Irony
abounds. On the same day Los
Angeles appointed a blue ribbon panel to
study ways to reduce taxes and
encourage business, the Canyon
Lake City
Council decided it was time to
raise taxes, errr, FEES and singled out 'Professional
Employees and
Professional Licensees' for an additional tax, errr, FEE.
(They went to great pains to point out in their ordinance that this
is a FEE and shall not be construed as a TAX.)
Whatever - the net result is
if you're a professional
licensee it'll now cost you more for the
privilege of doing business in Canyon Lake.
Exactly why they
singled out 'Professional
Licensees' to hit up for more taxes, sorry -
FEES, is anybodies guess. Maybe the city leaders just figured that's
where the money's at since it apparently isn't in the city coffers and
they need more. So they determined that in addition to the customary
'Business License Tax' that owners of every business pay every year,
they were going to break that down even further to "protect
the public
health, safety and welfare as well as provide for efficient
administration of the program". That's clever - invent an unnecessary
program and then tax people to run it. These people may
have bright
futures in state politics.
Ryan Smith, IVAR GAD,
board Counsel John Giardinelli and I have been working with the City to
address the madness of this ordinance since July. We have held numerous
meetings with city staff and counsel and, as of a month ago, had
actually reached what we felt was an equitable compromise.
Unfortunately the CL Mayor visited her hairdresser a few days before
the most recent council meeting and the current Ordinance 121 revision
was the result of that high level conference. (No, I am not lying).
From here on out, any 'Professional
Associate or licensee' including, but not limited to, realtors,
attorneys,beauticians, barbers, manicurists, dentists, dental
hygienists, veterinarians, doctors, podiatrists and chiropractors get
to pay extra to operate in Canyon Lake. It applies to 'businesses
which have a fixed location within the city as well as those which do
not'.
So if you're a Broker,
attorney, doctor, etc. with an office in Canyon Lake, you will owe this
extra fee for every licensee under you. If you are a Realtor from
elsewhere and you list a property in Canyon Lake, they will send you a
bill. They are unclear on whether they can bill your Broker
for every agent in your office whether or not they do
business in Canyon Lake but for sure you'll get a bill because of your
sign. If you represent a buyer on a property in CL, they have no way of
figuring that out so you can either just pony up the tax, errrr FEE
because you are a fool, or you get a free pass.
I'm sure all the agents
from San Diego and Los Angeles (& Murrieta and Riverside)
listing bank-owned homes in Canyon Lake
will just be falling over themselves to send in that extra payment.Their code enforcement
person is going to have a full time job tracking down these signs,
sending bills, stopping by offices to count noses and ensure compliance
etc.
What? You say they don't
have and can't afford to devote a full time code
enforcement officer to this effort? Jeez,
maybe it's gonna be a challenge collecting those payments from Ventura
and the OC then. If they're lucky a few businesses in Canyon Lake might
comply - everybody else will just give this program the respect it so
richly deserves - doo-dah.
The City claims this is
necessary for 'disaster
preparedness and in the event of an emergency'. So by
their logic, if your building is on fire, instead of calling the owner
of record they could just call some random Realtor or hairdresser. If
your business is being burgled, don't call the manager, just call
somebody that does nails in the back stall or a random podiatrist.
Yeah, that makes sense.
In summary, under
Ordinance 121, the City of Canyon Lake has singled
out 'licensed professionals' working in or thinking about working in
the City for an additional tax, errr, FEE. They claim they
need to do this for 'disaster preparedness and emergency contact', and
they're counting, in large degree, on voluntary compliance because they
don't have the manpower necessary to enforce it. They have invented an unnecessary
program and want to charge you an additional fee to implement it.
At this point you may be
wondering what the additional tax, errrr FEE is? $20.
That's right, $20.
One lonely Andrew Jackson. As a representative from their Chamber
asked, why is the City willing to piss off some 300+ business' still
hanging on in Canyon Lake over $20? If they're lucky, they might
generate a few grand. Probably not. He told them straight out "You aren't
listening!". He was right.
If there's any good news
to be gleaned from this ludicrosity, they started out demanding $90 a
head, they ended up at $20. Of course since the amount of annual
increase is unspecified, they could decide to jack it to $90 next year
now that it's in place.
