Saturday, April 19, 2008

Does Sun City really need CC&R's and an HOA?

Does Menifee really need Sun City Civic Association CC&R's and an HOA?

It's been proven beyond the shadow of a doubt the CC&R's and the capricious enforcement of them fails to protect the value of our properties. All it does is harass residents. Isn't it just a bit embarrasssing to be designated a blighted area after being constantly told we are paying dues to have our property values protected? Isn't that why SCCA board keeps Donald Miller on the pay roll? The residents of Sun City are senior adults, not children and not criminals and not charity cases. Do we really need to be spied upon as if we were? Other than take our money and harass us, just what does the board do for us? As far as the swimming pool and work shops go, we don't need an entire HOA to run them. Any single manager could do that for far less the cost. This HOA is like a black box with a button. Push the button and a little hand comes out and turns itself off. Sun City residents don't need an HOA whose only purpose is self perpetuation.

For some perverse reason the SCCA Board seems to think being an age 55 senior community is a major benefit. If so, just what are the benefits? Don Weddle was recently quoted in the Press Enterprise justifying the codes enforcement officers because some homes might have people under 55 living in the Core. (Isn't that a real threat to society?) Would someone please tell me what is so important about keeping the age limit to 55? People are senior adults at 45. Another proof that CC&R's do not protect property values is the age limit of 55. What do you think would happen to the property values in the core if the age were dropped to 45?

CC&R's were written by lawyers over 45 years ago based upon condominium standards.The core of Sun City is made up of single family homes. Most of the issues in the CC&R'S are stupid, ridicules, invasive, too restrictrive, and violate human rights.They are also poorly written as they are contradictory, vague, and left to arbitrary interpretation. However, SCCA'S enforcement of them is capricious, reclacitrant and cruel. The CC&R'S used by the SCCA are neither divine, Gospel nor the Bible. They were created by man with out foresight for the life styles in at the turn of the century. What is created or written by man can be changed by man. The CC&R's have been the source of conflicts between neighbors and the SCCA for years. They have been used as a sword and a whip against residents and made their lives a living hell. This has robbed members of the quiet enjoyment of their home. The SCCA claimed they do so to protect property values. This is a lie. Sun City is declared a blighted area. Under SCCA leadership, Sun City has gone down in value in relationship to the new communities that are built to our borders. It is time to put a moratorium on these stupid CC&R's and start planning to bring Sun City into the Twenty First Century and eventually the City of Menifee Valley. Edit Text

letter to Don Weddle continue. . .

I take #9 to clearly mean that neither fence nor landscaping should be planned that blocks the view of any adjacent lot. What seems to take precedence in the language of #9 is the importance of maintaining the view. Obviously, the first concern is protecting resident’s golf course views. That is the primary purpose of the CC&R’s. Views are the reason people choose to live on the golf course. Good view lots bring premiums. One item that is perfectly clear in CC&R#9 is “. . . no solid wall. . .” any where between the lots. The plastic wall erected by Carl Fuess is solid. How is it SCCA can bend or ignore the rules for him and do nothing to protect me? ? ? Am I not also a paid member in good standing? There is everything in the Del Web design of Sun City, tradition, intent, and CC&R#9 that suggests it is not O.K. to build a fence where it will block the neighbor’s golf course view. As a realtor of thirty years having worked on many new home communities, I can assure you protecting a golf course lot view is the highest and best interpretation of that CC&R#9.

Many things people have done prior to 1993 have been grandfathered. The two foot block wall along the adjacent property line to my neighbor was built when this home was built. Why then, is it not considered “grandfathered in” and accepted the only fence necessary between the properties? How could SCCA so flagrantly violate 40 years of tradition between these properties by permitting a six foot solid plastic wall. Plastic wasn’t a material that was used for fencing way back in the “60’s. How could the writer of CC&R #9 have known to exclude plastic as an undesirable material? How, then is the code enforcer permitted to condone the use of that horrible material? To date, the only plastic fence in Sun City Core is the one built next door to me. Originally, Del Web had an architectural review board that would have denied the use of such a horrible material. Today materials are supposed to be approved by at least two board member. Did any two board members make such an approval? If so, is heavy solid plastic fencing meant for ranches going to be the trend in Sun City?

