a period of 10 years...it cannot and will not work. The only question left to answer is when will the majority of club members finally get the picture and do as they have done in the past, and vote them out, and limit their ability to write checks and hire lawyers with only 200 of 4,400 voting for it?
Ask yourself what would they do if the 3,000 plus members showed up at Farnsworth Hall to cast a ballot? What would they do if just those in the mandatory sections showed up? Where would they park? What would all those who are handicapped do?
When I first moved in here, this was a serene and friendly place. No one paid much attention to the club, or its bulletin. The winter people came and went unmolested by any hanky panky by the board or its committees.
Everyone knew that a small number of folks wandered in and out of the rock shop, the arts shop the ceramics shop and the cards and bingo clubs...from time to time. Most of us just came and went. I remember that the restaurant seemed to be the main drawing card over here at Read Hall. Wouldn't you like to live in a place where those who showed up weren't there to challenge the next theft of property? I would. Dorothy7
If the club offered SADR to the signatories, you can bet they weren't in Sections 1 or 8...Janet Massey said that when they handed copies out this past month FINALLY, no one knew what it was. I know of two people who saw a draft of SADR in Section 7 and Section 14. Neither signed up. Maybe that's why they quit offering it? The fact remains that they did not mail, or distribute, nor publish it prior to collecting signatures, did they?
|
Ron & Cathy Ehninger
Member
| Joined: | Sat Aug 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 733 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 16th, 2007 12:55 pm |
|
Bable on and on,
Make no mistake, we are on the side of the fence that we want to be. See we had a choice, the club gave us no choice. None. Your attack that we control the press and minds of the East Valley Tribune is most amazing but wrong. The reporter visited both sides of the story and wrote the same, he made the effort to visit and talk with the people who were being abused by the club, have you ? Has any one from the club visited the widow on Adobe or the single mom on Desmoines? Has any board member made it his or her business to find out what the other side of your wisdom fence feels? Boy it is hard to cast pearls before dogs.
R&C
|
alasbabylon
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 4th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 414 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 16th, 2007 12:16 pm |
|
Dorthy;
As I mentioned and you verified, the reporters went off with only your side of the story. As far as diatribes you are the queen. I had to go look up the word! It fits your attacks & verbose comments to a tee! Hearsay and rumors have little bearing on most issues. Usually the second time they are repeated the distorstions are immense. R & C wrote they were offered a copy of the CCR's and that Merle didn't know who they were. A fact! The two that are " running the show" that have been saying people weren't offered the facts. Caught in deciet once.... can lead to a bitter, abusive criticisim or denunciation ( diatribe ) of the complete show! A wise person said " Be sure you are on the side of the fence you want to be, before you close the gate!" Oh! to be that wise!
|
Dorothy7
Member
| Joined: | Mon Sep 18th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 592 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 15th, 2007 02:08 pm |
|
| Dear Alas: In your diatribe regarding the Editorial in the Trib entitled Dreamland Doomed, my I remind you that we took the reporters to the Office where the Board was sitting in their President's office (Billie T. was there too), and they asked for a statement...and were ordered not to take any of the pamphlets on the counter, and to leave. Don't whine when you hide behind Charlie who gave them a statement in your behalf...that was, as usual incomprehensible. Dorothy7
|
Dorothy7
Member
| Joined: | Mon Sep 18th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 592 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 15th, 2007 01:58 pm |
|
alasbabylon wrote: R & C
You never answer questions! Did things happen as I mentioned or is something missing? Did the Board ask the club members to ask the community to approve mandatory membership or not? Yes or No! Did the Board Members make the membership mandatory? Yes or No! Did the Club members make the membership mandatory? Yes or No! Did the residents have the final say in the outcome? Yes or No!
You said in your 1/10 blog letter, that you were asked to sign & offered a copy of the CCR's and all thru your years of protest you say people weren't offered the truth. So what was it ! There was a form in the Citizen to change their minds and few did so what was it? When offered a copy of the CCR's the truth was in their hand in black & white! It is difficult to discern the truth from all of the hateful deciet and libel ( as Dorthy calls it thats she spreads in her letter a couple of weeks ago) that is printed in this website! As Dorothy (I, myself) wrote repeatedly...The answer to the last question is No! The Answer to the one presceding is Yes, and ONLY the club tried to make membership mandatory by fraud and deceit...that is to say, the solicitors did not offer copies of SADR, nor did the give proper notice (mail it to all residents or publish it in the Citizen or any other forum available to those who signed "To save the Senior Overlay and Keep Mexicans from moving in next door." (I have a file of hundreds of resident's sworn statements to that effect.) The prior several questions are yes! The club DID SET OUT TO MAKE DV A MANDATORY MEMBERSHIP HOA. To quote The Citizen, "The Club and its committees will solicit their neighbors to sign up for mandatory membership. And, later "we need mandatory membership to protect our Senior Overlay, and to enforce our 55+ age restriction." Where in any of those statements to see a reference to the Second Amended Declaration of Restrictions? Where in the header on the petition do you see a reference to an HOA, or lien, foreclose and evict?
