Anyone interested in CRE talk?
- Thread starter hotcoffee
- Start date
Jbeckman
New Member
Good, the bad and the ugly...
No one put the "light up" at the Appeal/Post office entrance...that is WILL ALWAYS BE, nothing less than, doesn't matter if you beg, can not be done unless it meets state/federal guidelines for the light or someone too many lives are lost at the intersection from crashes.
Security is in the covenants...but heck so was racist/limits on who could live in CRE - that didn't require a vote...it was just wrong. And you could call security "the young people standing at the lake/beach, Sat and Sun, from Memorial Day to Labor Day " security and still meet the requirements - for $10 an hour. No truck, no vehicle, no insurance for the car, etc.
Stop trying to BUILD, start letting go. People CANNOT afford more. The only plan they want is a "fazeout plan" to reduce costs and stuff for upkeep. Heck take a vote - and I bet you could sell the campgrounds. Great place to start.
No one put the "light up" at the Appeal/Post office entrance...that is WILL ALWAYS BE, nothing less than, doesn't matter if you beg, can not be done unless it meets state/federal guidelines for the light or someone too many lives are lost at the intersection from crashes.
Security is in the covenants...but heck so was racist/limits on who could live in CRE - that didn't require a vote...it was just wrong. And you could call security "the young people standing at the lake/beach, Sat and Sun, from Memorial Day to Labor Day " security and still meet the requirements - for $10 an hour. No truck, no vehicle, no insurance for the car, etc.
Stop trying to BUILD, start letting go. People CANNOT afford more. The only plan they want is a "fazeout plan" to reduce costs and stuff for upkeep. Heck take a vote - and I bet you could sell the campgrounds. Great place to start.
hey while you guys are politicing, and making all these unkept promises, can you also promise to do something about the homeowners/renters, that allow their grass to grow 2 feet high, and continuously litter their yards with trash, and debris, and are not held accountable for the upkeep of their property? I have neighbors who have an electrical cord stretched across the street, and are using another home to provide electricity to theirs, and have been running a generator for weeks! Run down camper, crap and debris laying everywhere. Yes, a lovely place to live....and no possible chance of me selling my home to get out.
thats because i have actually met you and wouldnt trust you to be responsible for picking the dog crap up from my yard let alone run a multimillion dollar HOA.I had written in a lot of sources where you could check the information I put in here.... but I decided to take it out....
Plenty of people know that what I wrote is the truth.... Geeze I've been online here for years.... and you've been giving me grief for years.... it's all documented somewhere....
so you ran for commissioner and lost, then others who were elected did somthing. How is that YOUR accomplishment?It's ok if you jab me again... I know you love me.... just as much as you hate Cusick....
So... I didn't win Commissioner.... I made my point and eventually we got SHUR funds through the Commissioners I campaigned against....and then county SHUR funds got cut and our funding went down....
I know I have a lot of people who don't agree with me.... but so be it.... I can't please you all.... the items I put in the post are my accomplishments... Anyone who posts as much as I do has to be careful to tell it like it is cause what you right is always out there somewhere....
Like I said... Travis has done a good job.... We have different philosophies...
He likes Security.... I think the Security force at CRE is a waste of money and the members should be allowed to vote to save it or terminate it....
He likes running CRE as an HOA.... I would like to move us to a POA.... even if it would take a change in the law....
Becky Tice
Again, i encourage anyone who thinks that Becky Tice would be a good choice for any office to have a conversation with her first.
OmyGawd
Active Member
What do you expect - quiet time? They are allowed to talk about anything they want, it is their right.
Oh well, they are voicing opinions amongst friends. Too bad you were so offended. 
msqtech
Citizen
STD as it affects the tax rate
we in CRE pay the highest effective property tax rate in the county do to the perpetual STD. We should be able to stop it simply base upon its inability to be temporary. It will never end as there is no way to maintain all the improvements it is designed to give us. Funding levels of the roads maintenance budget will never cover a fully paved CRE. And it will take over 50 years to achieve that. So if the STD isn't stopped we will be continually taxed at rates above all other County residents. That should be enough to stop it. Additionally we need to compare the cost of these non standard roads with that of the county and see if we are getting a good bargain from our volunteer managers.
we in CRE pay the highest effective property tax rate in the county do to the perpetual STD. We should be able to stop it simply base upon its inability to be temporary. It will never end as there is no way to maintain all the improvements it is designed to give us. Funding levels of the roads maintenance budget will never cover a fully paved CRE. And it will take over 50 years to achieve that. So if the STD isn't stopped we will be continually taxed at rates above all other County residents. That should be enough to stop it. Additionally we need to compare the cost of these non standard roads with that of the county and see if we are getting a good bargain from our volunteer managers.