In the eyes of the law it might appear both neighbors are guilty of something. However every case has elements that make it unique. Every situation must be judged on the pertinent facts. From the surface, it appears as if two cranky, stubborn people are having a battle of wills. Taking a closer look will show it is quite a different picture. It doesn’t take a mental giant to recognize the circumstances of each neighbor is entirely different. One neighbor is a living resident who plans to stay there until death do her part. The other is an absentee investor whose only purpose is to sell for profit and move on. One lot is on the corner of a busy street. The other is an inside lot. There is a clear right and wrong situation here. There is an innocent victim. There is a bad guy. Consequently the same arguments are not going to apply equally to both. For example, when I first realized a six foot solid plastic wall was going to be erected and Fuess was too belligerent to be reasonable, I went to SCCA and filed a complaint against Carl Fuess. I also went to the building department to check on the concrete damn he built next to our property line. When he threw one of my potted plants at me and seriously injured my right arm, I filed a police report against him. When I sent a letter to the broker who is marketing his house, I was merely alerting him of a DRE disclosure law. Carl Fuess took it as if I were trying to prevent him from selling his place. (He evidently wants some unsuspecting family to buy his over priced by $60,000 property and let them deal with a controversial fence he built.) All my actions were hopeless attempts to protect myself, my property, and my peaceful life style I had enjoyed from 1998 to July 2004.

Carl Fuess damaged my concrete patio by cutting a wedge eight inches deep and cracking a large corner from the slab. He refuses to compensate me for the damage.(not the SCCA problem) He arbitrarily cut two inches of the patio slab claiming it was encroaching on his property. He did so without the benefit of a licensed surveyor. He talked to as many neighbors as he could trying to get them to say something negative about me. He perjured himself in a sworn statement in a petition for a TRO. Carl Fuess also filed complaints to SCCA that I was operating a business from my home. (If I were, how did that hurt him?) When that failed, he complained to the County building department I added a room without a permit. (If it were so, how did that space interfere with the quality of his life?) When that failed, he complained to SCCA about weeds in front of my house. (This was the first letter I ever got from the SCCA about weeds since I moved here in 1998). As late as April 29, 2005, I received a letter from SCCA claiming a six foot block wall that was built by Del Web when this house was built was in violation of CC&R#9. That wall, built for security reasons was grandfathered in. Yet, I was told by SCCA it was a violation and I had to take it down to three feet 25 feet the rear property line. In each and every one of these issues Carl Fuess used SCCA in an effort to hurt me. Not one of the issues Carl Fuess has attempted to use against me impinges upon his personal life style, value of his property next door or in Wildomar. The removal of a wall that enlarged an existing interior space, my little quiet home office, nor six foot block security wall between my property and Murrieta RD. in no way shape or form caused him harm, inconvenience, or economic loss. All those complaints, plus his conspiracy with a certain Sun City Broker to slander me and do me harm in the civil courts were done with pure malice. He clearly demonstrates by his actions an active desire to do me harm. I constantly feel I am being stalked by him. So if any one wants to minimize the nature of this conflict between property owners by claiming that what Carl Fuess did to me was no different than what I did to Carl Fuess, please note the difference. I am a resident whose life style and property have been severely damaged directly by Carl Fuess with the blessing of SCCA.. I have been fighting to defend the value of my property and life style without malice within the parameters of the system. He is an absentee speculator, who has suffered no harm from the items he complained about me. This isn’t an equal battle. I am being harmed and victimized by his actions and the SCCA participation in many of his actions.

This long tiresome letter is only the tip of iceberg of the harassment I have suffered. I hope you will take a serious objective look into this matter. Please reevaluate your position regarding that ugly solid plastic wall and understand how important this is. Sun city does not need plastic walls and fences “to make good neighbors”. It needs good leadership. I have abundant documentation regarding the statements made. I would be glad to supply them to you if so needed.

There is no law against being a mean spirited, knuckle headed jerk. There also is no law against exposing mean spirited knuckle heads to the world. So if sneaky Carl Fuess thinks he can hide behind the disguise of a good considerate Christian citizen, he is mistaken. The community needs to know there is a vicious wolf in sheep’ clothing running loose in this community. Other innocent residents need to know what price they will pay if they dare to fight for their rights to maintain their life style and property value. This is why I’ll be sending copies of this letter to the many concerned people listed at the close of this letter. . . .

No comments: