Category Archives: firearms

Google Forces Big Website Changes

      No Comments on Google Forces Big Website Changes

Starting today, Google is making some huge changes that will cause millions of websites to seemingly vanish from search engines. Since 60% of all website access is now from mobile devices, many websites, including this one, will be substantially impacted.

To stay visible to you we have to completely redesign this website, which we’re now working on. It will necessitate us being offline for at least a day while the changes are uploaded. Unfortunately we’ll have to accept a completely different look.

I’ll try to give you advance notice when we’ll be offline.

(link to info on Google changes)

 

Promises, Promises

      No Comments on Promises, Promises
guest blog by Deborah Goonan

Today’s blog features the story of a major developer, Centex, allegedly not delivering on amenities as promised to early buyers in the master planned community,

Sullivan Ranch in Mount Dora, Florida, was supposed to include a private equestrian center, according to Sara MacKenzie, a homeowner since 2007. She says she still has the brochures that describe the plans for owners to ride their horses on lush, rolling hills, and the developer did install a fence suitable for the purpose of keeping horses. But the two-story equestrian center, as described, has never been built. MacKenzie claims recent buyers received an addendum disclosing approval for multifamily apartments in place of the promised amenity. So MacKenzie has filed suit against the developer, with a hearing scheduled for April 21, 2015.

In typical HOA style, as soon as MacKenzie began to talk to her neighbors, she was hit with a “non-solicitation” violation. Free speech in an HOA? Only if you are willing to sue to protect your rights.

Do these owners have a solid legal case? Maybe not.

A quick Google search of Centex and Sullivan Ranch is revealing. The current promotional video fails to mention a single word about horses or an equestrian center. Clicking on the site plan thumbnail opens a web page without a site plan, but with this fine print disclaimer:

“The site plan shown is conceptual in nature and for illustrative purposes only to show general features and the layout of the community, and should not be relied upon in making a decision to purchase a homesite. Any improvements shown may not have been constructed and Centex makes no representation or warranty that the improvements will be constructed. The past, present, future or proposed roads, easements, land uses, plat maps, lot sizes or layouts, zoning, utilities, drainage, land conditions, or development of any type whatsoever, whether reflected on the site plan or map, or whether outside the boundaries of the site plan or map, may not be shown or may be incomplete or inaccurate.

“See the recorded plat, utility plans and construction plans on file in the sales office for lot dimensions, restrictions, easements and other important information regarding these lots and this community. Any landscaping that may be shown is for illustrative purposes only and does not represent the current landscaping within the community or plans for future landscaping. Seller reserves the right to change and modify development plans without notice. This site plan is not drawn to scale.”

In fact, I hate to break it to these homeowners, but these boilerplate disclaimers appear on virtually every developer website and brochure these days. This isn’t the first time Centex has not delivered on all of its promised community features and amenities, and plenty of other developers, large and small, have also broken their promises to finish golf courses, club houses, pools, boat slips, bike trails — you name it. If the economy changes, the builder can alter plans for the community to better maximize profit. Homeowners can sue, but there’s no guarantee the developer will ever finish what was started, or that owners will be compensated for broken promises.

Next time you look at a developer’s website or glossy brochure, be sure to read the fine print. For a true representation of what the developer is obligated to build, check the plats on file with your local county clerk, or ask your real estate attorney to check it out for you before you finalize a sale agreement. Visit other communities that were constructed in previous decades, and check out what was completed, and its current condition in relation to age of the community. Then decide for yourself if it’s worth paying extra for amenities that may or may not be completed someday in the future.”

More Money Down The Drain

      No Comments on More Money Down The Drain
guest blog by Deborah Goonan

Yet another case of shoddy construction, this time a failing storm drain and a sinking retention pond in Michigan. Over several years, homeowners of Windridge Estates HOA have experienced cracked foundations and basement windows, shifting soil in their back yards, and movement of retention walls, as the shoreline of the nearby pond crumbles into the water.

The HOA lacks the means to make the needed repairs, so the City of New Baltimore has agreed to “help” by setting up a special assessment district, in order to collect $1.45 million from homeowners over the next 10 years. Each lot will ultimately be taxed roughly $6500.

That’s in addition to any regular HOA assessments and property taxes they have paid all these years the problem has gone unaddressed.

The HOA Attorney argues that the City should pay at least 18.5% of the cost, since City roads drain into the pond when it rains. In this particular HOA, the City maintains the roads and easements, but not storm drainage. This illogical arrangement is amazingly common in HOAs.

Several questions come to mind.

First, how did this storm water system get approved by the City Inspector? Second, why isn’t the developer on the hook to pay for these repairs? Third, how much will this end up costing City taxpayers who do NOT live in Windridge Estates?

Local governments have been abdicating responsibility for maintenance of major infrastructure for decades. But retention ponds and underground stormwater pipes are notoriously difficult and expensive to maintain and repair, even when they are constructed properly. Repairs almost always involve precise engineering design, heavy equipment, and moving around large amounts of soil. How do local governments justify dumping this responsibility on a volunteer Board and the disproportionate expense on unsuspecting homeowners?

In the meantime, one unfortunate recent buyer just got a fine welcome to the community. The seller hadn’t disclosed problems with the pond, and now the buyer is on the hook for his share of the cost. Just goes to show how affordability of your home in an HOA can be wildly unpredictable.

Oh, and as I’ve mentioned before, but it bears repeating: a lot adjacent to a retention pond is NOT a “lake view” or “water view” for which a buyer should pay a premium.

(read the story, check out the photos, here)

 

Another Military Family Ordered To Remove Flag

      No Comments on Another Military Family Ordered To Remove Flag

One often thinks of the people of Utah as being more patriotic than those in many other states. But Homeowners Associations in Utah can be just as ugly as elsewhere.

The Spring Creek Ranch HOA in Lehi, Utah, is ordering the wife of an active duty Navy man to remove the U.S. Navy flag from her home. Lucia Sandoval is being threatened with a fine and lawsuit because she had the temerity to put up her patriotic display. She says she intends to fight, but that probably means massive legal expenses for her and her family.

Patriotism is a no-win situation for people who buy into the HOA movement.

(link to KUTV, Salt Lake City)

 

Stealing Homes In Indiana

      No Comments on Stealing Homes In Indiana
guest blog by Deborah Goonan

Last year, residents of Charlestown, Indiana, thwarted an eminent domain attempt initiated by Mayor Bob Hall to allow developers to buy out, raze, and redevelop their entire Pleasant Ridge neighborhood. With pro bono assistance from Institute for Justice, and a well-organized effort, residents were able to put an end to those plans, and keep their homes.

Pleasant Ridge is still in need of improvement, however, and owners want to work with the Mayor on alternative plans to reduce crime and clean up problem properties. Therefore, several neighborhood leaders have proposed establishing a steering committee, to work with the Mayor’s office on revitalizing their Pleasant Ridge neighborhood. Mayor Hall has been asked to serve on the Board of this steering committee, along with one other representative from his staff.

But Mayor Hall has reservations about working with the Neighborhood Association.

Check out this statement made by the Mayor:

“Hall said Wednesday that the neighborhood association and the steering committee represent too few residents of the neighborhood.

“They are more of a special-interest group than they are a homeowners association,” Hall said of the neighborhood association. “They only represent less than 15 percent of the property owners in Pleasant Ridge. A real homeowner’s association will represent 100 percent of the properties in a subdivision.”

Hall said he has made efforts to revitalize the neighborhood since 2000, and it’s important to him that the area improves.

“I am not the mayor of the minority of Pleasant Ridge, I am the mayor of the whole city,” he said. “I am not going to be involved in a committee that has a very narrow focus and is only representing a very small interest.”

Recall from my previous blogs that the Mayor’s plans for redevelopment, though never solidified, included multifamily structures and mixed use development. In other words: establishment of Homeowners’ Associations. Apparently, Hall thinks mandatory membership HOAs would better represent owners’ interests than a voluntary membership resident-supported Neighborhood Association. Where on earth did he get that idea?

Apparently someone has been drinking the Kool-Aid, courtesy of HOA Industry special interest groups representing Community Associations and Developers.

Obviously, Mr. Hall hasn’t got a clue about the realities of HOAs! Although 100% of owners are required to be members, that does not mean that the HOA actually “represents 100 percent of the properties in a subdivision!” Note the use of the word “properties” with regard to representation — not “homeowners” or “people.”

Ask any minority property owner in an HOA if his or her interests are represented, or if those interests are merely outnumbered by majority stakeholders.

And as for having a “very narrow focus” and “only representing a very small interest,” — well, that’s the norm for HOAs. And the people of Pleasant Ridge weren’t very happy about the Mayor’s previous attempts to align himself with the narrow interests of the developer, who, along with the Mayor, wanted to get his hands on grant money.

So who is representing the interests of the homeowners in Pleasant Ridge at this point? At the last City Council meeting, neighborhood association representative Jason Patrone reportedly seemed to have the support of neighbors in attendance.

Let’s see how this one plays out.

(link to Charlestown News and Tribune)