So what is the solution? Go back to where we were 15 years ago with mostly gravel roads?
msqtech
Citizen
The solution is to come up with payment for the County Standard roads paid for by all county residents eqiitably just like we contribute to all the roads within the county and state and country within which we reside. Additionally use the funding sources that are provided for not an additional unfair tax against a small group of land owners. That is the appropriate solution.
NorthBeachPerso
Honorary SMIB
Then dissolve the POA or incorporate. That will be how you accomplish the above. And if you incorporate you still will be paying for your own roads, the County doesn't have a piece of the roads in an incorporated municipality and the State only has the the State numbered roads.
This is a direct quote taken from a Circuit Court Transcript case # C-09-706 in Calvert county involving an argument over the Chesapeake Ranch Special taxing district:
County Atty Demedis: ""I don't think due process requires that the people in this subdivision be given the opportunity to vote as to whether or not their board of directors makes the petition. They do have the power to vote those people out if they don't like it."
The "petition" is the petition for the special taxing district and the appointment of the POACRE Board as the beneficiary of the tax proceeds.
The argument, which was not decided by the court, was based on the fact that the law in Calvert County incorporates by reference the bylaws of the HOA for the purposes of voting and due process. The problem with that is that at any time, and for any arbitrary reason including fines, fees, dues, and attorney fees being unpaid, property owners are denied their right to vote. That is a prohited version of a poll tax.
Until someone with deep enough pockets can pursue an expensive court battle to correct this violation of the constitution born of an unholy alliance between the POACRE BOD and the County Commissioners, and maybe even sending someone to jail over it, this is how it will be.
The other problem with this statement is that it is confiscating money from private property owners for the benefit of a private corporation. Now some believe that POACRE is owned by the property owners. It is not. It is a stand alone corporate person. The properties it owns are owned soley by the corporate person "Property Owners Association of Chesapeake Ranch Estates" which is a misnomer and terribly wrong. No individual has any property right interest or equity interest in any of the properties owned by POACRE.
An analogy would be if Six Flags were to be able to levy a tax on your private property, force its collection on you at the peril of being hauled into court, and in exchange you were given the "privilege" of having access to its air park and stables.
It would be a whole different story if the "property owners" in CRE actually had equity interest in the common properties the way the HOA law assumes it would be. It would be a whole different story if POACRE were a property trust corporation. But it isn't. It isn't accountable to anyone for anything that it can do "legally".
County Atty Demedis: ""I don't think due process requires that the people in this subdivision be given the opportunity to vote as to whether or not their board of directors makes the petition. They do have the power to vote those people out if they don't like it."
The "petition" is the petition for the special taxing district and the appointment of the POACRE Board as the beneficiary of the tax proceeds.
The argument, which was not decided by the court, was based on the fact that the law in Calvert County incorporates by reference the bylaws of the HOA for the purposes of voting and due process. The problem with that is that at any time, and for any arbitrary reason including fines, fees, dues, and attorney fees being unpaid, property owners are denied their right to vote. That is a prohited version of a poll tax.
Until someone with deep enough pockets can pursue an expensive court battle to correct this violation of the constitution born of an unholy alliance between the POACRE BOD and the County Commissioners, and maybe even sending someone to jail over it, this is how it will be.
The other problem with this statement is that it is confiscating money from private property owners for the benefit of a private corporation. Now some believe that POACRE is owned by the property owners. It is not. It is a stand alone corporate person. The properties it owns are owned soley by the corporate person "Property Owners Association of Chesapeake Ranch Estates" which is a misnomer and terribly wrong. No individual has any property right interest or equity interest in any of the properties owned by POACRE.
An analogy would be if Six Flags were to be able to levy a tax on your private property, force its collection on you at the peril of being hauled into court, and in exchange you were given the "privilege" of having access to its air park and stables.