This entire undertaking was based on a tissue of lies and ommissions...and please don't try to explain away the fact that 49.9% of residents were never solicited, nor were they ever given, mailed or allowed to read in the club's own bulletin...entirely under the control of the Board...any references to their intention to fine, lien foreclose and evict? I was there during the inception of this fraud...I can tell you that Jim Quinn and I both made motions to send out letters, and copies of SADR to all residents. Jim Cook and Jim Cole moved to table those Motions as "premature", and the fraud was underway. You know it. I know it, and anyone who has served on that Board in the past 4 years knows it. (Minutes published in The Citizen) At our first meeting with Charlie Maxwell, Andy Anderson (who opposed mandatory membership at that time) made the comment that "If you mention HOA you won't get 6 signatures...it's poison." This was, to the best of my recollection in executive session (called Rap Session for reasons unknown) on or about October 4, 2002. Jim Cook, Mary Anne Glauner, Sybal Gullickson, Andy Anderson, Bob White and Dick Young, as well as Barbara Miller, whom I do not recall having been on the Board at that time, but she was present, as well as Russ Peck...and I believe Eugene Meade. I resigned soon thereafter when my mother, who lives with me. had a heart attack and required full-time care. My records show that in my capacity as parliamentarian at that time, I wrote to the Board reminding them that we had two legal opinions in our files from the year before stating that mandatory membership would be very costly, take years to complete and would require that every owner be notified, given copies of the changes, and allowed to approve or disapprove the change...SINCE OUR DECLARATION WAS A LIST OF DEVELOPMENT RESTRICTIONS ON EMPTY LOTS IT COULD NOT BE CONSTRUED AS A VEHICLE INCLUDING OBLIGATIONS TO A CLUB THAT DID NOT EXIST AT THE TIME THE DECLARATION WAS MADE AND FILED. So, Alas dear, the questions you ask have been answered in full. I have documents that the club has printed to verify these statements, as well as their filings with the County for the Senior Overlay, the Corporation Commission, and copies of all the original declarations. I was never solicited, nor given a copy of SADR though I tried to get a copy of it from the club repeatedly during 2003. They told me that they would mail me a copy, since the only copy they had was for office use, and that as a non-member at that time I would have to pay for it...the cost was either 12.00 or 20.00. They never mailed it. In early 2004, I was in the office with Cathy paying 82 mandatory member's dues under protest, when a man came in and asked for a copy...he had sold his home, and the buyer insisted on seeing it before closing...which would occur in three days. Howard Zimmerman was sitting at a desk in that back room, and told that man, they had only one copy for office use, and they would mail him a copy...to pay Jeannie. Does this help you to decide whether you're a victim of a fraud...or perhaps a participant? Dorothy7
|
Ron & Cathy Ehninger
Member
| Joined: | Sat Aug 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 733 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 15th, 2007 12:52 pm |
|
Bablyon,
You want answers? Read the brief CC2006-212703. This will do the talking from now on for us. The point is all the past history will have to stand up in court now and the ones who started this mess and decieved the community will have to answer. One can only wonder what the ultimate punishment will be. Did you try to change your vote at the January 2004 meeting? Did the attorney send you home like he did hundreds of other people ? Did you have the SADR explained to you when you signed the clip board? Did you know and understand the club was creating an HOA not protecting the club and senior overlay? Did you really read or have you ever read the the CCRS? Do you like what the club has done by serving the summons. Did you watch the count and ballott stuffing like some did ? Yes or No. Hummmmmm
R&C
|
alasbabylon
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 4th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 414 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 15th, 2007 12:20 pm |
|
R & C
You never answer questions! Did things happen as I mentioned or is something missing? Did the Board ask the club members to ask the community to approve mandatory membership or not? Yes or No! Did the Board Members make the membership mandatory? Yes or No! Did the Club members make the membership mandatory? Yes or No! Did the residents have the final say in the outcome? Yes or No!
You said in your 1/10 blog letter, that you were asked to sign & offered a copy of the CCR's and all thru your years of protest you say people weren't offered the truth. So what was it ! There was a form in the Citizen to change their minds and few did so what was it? When offered a copy of the CCR's the truth was in their hand in black & white! It is difficult to discern the truth from all of the hateful deciet and libel ( as Dorthy calls it thats she spreads in her letter a couple of weeks ago) that is printed in this website!
|
Ron & Cathy Ehninger
Member
| Joined: | Sat Aug 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 733 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 14th, 2007 01:44 pm |
|
To ABSAlaomhykm whatever,
Read the legal brief filed on behalf of the summoned people in Nightmare villa and learn the truth if you really want it or you can hang on to your belief that the club is correct in what they have done. Now the court will decide. You can continue to support the board and presidents and the underhanded voting and clip board commandoes that raped our community. The reporter got it right, the editor got it right and now the court will be the final authority. Maybe then you will be in the know, just maybe.
R&C
|
alasbabylon
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 4th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 414 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 14th, 2007 12:32 pm |
|
Dreamlandman:
The editorial board based that on an article that was reporting only one side of the facts! You always complain and gripe about being fair! Reporting half of a situation is as dihonest as you claim the club is! So we have a reporter hearing the dissident's side of the story! The Editorial Staft takes it as the truth & runs with it! Of course you are delighted because your story ( no matter how distorted ) is used!
As ignorant as I am I am trying to figure out what happened with this intire situation! Maybe if I put it in Black & White I can picture it!
1. The Board had a meeting( Which Vicki says was illegal )! At that meeting they voted to ask the Club members to ask the community to vote on making the Club Membership mandatory!
2. At the general meeting a vote was taken by the Club Members to ask the community to approve or disapprove making Membership Mandatory! The Members appoved the motion to go to the residents. ( This is the meeting that nonmembers were not allowed to vote in). The " NO VOTE " situation!
3. Volunteer members went door to door asking residents to approve the Mandatory Membership. And according to R & C's 1/10/2006 letter in the blog they were offered a copy of the CCR's whether they signed or didn't sign. The CCR's explaining all of the facts. So the signature count that was needed carried all but 1 zone! The " RESIDENTS HAD THE FINAL SAY "!
Note. Once the needed count was obtained in a zone the volunteers would move on to their next zone, ie: houses where no one was approached!
Similar to the annexation process. One person pays the fee & gets 50 % + 1 to sign and it's a done deal.
|
DreamlandMan
Member
|
Posted: Sat Jan 13th, 2007 04:24 pm |
|
HEY ALASBABYLON,
HOW LARGE OF PRINT SIZE DOES IT TAKE TO OPEN YOUR EYES AND UNDERSTAND THAT WHAT YOU AND YOUR FRIENDS AT DVCC ARE SUPPORTING IS WRONG?
PERHAPS BRAILLE IS NEEDED. YOU SEEM TO BE BLIND TO WHAT IS RIGHT AND WHAT IS WRONG!!!
.........................................................................
DREAMLANDMAN
|
DreamlandMan
Member
|
Posted: Sat Jan 13th, 2007 04:12 pm |
|
EDITORIAL FROM TODAY'S EAST VALLEY TRIBUNE
Tribune Editorials The best way to repair fractious retirement haven would be a return to voluntary dues payment Tribune Editorial January 13, 2007 The singer Tom Waits once wrote in a song about a dying love affair that “you can’t unring a bell.” Trying to unravel the legal morass that has enveloped Dreamland Villa may be just as difficult, but to us it appears to be the only way to resolve the discord that has cast a cloud over one of the East Valley’s oldest retirement communities.
This 3,000-home development, located on a county island surrounded by east Mesa, was built 45 years ago, before homeowners associations were common in single-family neighborhoods. For decades its clubhouse, wood shop and other amenities were paid for on an elective basis: if residents wanted to use these amenities, they could join the club and pay an annual fee to help with the upkeep.
Today, it can be difficult to buy a home that is not attached to an HOA. But the burdens and benefits of HOAs are well-known and explained, or at least mentioned, up front; most homeowners, unhappy as they may be with their HOAs at times, knew the risks.
But adding en masse to the deed restrictions of an already-occupied subdivision is something that should be done very carefully, and the indications are that, for whatever reason, it wasn’t in Dreamland Villa.
Proponents of mandatory membership, contending everyone should help maintain facilities that added to their property value whether or not they used them, collected signatures from at least half the homeowners in each section. But a sizeable number claim they were never told about the mandatory fees.
In 2004, a vote by those currently belonging to the club was taken, and former members who had stopped paying their dues were not allowed to participate. The one lawsuit filed to question this vote was dismissed on a legal technicality.
As Jason Massad reported in Sunday’s Tribune, 39 homeowners have received summonses for nonpayment of the $92 annual fee, which with penalties and legal fees has in some cases turned into more than $700 in debt on their homes. This could lead to liens or foreclosures.
The board members who started this process appear to have had the good intention of ensuring the community’s assets were maintained long into the future, and possibly giving them more teeth to enforce the age restriction.
But there appear to be enough clouds over the way the situation was handled that the best course of action at this point would be to return to the voluntary membership model that worked reasonably well for four decades, consistently keep nonmembers out of the club haunts, and, if necessary, attempt to bring in mandatory membership with a more transparent process.
Opinions expressed in the editorials, labeled OUR VIEW, are those of the editorial board and the publisher. All other opinions are those of the authors or artists.
...................................................................................................................................
|
Dorothy7
Member
| Joined: | Mon Sep 18th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 592 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 13th, 2007 01:22 pm |
|
Alasbabylon dear: Please remember that those small numbers of activists running the club are elected to represent their constituents...not Mr. Maxwell's dreams of glory!
If the only people they harmed were those who volunteered to join, then (as I have repeatedly reminded them) no one would complain. It is the usurpation of authority over those who do not use the limited facilities they can offer, nor want any other benefit of membership that has them in deep trouble, and for whom I am concerned.
It is precisely the sneaking around and attaching secret covenants to our deeds without our knowledge or consent, and falsely representing their intentions to those who did sign their petitions that has them in deep trouble.
Read this morning's editorial in the Tribune. I am so deeply moved by it that tears are clouding my vision as I write to you. If, for an instant, you could put yourself in the place of those whose lives you have placed in jeopardy with these outrageous demands for a thousand or more for dues they had no reason to believe they owed...much less penalties and interest, and threats to foreclose on their property and throw them into the street...penniless and homeless at age 85 or older, you would take a much different view of the self appointed "activists".
I need only remind you of one of Mr. Maxwell's other victims who was also my neighbor, Mr. Nelms, who was evicted, and shot himself because his small boat was parked in his carport against rules he was unaware existed! I cannot imagine at this point in my life how it must feel to be unable to meet their demands and the stress of the terror to which these helpless people are subjected, except when I meet them, and talk to them on the telephone.
You should spend a day with Ron and Cathy....their phone does not stop ringing...and I can't remember a day during the past three years when I have not had a minimum of 10 calls from terrified and confused neighbors who are being tormented by this silly club.
Please clear your notions of who and what we are from your mind and heart, and think about the harm you're doing to people who have never harmed you in any way, nor anyone else. The demands of living consume their days...not dreams of a larger club house or another pool, or lighted tennis courts...it is for them we are persisting in trying to persuade you to stop this nonsense. Read the editorial. Dorothy7
|
alasbabylon
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 4th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 414 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 13th, 2007 12:11 pm |
|
Dorothy 7 :
As in the real world a low percentage are involved in voting and participating in the operation of any group! Why are you surprised? I'm not surprised that a few dissidents can cause the trouble and strife that they do! We have witnessed what the media can do with misrepresentation of facts in the world and by certain dissidents in Dreamland.
|
DreamlandMan
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jan 12th, 2007 02:44 pm |
|
Hello Dorothy,
You are correct in pointing out the "real" number of people who actually attend DVCC meetings. Others such as alasbabylon inflate these numbers to make it appear the club has widespread participation. The truth is the vast majority of DV residents don't know who the heck these fools running the show at DVCC are and cannot identify who any of the board members are.
Thanks for your dedicated efforts in seeking the truth. I realize it must be a real tough situation for you and Vicki when dealing with the idiots at their social club hideaway.
You and Vicki are an INSPIRATION to all of us.
Thanks for keeping us informed. We appreciate it.
Have a great day.
Dreamlandman
|
Dorothy7
Member
| Joined: | Mon Sep 18th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 592 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 12th, 2007 01:44 pm |
|
Dear Alas, Please sir, do not make outrageous statements about those that participate as volunteers...if you can find one person to deliver papers, or one to help with the so-called Nature Walk clean up you're damned lucky.
I been there buddy, and it just ain't so. Why you insist on playing this silly game when we can all count the numbers who show up to meetings and vote for the Board. The so-called volunteers disappear in the daylight. There are between 20 and 30 people at Board meetings and less than 300 at annual meetings. There are as many opposed to this nonsense as in favor...and a lot who just don't give a darn. They don't live here year around and don't care. They reside elsewhere most of the year.
Truth is an alien concept around that club house...it's just lie and hide anymore. For the life of me, I can't understand why. Dorothy7
|
alasbabylon
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 4th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 414 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 12th, 2007 12:55 pm |
|
Dreamlandman;
I sure appreciate the cockroaches ( I mean board members ) that have been on the complaints committee. Working with the county they do help keep the underage resident under some control in order to maintain the less than 20 % margin needed to keep 55+ status! Same with all of the volunteer cockroaches ( I mean board members & committee workers ) that contribute all of their time, talent and pride in their community! I compare them to cockroaches for a different reason than you do! Most of the time you don't see the hundreds of committee members and volunteers workers. They just go about with their favorite activities with their neighbors and friends. They are there enjoying their life in Dreamland dispite the "poison RAID" put out in this blog site!
|
Dorothy7
Member
| Joined: | Mon Sep 18th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 592 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 12th, 2007 10:21 am |
|
Dear DVMAN: The last time I wrote to you, I was expelled from the Club! I am now back in...I guess with a proviso that they will hold my execution in "abeyance"...Ain't that Special?" Egads! Going over today and see what this meeting is about. Old Murkawski ripped me good over chiding Billie about selling her soul...and asking if those people still cast a reflection in their mirrors...(of course he did so when I was absent, and the Board was considering new business)...yet another violation, and another less than artful violation of their own rules.
Think about this all of you gentle readers...the last act of a meeting at which there was exactly one speaker in opposition to anything the board said or did...me...Janet Massey made a motion to expell Richard and Vicki Wirtz and me because of our alleged "affiliation" with concerned citizens. Now, the truth of the matter is that Richard, who has not entered the fray at meetings at all was punished because Vicki has had the courage to speak out about a rigged election, and a failure to give proper notice of the terms of an agreement that was signed by most people under false assertions regarding the terms.
I will remind you that the law makes rules that protect the minority from an abusive or unlawful majority. We are individually protected by the law...not collectively. That is why freedom of association and freedom of speech are the first protections we put down in print for each of us individually to enjoy.
Each of you board members should consider that every dime you've spent on attorney's fees (that your insurance pays) could have been avoided by simply producing the documents yourself as the statutes require. Why do you need an attorney to protect you if you've done nothing unlawful? You have sole access to the Citizen for which members pay, and never publish a retraction or rebuttal, no matter how untrue your statements are, or how outrageous the charges you make. The truth is, the club serves the interest of about 250 members....a few more or less from time to time. Most of the members are elected by fewer than 200 votes.
Now we have 40 or so Summons to defend against because the board is liening DV property. Yes, dear ones they are. I wonder whatever became of "We won't be liening DV property...we'll still have our Constitution and Bylaws...We'll always be the same club"...etc. etc.?
Standing up over there is a risky business. You are accused of things that simply are not true, and your motives and good faith are called into question without cause and you are shouted down, talked over and abused ruthlessly by that little gang of wannabes...told to sit down when making a legal motion, and to shut up when you try to get three uninterrupted minutes to speak to the Board...it takes real guts to stay with it, and keep asking.
In the end, we all discovered to our dismay, that the Board did have something to hide...and they hid it. The ballots were printed by the club, distributed by the club, and counted by club members. The results of the balloting will be borne by the homewoners who are forced to become members. You cannot deny those ballots are the property of our club, but the attorney and the Board are hiding them from an election official they claim to have appointed to be fair. Is this through the looking glass or what? Dorothy7
|
DreamlandMan
Member
|
Posted: Thu Jan 11th, 2007 11:52 pm |
|
Last edited on Wed Apr 25th, 2007 11:02 am by DreamlandMan
|
Ron & Cathy Ehninger
Member
| Joined: | Sat Aug 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 733 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 11th, 2007 11:27 pm |
|
Isn't it just amazing how quiet the blog has been especially the " Other Side" of the issue. Could it be they hear big feet coming? Clop, Clop. Clop. Gonna get muched up you Club guys. Gonna have to pay the piper. But you knew it was coming some day didn't You? Sure you did, you knew what you were doing was wrong. So be it. Another funny rumour, a certain resigned, sort of President, has put in a bid to be the property manager for Nightmare Villa. Now it all makes sense !!!
R&C
|
DreamlandMan
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jan 10th, 2007 06:08 pm |
|
Stucco wall splits Mesa couple, homeowners association
By Sarah N. Lynch, Tribune January 10, 2007
Matching stucco homes line the streets in the quaint retirement community of Verde Groves in Mesa. But try replacing your block wall with stucco to match your stucco house, and you may find a violation from the Verde Groves Home Owner’s Association in your mailbox.That’s what happened when Linda and Ben Glorfield followed the advice of their contractor and had their damaged and water-stained block wall stuccoed.
The couple claims they put in a request to the appropriate member of the HOA board in May to stucco the wall, but never got a reply.
Faced with a deadline from the contractor, they decided to go ahead with the stucco even though they never received official approval.
Even after the stucco was installed, they submitted a second request.
More than four months passed with no response. Then in October, a letter of violation arrived in the mail. Now the couple are being told to tear down the stucco from the outside of the wall despite pleas from some residents to let them keep the matching wall.
Neighbors of the Glorfields started a petition drive and collected 112 signatures from people who like the wall and want it to stay.