Anyway, if you're
thinking about dong business in Canyon Lake, you might want to check
out the City's record on business friendly ordinances before you jump.
Menifee, Lake Elsinore & Wildomar are right next door and they would love to have
your business. And it won't cost you an extra $20 a head to do
it.
You can read the full
text of this ordinance if they every figure out how to post it to their
website.
Jeez there are times I
just hate to be right. Back in May I
wrote about the much vaunted 'Cash for Clunkers' program and
what the likely outcome might be in my humble opinion. Well, the
numbers are in - no, not the governments numbers, the real numbers the
government didn't want you to see that had to be obtained through the
freedom of information act. It's that whole transparency thing, you
know. And it's even worse than I thought. Let's take a look at some of
those numbers, shall we?
Here's the fun facts
about the recently completed 'cash
for clunkers' program, another well conceived
and soundly implemented government-run program. A new reportwas
released by the AP yesterday using figures obtained under the freedom
of information act. If the AP isn't careful with this kind of factual
and statistical reporting they'll soon find themselves under siege by
the White House ala Fox News. You can read the full report here: Cash
for Clunkers - FAIL.
Of the 677,081 clunkers traded
under the program it appears that about 15%
got less than 20 mpg. 8,200 times, owners of high mileage Ford F150 pickups simply
traded them for new F150's making it the most highly traded vehicle,
followed by Dodge Rams and
Chevy Silverados. Many of these vehicles had
over 200,000 miles on them so the owners simply swapped. Yeah, they'll
be buying again soon.
Of the estimated $3 Billion spent by the
government, $562,000 went for
vehicles that got the same or worse mileage than the
trade-ins. Most of the trucks traded saw improvements of between 1 and
3 mpg, if at all. A total of almost
$1 Billon went for this type of vehicle.
Trades into higher
mileage vehicles like Corollas,
Camrys, Civics, Prius' and Focus' rounded out the top ten
and accounted for about $2
billion of the total. Those vehicles brought the average
fuel economy for vehicles sold under the program to 24.9, up from 15.8 on the
trade-ins.
So let's do some
math.
Using round numbers, if
your clunker got 15 mpg and you drove 12,000 miles a year you used 800
gallons of gas. The vehicle you purchased got 25 mpg so that same
12,000 miles only used 480 gallons. Good so far?
So the average clunker
traded reduced fuel consumption
by 320 gallons a year. That's pretty good, eh?
Assuming they got
700,000 of those rust-buckets off the road (actually 677,081), that saved about 224 million gallons
of gas.
It takes about 5 million barrels of oil to
produce 224 million gallons of gas.
That's about 1/4 of one days consumption in these
United States.
At a price of $75 a
barrel (give or take), those 5 million barrels cost $350 million.
So unless I'm wrong here
somewhere, the program that this administration lauds as such a great
success from an economic and environmental perspective, actually cost us $3 Billion to save $350 Million.
That sounds like my wife at a Nordstrom's shoe sale.
Now line up like good
like doo-bees because these same people want to sell you a health care
program. I can hardy wait.
Of course that's just my
opinion... I could be wrong.
A
woman named Judy
brings a very limp duck, Cuddles,
into her veterinarians office.
Judy
lays the duck on the table and Nicki
the Vet pulls out her stethoscope and listens to the birds
chest for a minute.
Nicki
the Vet shakes her head and says "I'm sorry, your duck,Cuddles, has passed away."
Judy
was very distressed and wailed "Are you sure?"
"Yes, I'm sure. That duck
is dead," replied Nicki
the Vet
"How can you be so sure?"Judy
protested. "He
might just be in a coma or something. You haven't even done any tests
for that."
Nicki
the Vet rolled her eyes but turned and left the room.
Two
minutes later she's back with a huge Black Labrador Retriever.
Judy
watches in amazement as the dog stands on his hind legs, puts his front
paws on the examining table and sniffs the duck from top to bottom. He
looks at Nicki
the Vet with sad eyes and solemnly shakes his head. Nicki
the Vet pats the dog on the head and took him back out of
the room.
When
she returns she has a cat with her. The cat jumps down on the table and
delicately sniffs the duck from bill to tail, stopping to lick one wing
very gently. The cat sits back on its haunches, meows softly, shakes
its head and strolls out of the room.
Nicki
the Vet looks at Judy
and says "I'm
truly sorry but this duck is 100% certifiably a dead duck. A late duck.
It is no more. It has departed."
Nicki
the Vet turns to her computer, taps a few keys and
produces the bill for Judy.
Still
in shock over the loss of her duck, Cuddles,
Judy
takes a look at the bill.
"$220.00"
she cries. "$220,000
just to tell me my duck is dead?"
Nicki
the Vet shrugged and said...
Wait for it.
"My
bill to tell you your duck was dead was only $20. The Lab report and Cat scan added $200."
County
Assessor/Clerk/Recorder Larry Ward has just released his 2009-2010
Annual Report and it's chock full of all kinds of exciting stuff - and
some not so exciting.
I'll
just tease you with a few details but for the full scoop you've got to
follow the link at the bottom to find the details.
For
example, did you know that:
The Riverside County tax roll value (before
exemptions) dropped 10.51% last year - from $242.98 Billion to $217.44?
There are 500,292 single family residences in
the County worth
$120,318,983,044. They represent 57.54% of the tax base with an average
value of $240,498?
253,364 of those
received a reduction in assessed value last year averaging $144,432 and
a total of $36,593,784,694 was lopped off the tax rolls as a result?
That's 15.44% of the total.
Indian Wells has 4 of the 5 largest
homes in the county at 22,597; 20,499,; 19,188; and 18,404 SqFt. Palm
Desert snuck in #2 at 20,667?
The Palm Desert place is assessed at
$26,619,674 while the Indian Wells places are $16,611,951; 12,180,881;
11,935,337 and $11,736,743? (He doesn't say if they applied for a
reduction in value last year).
There were 36,191 appeals last year, up from
12,330 in 2008 and 2,909 in 2007. Remember those days?
In Murrieta there were 19,113 homes re-assessed
under Prop 8. Gross Value Assessment rolls dropped 14.92% from
$11,885,525,613 to $10,112,353,803?
In Temecula there were 16,110 homes
re-assessed. GVA dropped 11.33% from 13,537,557,997 to $12,003,546,129?
The top business in the County based on
Business Personal Property was Abbott Vascular. International Rectifier
came in at #14?
Well,
there's a ton more great info available - the report runs to
40 pages of numbers, charts & graphs and a terrific summary of
each of our cities. . You can find the whole shebang right here: Assessor/Clerk/Recorder
2009-2010 Annual Report.
The
Southwest
Riverside County Association of Realtors® Young Professionals Network
received their official charter today from the National
Association of Realtors®. The Young Professionals Network
is a growing group of young career-minded real estate professionals
across the
country who want to stay abreast of the latest tools, resources and
networking
opportunities.
Recognizing
that the average Realtor® is about 55, the average buyer is under 30, NAR started an aggressive recruiting
effort under President Richard Gaylord from Long Beach. The program was
officially inaugurated in October, 2007. There are fewer than 20
chartered
groups In California with the state association itself just being
chartered in
September.
Connie
Lynch, SRCAR CEO is ecstatic. “Our effort here really got its genesis
in 2008
as a pet project undertaken by Chair-elect Wes Ives. Wes has been very
supportive of this group and those efforts really paid off.”
“Their
first meeting was in May of this year and the energy has just been
amazing.
Zack Smith, Dane Wunderlich and Luz Acosta just kind of took the ball
and ran
with it and today our meetings have 20 – 30 young professionals – even
more at
their mixers. This group constitutes the future leaders of our industry
and our
community. Our Association is very proud of the work they’ve done to
get
recognized.”
Chair
Wes Ives was equally pleased to see this effort come together. “I think
it’s
just terrific. At a time when everybody in our industry is down, we’ve
got
these young people who are charged up and building good solid
businesses. The
real estate industry is undergoing some major changes today and these
kids are
going to be on the leading edge of what emerges.”
“Mentoring
and networking are big components of what we are about”, according to
2009 YPN
Chair Zack Smith. “Dane and I went to Sacramento in June for
Legislative Day
and while we were there we attended one of the first statewide YPN
meetings and
found there were hundreds of people just like us looking for this
opportunity.
The Association has been very supportive and we are really pleased to
have
reached charter status in just 6 months. We’ve got some great members.”
The
S.R.C.
Chapter of the Young
Professional Network is operated in conjunction
with the Hemet/San Jacinto Association of
Realtors®.
Membership in the group isn’t limited by age, more by mental age and
members
must be affiliated with the real estate industry – Realtor®, lender,
escrow,
home warranty, etc.. For more information on meetings and events,
please
contact SRCAR YPN at 951-894-2571 or visit SRCAR.org.. To find out more
about forming chapter in your area visit: http://www.realtor.org/ypn
In
a nod to bi-partisanship, Gov. Schwarzenegger has sent a clear message
to one his Democratic legislators. Gov. Arnie always includes a note
attached to a bill that he signs or doesn't signs letting the bills
author know why he is taking the action he did. It's usually a
boilerplate note either congratulating them on proposing a bill that
serves the people, or telling them to try harder next time.
In
addition to his boilerplate note, he attached the following missive to
a bill he didn't sign authored by San Francisco Assemblymember Tom
Ammiano. It should be noted that Ammiano was a prominent heckler of the
Gov when he attended the State Democrats Convention last month at the
request of former Speaker Willie Brown. Among other taunts, Ammiano is
reported to have called the Gov a 'liar' and shouted that he could
'kiss my Gay ass' as he walked out of the event. So here's the Gov's
message:
Now
that in itself is hardly newsworthy - except that some sharpie noticed
another message embedded in the text. And it's not that hard to find -
just one of those simple 'Read Down the Left Margin' kind of things. If
you're having trouble seeing it, the message begins with 'F' and the
second word is YOU.
When
asked about the note, the Gov's office replied:
"My goodness. What a coincidence," said
Schwarzenegger spokesman Aaron
McLear. "I suppose when you do so many vetoes, something like this is
bound to happen."
Silly
stuff - and if you want to read what the San Francisco Guardian had to
say about the matter (as if you can't imagine what the liberal blogs
are saying) just click here: Arnold
to SF - FU
So yesterday I get an
email notifying me that 'The
Truth' wants to be friends on MySpace. I was startled, to
say the least, because I thought I already knew The Truth.
Maybe not.
It's
a Zen kind of thing, knowing The Truth
is out there... and on MySpace of all places.
I thought I'd found The Truth
on ActiveRain a time or two, but it just turned out to be posts from
Lenn Harley or Ken Cook - true enough but not The Truth
apparently.
I haven't found The Truth
on FaceBook or Twitter, although there's some funny stuff on there and
I think some of it's true.
No
Truth
on YouTube or LinkedIn or Plaxo.
Certainly no Truth
in Sacramento or Washington DC.
There are over
124,000,000 Google hits for The Truth,
including one that lays claim to The Truth.com,
but they're just an anti-smoking website that runs those edgy
commercials. True maybe, but not The Truth.
I
used to discover what
I thought was The Truth
with my friend Jack Daniels but I'd always
forget it by the next morning - so it may have been an illusory truth,
not
The
Truth after all.
Carlos Castaneda clamed
to have found The Truth
using mescaline & peyote. I tried that route once and got
sicker than a dog and that's The Truth.
Since
it was just spelled The Truth
I don't know if it's The
Cosmic Truth or The
Truth and nothing but The Truth (so help me God). I
suspect that The Truth
would have a bolder signature - THE
TRUTH - with trumpets and a drumroll when you
click the link. I don't know.
I suppose I should just
click over there and find out what the hell's going on with The Truth.
But to be honest - I
don't know if I can handle The Truth.
I'm a little afraid of The Truth.
Will it be The
Honest Truth, The Ugly
Truth, The Undisputed Truth, The Naked Truth?
Thank heaven it's the
weekend - it gives me time to uncover The Truth,
deal with The
Truth and see if I can twist The Truth
to my own purposes.
When
you start your day attending two
meetings where the speakers apologize for being depressing,
the rest of your day can only improve. That was my day
today.
