Showing posts with label lawyer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lawyer. Show all posts

Thursday, August 23, 2012

Twice Screwed


When I read “'Shaded' parcel owners, staff meet” in today's Times-Standard, once again I had confirmation as to why the wife and I were not going to invest in rural Humboldt County property. Another good reason is the California Fire Tax, but that's another article. Here is a classic situation where the innocent victim is made to pay for the crimes of another. These people, through no fault of their own, having over a period of years in most cases possess a large investment in time, health and treasure are, well after-the-fact, faced with the state's legal threat putting it all in jeopardy. Rather than try to protect these people's investments, they try to force them to do what the County Planning Department failed to do over an extended period of time. And then, on top of that, make them pay for it. You know what they are trying to do is wrong when they do everything behind closed doors. This is a classic shake-down – legal extortion.

It was when I read this portion of the article that I remembered back to the untold number of times over the years that I heard the same kind of talk from a lawyer that I had just paid a small fortune to represent my best interests:
 “Local attorney Eric Kirk is representing about one-third of the Seely Creek property owners. He said the next step for many of his clients is to file for a conditional certificate of compliance with the county. The certificate would outline the improvements required to make each plot legal, such as bringing sewer systems up to code. 
Kirk said the certificate could cost his clients anywhere from $300 to $1,700, depending on whether new parcel maps or surveyors have to be utilized. In the meantime, he said his clients will be looking for documentation, such as building permits, titles and deeds to prove their lots are legal. 
Kirk said it appears the county wants to resolve the parcel problem in a way that is as painless as possible
”I'm getting that once they have the conditional certificate of compliance, they've done their due diligence in the state,” he said.” 
Does that sound anything like this property owner?
Seely Creek property owner Georje Holper said she's frustrated with how the county is handling the issue. 
”To put the burden on us is not right,” Holper said. 
As a group, the property owners said it's the county's responsibility to determine the legality of the parcels -- especially since they didn't know the parcels were illegal when they were purchased. They said the county doesn't have any records of when the parcels were shaded or by whom, so the burden of proof is on the county. 
 Compare what Eric Kirk says to this:

Humboldt Coalition for Property Rights Chairman Lee Ulansey said he knows for a fact that some of the properties were shaded by people who simply took a pencil to the antiquated maps. He said the maps aren't kept under lock and key, so access to the records isn't monitored. 
Ulansey said the county has gone about the shaded parcel issue the wrong way, pushing Hum CPR -- a private property rights organization -- to file a lawsuit against the county in April. He said the county needed to do more research on each parcel before simply declaring them all illegal. 
”They need to get to that solution before they disrupt people's lives,” Ulansey said. [Emphasis added]
 So, with a stroke of a pen, all these people own "illegal" property. And Eric Kirk says the best thing for all of these people is to "file for a conditional certificate of compliance with the county." In other words, these inadvertent "illegal" property owners need to take personal legal responsibility for purchasing and owning their "illegal property". That way the County can walk away free and clear. Never a thought about making the County be accountable for their negligent irresponsible acts. Just make the people with everything to lose, pay and pay.

"Painless as possible" - Yeah! Right. TWICE SCREWED.
[Source]
--Joe

Friday, February 4, 2011

Police State Example Served Up Locally


This is an update to the following post: Is The U.S. Really A Police State?

Since the 9/11/2001 incident after George W. Bush took control of the United States government this country has sunk deeper into a lawless state of anarchy. The Ruling Elite, a small group of wealthy individuals and corporations encompassing all relevant political parties, has literally trashed the U.S. Constitution. That universal Law is only as good as the people make it. Unfortunately, they've decided the Rule of Man is more to their liking and subsequently have co-opted, corrupted and perverted the Law and the Courts with their arrogant, self-serving lawlessness. Glenn Greewald has a timely article today: Guantanamo death highlights U.S. detention policy - You may think that what happens to a few "rag-head" Arabs that supposedly hate our guts has nothing to do with you or your family and the long-held belief that our home is our castle and we are always safe there, you may want to re-think your beliefs.

Thursday's February 3, 2011, Times-Standard has an extremely revealing expose by Jeffrey Schwartz in the My Word: Up in arms: Search warrant folly. You may think the we are people with certain, guaranteed rights with honorable, decent and just men stationed in high offices to protect those rights. Armed to the teeth, masked gunmen can't just cave your door in sometime in the early morning, shouting police, drag you and your family out of bed, providing you didn't do something stupid, like trying to defend yourself and your family in your own home, on your own property, and get shot dead, or can they. Mr. Schwartz says they not only can, but do on a regular basis right here in Humboldt County.

Today we see people living in the more brutal, domineering totalitarian police states beginning to stand up for their personal and collective rights as equal human beings - both men and women. What's becoming more and more widespread in this country has been going on in these other countries for decades. All with American blessings. Considering the fact that Mr. Schwartz had the courage to write that article, making us all aware of what's going on in our names, tells me we won't wait decades to put a stop to this lawless corruption.

What puts everyone's life, liberty and citizenship in jeopardy is who Mr. Schwartz says is responsible for this, what I consider criminal conduct and perversion of the law, the gutless and sycophantic District Attorney and Superior Court Judges. They legitimize this outlandish police action, what amounts to a pure, raw act of terrorism, without any apparent substantive evidence of probable cause other than someone's unproven accusation. This situation puts everyone under the gun and at risk.

What is to stop anyone, an irate neighbor, a family member or anyone else from calling the police and telling them some wild, unsubstantiated lie about you? Mr. Schwartz says:
But if you own a handgun or rifle, just imagine this: A judge issued a warrant to search your house because someone you know saw you with it and they don't know whether or not you have a license to own it.
Sadly, Jeffrey Schwartz doesn't offer much hope for all of the common, law-abiding people that live in this county, other than to say:
"It remains to be seen if it is OK with the higher courts and juries in civil rights actions against law enforcement officers." [Emphasis added]
 "Higher courts." Our history tells us where that goes. Courts (Judges) protect themselves in these kinds of situation involving police power. And "juries in civil rights actions against law enforcement officer"? The problem is NOT with the "law enforcement officers." It is with the District Attorney and the Superior Court Judges.
For the complete article: Up in arms: Search warrant folly click the link or continue reading.