“It’s getting to the point where (the HOA) is getting so nitpicky about stuff,” said Sylvia Tenhoff. “It’s getting out of control.”
Helen Nebeker, a five-year resident, said she’s faced violations for everything from cracking her garage door two inches in the summer to leaving her hose on the ground for five minutes once when she ran indoors to answer the telephone.
Nebeker signed the petition because she likes the wall, and she said there are other stucco walls in the community.
“If I were to buy here again, I would not buy here knowing the HOA is erratic,” she said. The Glorfields have not been able to make any progress in speaking with board members about the wall.
In fact, they claim they could not even get a copy of the Resident Handbook for months, and that the president himself did not even know a 2006 version existed. The handbook does not explicitly prohibit stucco fences.
“They have been so secretive and they’re not telling people what’s going on,” Ben Glorfield said. “They haven’t provided handbooks and bylaws. I wanted to know what the rules are, and by God, we have a lot more power than we thought.”
Edward Bunker, the president of the HOA, said he has no problem with the way the wall looks.
But he said that none of the board members received any of the Glorfields’ requests to stucco the wall in the first place. The bottom line, he said, is they didn’t follow the rules.
“The point is we have homeowners who signed an agreement when they bought the home they would abide by these covenants, restrictions and rules and they haven’t,” he said.
Steven Cheifetz, an attorney who defends homeowners against HOAs, said this kind of response does not surprise him.
But the Glorfields may have a legal leg to stand on based on a similar court case in 2000, he said.
“You can’t just be so fixated on a lack of approval you ignore the ultimate issue of whether they are entitled to the wall or not,” Cheifetz said. “Otherwise you’re just being punitive and punishing them for not getting approval.”
So far, Ben Glorfield said he and his wife are not budging. They submitted a letter challenging the board and are awaiting a response. “We will stick to our guns,” he said.
DREAMLANDMAN
Last edited on Wed Oct 10th, 2007 03:34 am by DreamlandMan
|
DreamlandMan
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jan 10th, 2007 01:06 pm |
|
alasbabylon wrote: Dreamlandman;
I am trying to figure that out myself! It was tabled yesterday after a split vote and there wasn't enough information supplied to all of the board members!
Thanks for the reply back. It would be interesting to know more. Also, who is responsible for pushing it. Is it Maxwell? It seems to me the last thing they need in addition to paying large amounts of money to Maxwell is to be paying even more money for a property management company----unless of course it's like I figure---the property management company is the initial step in establishing their goal of imposing a homeowners association on us all. VERY IMPORTANT: Keep the name of this company in mind when pondering this issue----the name of the company is---FARNSWORTH PROPERTY MANAGEMENT.
Have a great day....
Dreamlandman
|
alasbabylon
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 4th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 414 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 10th, 2007 12:43 pm |
|
Dreamlandman;
I am trying to figure that out myself! It was tabled yesterday after a split vote and there wasn't enough information supplied to all of the board members!
|
Ron & Cathy Ehninger
Member
| Joined: | Sat Aug 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 733 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 10th, 2007 12:19 pm |
|
Yes , it is amazing about M White, but he represents the type of person we are dealing with at the Club. He and his wife came to our door the first Sunday in November, 2004, and asked if we would sign a petition to save the Club and the fifty five overlay. We said no, this is about an HOA not the Club and they said no, just the club then asked if we wanted a copy of " Your CCR's"? We said no we have several hundred on the dinning room table. As they walked down the driveway we heard them saying " Wonder why they have so many?" They were to stupid to know who they had been talking to. NO HOA. NO MANDATORY CLUB. That has always been our moto and always will be. So as they walked down the street I took their pictures for the record and they smiled and waved just as they are doing now when the sell and leave the community. Good Bye Whites !! Thanks for your legacy , hope you move into a really messy HOA in your new digs, you deserve it .
R&C
|
DreamlandMan
Member
|
Posted: Tue Jan 9th, 2007 02:37 pm |
|
Dorothy7 wrote: It's amazing, isn't it? Here we have good old Merle White putting his house on the market when he's trashed our entire community....he bugs out. I have nothing but contempt for those who did this. They knew that very few who live here could afford to mount a legal challenge....but wait...
I found a record of Dreamland Villa having liened a property in 1992! In the Summons they declared that this hapless homeowner was in violation of the "Association's" rules. The notice, and the subsequent release of the lien was signed by Jeanne Leoper! Well now, ain't that sumthin? I seem to recall that they swore in Court in 2005, that they were not a planned community nor an association. Wonder how often they've tried to pull this scam. Wonder if the fellow they liened has a lawyer? These people need a brain transplant! Dorothy
AMEN TO THAT!!