I
started with an early morning meeting of the Southwest
California Economic Development Corporation where we were
treated to remarks by John
Rossi, General Manager of Western
Municipal Water District. Apologizing for depressing us,
John presented a factual summary of where our state is waterwise and
how the water districts are dealing with our current situation. Having
toured the Northern end of our state water supply system last year from
Oroville Dam to LA, and having written about the issue on numerous
occasions, I believe that rather than being depressed we
should see this as a call to
action. As Rossi did when he encouraged us not only to use
our resources wisely but to engage our legislators in recognizing the
complexity of the issue and dealing with it comprehensively.
With
over 70% of SoCal water deriving from the north, another 25% from the
Colorado River and about 5% from ground water & desalinization,
it's clear where the
answer lies. Prayer. But in addition to prayer, the water
department is also working legislatively through the current 'special
session' to address both conservation and infrastructure issues. Until
and if those solutions ever bear fruit, they will also continue to squeeze their customers.
Oh, by the way, if those solutions do bear fruit, they will still
continue to squeeze their customers. Why? Because they can. And any fix
- even the inadequate Democrat proposals, will come with a big price
tag that somebody has to pay for.
Here's
a fun factoid. During the past year our primary wholesale supplier of
water, Metropolitan Water District, has instituted rate increases of nearly 40%.
These increases were designed to encourage
conservation - a very admirable goal and one that will
certainly help us deal with the problem. There's another 20% increase due in
a month or two. Why? Because our conservation efforts have been so
successful at reducing water consumption that Metropolitan has less
revenue coming in to service their bond debt and fixed expenses. So
they need to raise rates again because the first rate increases were so
successful at changing our consumption habits. Damned if you do, damned
if you don't. Is there a win-win in here anywhere?
Think
our bills will go down anytime soon? The you should have been to the EWDC
luncheon featuring Senator
John Benoit and Assemblymembers
Brian Nestande and Kevin Jeffries. The operative words
here were also 'depressing'
and/or 'frustrating' by turns, for the state's economic
outlook, any chance for real reform and for the water picture.
Assemblymember
Jeffries, who was appointed to the state special commission on water,
remains hopeful that some
compromise solution will be reached soon, possibly as
early as this coming week. He bemoaned the fact that water has become
so politicized that true progress remains elusive. While the party in
power in Sacramento thinks the problem can be solved by merely
conserving more and restoring the Delta, the minority view prefers
conservation coupled with additional infrastructure to provide
long-term solutions. Capturing and storing rainfall and snowpack for
future use, channeling current water resources without adversely
impacting the Delta Estuary, new dams, an alternative conveyance AND
continued conservation are all part of a comprehensive
solution.
Our
current drought is caused in equal
parts by nature and regulation. Our dams truly
are down by 1/2 to 2/3rds as a result of rainfall & snowpack
the past few years. It is regulatory by virtue of the fact that
judicial decree has determined the rights
of the Delta Smelt take precedence over 18 million water users, farmers
and food producers throughout the central and southern parts of the
state. There are also complex water rights issues with
people at the watershed source and with environmental groups concerned
about preservation of the Delta. It wouldn't be an easy fix even on a
level playing field - given the way our legislature operates it's a
wonder anything happens at all.
All
panelists agreed that jobs
are the answer for our state. "Not bigger government, not
more taxes, more jobs", according to Senator Benoit. "Taxes
up, jobs down, legislature ineffective", according to Jeffries.
'450,000 jobs lost this year at an average $68,000 per, 150,000 jobs
created at an average of $52,000 per - not good' according to
Nestande.
Jeffries
also pointed out that the party
in power, regardless of which party, has shown they will do darn near anything to perpetuate
that power. There was some disagreement as to whether term
limits have been effective at making our state more governable but all
agreed that term limits have resulted in shifting power from the people
who should be accountable, (our legislators), to people who are not
accountable, (staff and lobbyists). The people who make the decisions
aren't around long enough to have to deal with the consequences of
their actions so what's their motivation to work for the long-term
good? (Please keep in mind that all legislators are not altruistic by
nature. Some just love the power, some just love the perks, and some
just want to have a lobbyist mistress who wears a thong).
Agreeing
that reform must occur if California is to turn itself around in any
meaningful and sustainable way, they admit that if the legislature is not prepared to
reform itself then the public will have to do it for them.
When asked about the prospect of that occurring through Constitutional
Convention, Jeffries voiced some concern about what could result from
opening that can of worms while Nestande opined that any result
probably couldn't be much worse than the status quo.