It would be a whole different story if the "property owners" in CRE actually had equity interest in the common properties the way the HOA law assumes it would be. It would be a whole different story if POACRE were a property trust corporation. But it isn't. It isn't accountable to anyone for anything that it can do "legally".
Last edited:
ReadingTheNews
Active Member
Thanks for weighing in, ex.
Sure we have the power to vote them out. Problem is, the next group that comes into office sees dollar signs that the STD generates, and they'll ask (practically beg?) the comissioners to approve the next one. IMO, I really don't think anyone that gets voted in will want to stop the STD.
And it's absolute horse poop.
Sure we have the power to vote them out. Problem is, the next group that comes into office sees dollar signs that the STD generates, and they'll ask (practically beg?) the comissioners to approve the next one. IMO, I really don't think anyone that gets voted in will want to stop the STD.
And it's absolute horse poop.
Thanks for weighing in, ex.
Sure we have the power to vote them out. Problem is, the next group that comes into office sees dollar signs that the STD generates, and they'll ask (practically beg?) the comissioners to approve the next one. IMO, I really don't think anyone that gets voted in will want to stop the STD.
And it's absolute horse poop.
You went right past the point. The STD is employing an illegal process of denying persons to vote for their taxing Board of Directors by and through an unlawful use of the "member not in good standing" provision in the bylaws. That provision bars taxpaying persons in the subdivision from voting in a POACRE election. When you are dealing with taxation and due process, that is the thing that will eventually destroy political careers and possibly send people to jail.
No ...oh well ... about it.
ReadingTheNews
Active Member
I thought I understood what you were getting at. The - oh well - was because I focused on the part about about STD approval/defeat being in the commissioner's hands, coupled with the fact that whatever officers are voted in for POACRE will most likely back whatever the commissioners decide - as long as the STD continues.
Hope that clarifies it.
And it's is unfortunate that the deep pockets don't go deep enough......
Hope that clarifies it.
And it's is unfortunate that the deep pockets don't go deep enough......
The approval or disapproval of the STD is in the hands of the members in good standing and who they put into office. If the homeowners don't care enough to involve themselves in the process of the STD through involvement, they will get exactly what they deserve.
hotcoffee
New Member
If 99% of the members voted to dissolve the POA then the other 1% would be open to going to court to take the amenities.
I would rather change the HOA into a true POA that pays dividends instead of costing us money.....
Even if we were to follow the Municipality route.... the amenities could very well become an income source.... North Beach and Chesapeake Beach are good examples of this.
So we turn our amenities into something everyone wants to enjoy.... and only members can reap the financial benefits..... wouldn't that make sense? It would take a lot of work... not to mention some legislative and legal costs.... but I think it is a good direction for us to consider....
That is so absolutely not true. If any majority voted to dissolve, it would be dissolved and no other member would have standing to challenge it. POACRE owns all the amenities "in fee simple". That means that no property owner owns or has a money interest in those amenities. They are completely disposable be whoever is in control of the corporation. Control of the corporation is a matter of a simple bylaw amendment. That is why a couple of certain lawyers and property owners are so interested in controlling things from the shadows.
hotcoffee
New Member
The Task Force formed by the Maryland General Assembly to Study the Infrastructure Needs of Private Communities in Calvert County studied that particular question.
Let me ask you the question a different way.... Cheasapeake Ranch Estates owns common property valued in the millions of dollars. If the HOA [which should actually be a POA] were dissolved, what would happen to the land?
If the land is covenanted to be permanently in "open space" with strict language on what can and can't be done with the land, and that any property owner in the CRE subdivision has unobstructed access, enjoyment, ingress, and egress without penalty or fee applied; what does it matter who owns it?
This discussion is really moot because it cannot happen this way. The way it should go down is if the POACRE Board first would agree to correct the deeds for all the amenities to say that each and every property owner is an owner in equity and that POACRE is operating in the capacity of a property trust. That way, if POACRE should dissolve or be dissolved, the property owners get first right of refusal on recovering the amenities. This does NOT change the HOA status, but actually cements it.
Right now, POACRE is operating in the capacity of a land developer owner of the subdivision as if they had purchased CRC, Inc. and not just the amenities. This is the fundamental flaw in their documents and the reason they can never get reconciled with their base.
hotcoffee
New Member
And this is why I keep saying we should not be an HOA... we should be a POA...
You present an interesting concept here....