DREAMLANDMAN
|
Dorothy7
Member
| Joined: | Mon Sep 18th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 592 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 9th, 2007 01:52 pm |
|
It's amazing, isn't it? Here we have good old Merle White putting his house on the market when he's trashed our entire community....he bugs out. I have nothing but contempt for those who did this. They knew that very few who live here could afford to mount a legal challenge....but wait...
I found a record of Dreamland Villa having liened a property in 1992! In the Summons they declared that this hapless homeowner was in violation of the "Association's" rules. The notice, and the subsequent release of the lien was signed by Jeanne Leoper! Well now, ain't that sumthin? I seem to recall that they swore in Court in 2005, that they were not a planned community nor an association. Wonder how often they've tried to pull this scam. Wonder if the fellow they liened has a lawyer? These people need a brain transplant! Dorothy
|
DreamlandMan
Member
|
Posted: Tue Jan 9th, 2007 12:58 pm |
|
Mr. M. White has a house for sale. I wonder if he will have to pay the club a transfer fee? I'll bet he won't.
Why is he selling? He has been a big part of the damage that's been done here. Incredible!!
|
DreamlandMan
Member
|
Posted: Tue Jan 9th, 2007 12:48 pm |
|
TO ALASBABYLON:
CAN YOU TELL US WHY THE CLUB NEEDS A PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY?
|
Ron & Cathy Ehninger
Member
| Joined: | Sat Aug 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 733 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 9th, 2007 12:21 pm |
|
The blue fence came with the home when we purchased it six years ago. Not the SADR attachment to our property deeds, that came later with no vote or no knowledge of the lein on our property. Beside we kinda like blue, so what ? Nothing in zoning laws about blue fences. Kick us off the mandatory list that would be just fine, seems to be the trend these days.
R&C
|
alasbabylon
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 4th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 414 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 9th, 2007 12:06 pm |
|
DREAMLANDMAN; YOU WROTE "You purchase a home, pay taxes, pay additional monthly or yearly fees for the community you live in, but yet, you can't paint the house the color you want, you can't put up shrubs or trees withot paying additional fees for a Committee to either approve or disapprove (and most of the time they disapprove) so you're out that money as well.
Your visitors can only park in front of your home for a specified amount of time, then you get fines and liens on your homes if you do not do as you are told by the Association and Management Company.
They own everything you own, the street you live on, and they control you. What more could you want out of life?
It's just like living in a prison ,,,, only you are still paying for your housing, food and medical expenses without the prison uniforms and cell bars.
So this is what freedom has turned into and we preach to other countries about democracy!
What a bunch of losers afraid to execute the first amendment and in case many of you do not know that might be - it's the FREEDOM OF SPEECH!
But then again, it seems when you speak up, you are "marked" and could possibly go to jail these days.
And we're concerned about terrorist cells within our country who can strike us at any moment?
We are ruled, owned and dictated by them every day and they are called Homeowner Associations."
This is a all deciet and you know it! Of terrorist you are chief! Prey on your neighbors with fear and deciet! Most of the community understands the zoning, we have lived with it form day one. Proof of it is R & C still have a blue fence!
|
Ron & Cathy Ehninger
Member
| Joined: | Sat Aug 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 733 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 9th, 2007 12:03 pm |
|
When Dorothy & Cathy asked that question at the Club office they were told because the minuets where not approved. They were told to read the bulletin board outside for the minuets. Nice huh? Also another big question , what has the Club and Board and President and attorney done to maintain, improve, repair and maintainance of our property ? What has the Club done to do one simple thing on your property ? They know how to send bills and summons, but what on earth do they do to our individual properties ? Answer, NOTHING. Get it ? They get paid for doing nothing and this is a bona fide debt ?
R&C
|
DreamlandMan
Member
|
Posted: Tue Jan 9th, 2007 08:58 am |
|
DreamlandMan wrote: How come the board meeting minutes from December were not published in the January issue of the Citizen?
Could it be that DVCC wanted to hide the fact that Eugene Murawski reported to the board that he has received 4 bids from property management companies?
Just what exactly will be the role of the property management company that is hired?
DVCC ALREADY HAS A MAINTENANCE MAN ON ITS PAYROLL.........WHAT PROPERTIES NEED TO MANAGED? MANAGED IN WHAT WAY? WHAT WILL BE THE COST FOR THIS WASTE OF MONEY?
ANSWER....DV RESIDENTS PROPERTIES WILL BE "MANAGED" THROUGH FINES FOR VARIOUS INFRACTIONS DETERMINED BY YOUR DVCC BOARD AND ITS LAWYER AND YOU THE HOMEOWNER WILL BE PAYING FOR THIS!!
THIS IS HOW HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS OPERATE AND HOW PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANIES GENERATE HUGE PROFITS.