Depressed
yet? You shouldn't be. This is California politics at its best. The
more you know, the better prepared you are to deal with it. If you're
not at the table, you'll surely be on the menu. Sometimes you might be
anyway. Of course that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
A
recent issue of Time Magazine carried an article by The Curious
Capitalist / Justin Fox
entitled
'Get Homes Off Welfare" . I'm not sure if Fox
really is a capitalist at heart, or if he's just curious about the
concept. Either way he makes a semi-literate case against the housing
industry in general and the governments support of same. He bemoans the
fact that homeowners are 'at
the receiving end of a truly staggering array of subsidies and tax
breaks', hard to put a price tag on but 'clearly in the
hundreds of billions of dollars a year.'
He claims that even with
all this aid homeowners aren't doing so well and then trots out the old
canards about real estate values falling by $4 trillion the past couple
years and the millions of foreclosures and people 'booted from their
homes'. Like that's somehow 'housings' fault. He bemoans the fact that
80% of mortgage loans this year are backed by the government and their
minions Fannie, Freddie & Ginnie at lower interest rates than
private market mortgages. He lumps in the Federal Reserve for
good measure blaming them for artificially lowering interest rates by
buying up Freddie, Fannie & Ginnie securities. All of
this, according to Fox, puts taxpayers on the hook when things go
disastrously wrong, as they so spectacularly have the past couple
years.
He goes on to slam the $8,000 first-time homebuyer tax
credit and then progresses to the mortgage interest deduction, property
tax deductions and capital gains tax breaks , which he
believes cost the government at least $100 Billion this year and every
year. With nary a nod to the economic benefit and the
hundreds of billions in revenue & jobs provided by housing,
building and ancillary industries, he goes on to complain that the bulk
of tax benefits flow to the upper end of the income spectrum and to the
coasts.
Let me get this straight
- Justin thinks homeowners
aren't taxed enough and that too many breaks go to the wealthy and the
coastal elitists. Hmmmm, I may have just figured out his
position on capitalism after all. That's curious.
Then he posits that
subsidies have a side effect that 'push
us to buy rather than rent'. These dastardly subsidies
not only push us to buy, but force us to buy more home than
we can afford & drive prices up and that subsequently
our homeownership becomes a 'ball and chain' if workers want to move
where jobs are more plentiful. He says that subsidizing
housing resulting in appreciating home values is good for sellers but
not renters or first time buyers. Maybe he should peddle that claptrap
to the 350,000 first-time homebuyers who have recently become
homeowners thanks to this subsidy.
In fairness, every point Justin raises is valid.
But as with so many in the media today, he appears to be in touch with
only 1/2 the picture, the half that supports his agenda. Or maybe he
was just on deadline and didn't have time to do an objective article,
or he just thought this would be clever or something. Who
knows.
He closes his article by
stating the obvious - that rising
prices are always good news for real estate agents, mortgage lenders
and homebuilders. (Jeez, Justin, what might you
conclude about our fortunes during the past 3 years of plummeting
prices?)
This part I love. "These groups are
powers in Washington. The National Association of Realtors gave more
money than any other group to candidates in the last election ($4
million). Its 1.1 million members can do a lot of lobbying." Justin,
you got that 100% correct right there.
Finally he refers to
Dwight Eisenhower's caution against the 'military-industrial complex'
by issuing a call-out to the 'real-estate
industrial complex'. I love that. Sure maybe
it's just little old Justin Fox, the Curious Capitalist, who has
recognized that fact, but it's a start.
I don't know about you but when it comes
to advocating on behalf of homeowners, or standing up for private
property rights and supporting the industry that drives our economy,
I'm damn proud to be part of the real-estate industrial complex.
Except, Justin, for future reference, we call ourselves 'The Realtor Party'.
Try to get it right if they give you any column inches in the future. Of course that's just my opinion... I could be wrong.
Disclaimer: ActiveRain Corp. does not necessarily endorse the real estate agents, loan officers and brokers listed on this site. These real estate profiles, blogs and blog entries are provided here as a courtesy to our visitors to help them make an informed decision when buying or selling a house. ActiveRain Corp. takes no responsibility for the content in these profiles, that are written by the members of this community.