THE DEATH OF DREAMLAND VILLA AS WE KNOW IT HAS STARTED!!
|
DreamlandMan
Member
|
Posted: Tue Jan 9th, 2007 05:47 am |
|
DreamlandMan wrote: How come the board meeting minutes from December were not published in the January issue of the Citizen?
Could it be that DVCC wanted to hide the fact that Eugene Murawski reported to the board that he has received 4 bids from property management companies?
Just what exactly will be the role of the property management company that is hired?
What are the names of the property management companies he has contacted?
Is one of them Farnsworth?
Just another step closer to living in a dictatorship............
Dreamlandman
FREEDOM IN AMERICA Where homeowners are ruled, owned, dictated and terrorized by Homeowner Associations
April 17, 2006
By Danene Ruggiero (View author info)
Copyright Danene Ruggiero
Phoenix, Arizona - The HOA Primer book on line makes a lot of sense to me. The homeowner is screwed no matter which way you look at it.
Management companies are getting donations from homeowners like us because it comes out of our fees. They laugh all the way to the bank because homeowners are too afraid to stand up for what is being taken away from them, mainly our homes and the right to own one without being dictated to. It's a great scam when you really look at the whole picture.
You purchase a home, pay taxes, pay additional monthly or yearly fees for the community you live in, but yet, you can't paint the house the color you want, you can't put up shrubs or trees withot paying additional fees for a Committee to either approve or disapprove (and most of the time they disapprove) so you're out that money as well.
Your visitors can only park in front of your home for a specified amount of time, then you get fines and liens on your homes if you do not do as you are told by the Association and Management Company.
They own everything you own, the street you live on, and they control you. What more could you want out of life?
It's just like living in a prison ,,,, only you are still paying for your housing, food and medical expenses without the prison uniforms and cell bars.
So this is what freedom has turned into and we preach to other countries about democracy!
What a bunch of losers afraid to execute the first amendment and in case many of you do not know that might be - it's the FREEDOM OF SPEECH!
But then again, it seems when you speak up, you are "marked" and could possibly go to jail these days.
And we're concerned about terrorist cells within our country who can strike us at any moment?
We are ruled, owned and dictated by them every day and they are called Homeowner Associations.
|
DreamlandMan
Member
|
Posted: Tue Jan 9th, 2007 05:27 am |
|
How come the board meeting minutes from December were not published in the January issue of the Citizen?
Could it be that DVCC wanted to hide the fact that Eugene Murawski reported to the board that he has received 4 bids from property management companies?
Just what exactly will be the role of the property management company that is hired?
What are the names of the property management companies he has contacted?
Is one of them Farnsworth?
Just another step closer to living in a dictatorship............
Dreamlandman
|
Ron & Cathy Ehninger
Member
| Joined: | Sat Aug 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 733 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 8th, 2007 01:17 pm |
|
TO CT:
Dreamland Property Rights Inc.
PO Box 195
Mesa, AZ 85205
Phone 480-694-6761
Email: dreamlandprop@excite.com
|
alasbabylon
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 4th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 414 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 8th, 2007 12:52 pm |
|
Dorthy;
I was at that meeting, as usual different people will give you different accounts of what went on. My account is totaly different from yours. I witnessed a meeting that was called for Vivki's benefit ( it wasn't an open meeting )! The clubs attorney ( I admit he is arrogant ) explained the the ballot situation! I understood his stand on keeping the ballots sealed and protected! He is protecting the community that hired him! You said the other attorney was allowed to view the papers Vicki requested. Once again the board was trying to work with ( they didn't have to call this meeting) Vicki !
|
Ron & Cathy Ehninger
Member
| Joined: | Sat Aug 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 733 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 8th, 2007 12:52 pm |
|
This is all very interesting and historic in what has been, but the future will for sure exspose the going ons of the Club and the Debt collector. The truth will come out , it has to , and the community will understand the junk that has been set upon us. The new fight is on. Folks have been served and will defend their homes. All types of folks , many very peacefull and have worked long and hard to obtain what they have. The line has been drawn, the action will begin, the fur will fly. Many will try to play the blame game but never forget folks, it all started with Mary Ann Glauner and a hand full of unknowns that voted to hire the attorney and start " Mandatory Membership". And she had the gaul to call us " Stupid People" that did not understand we had signed up for some kind of HOA? It never has been an HOA and never will be. All property owners had no vote, did not sign or agree to any contract and that is the simple truth buried under tons of paper work and legal junk. That is where it started and time will tell where it will end. We pity the past Boards of Directors and Presidents that were a part of this mess. They will have to answer !
R&C
|
Dorothy7
Member
| Joined: | Mon Sep 18th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 592 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
| |