And yet somehow the notice was read by investors who showed up and bought the sidewalks. If only the treasurer had posted the notice in a more exclusive publication with fewer readers, a high cover price, and more expensive ads. Then perhaps these residents might have read it or even better, perhaps the new owners would have never heard about it. That would have been ever better right?
3 Likes
I opened it this way but all I see is news. SAD!
2 Likes
I’m not blaming the buyers. There are property investors who specialize in snapping up foreclosures or distressed properties, and that necessarily requires being regulars on the SF Treasurer’s website or reading dead-tree publications nobody else reads in 2017. It’s not glamorous and sometimes a little unsavory, but they are not the ones who bungled.
The blame squarely belongs on the SF Treasurer’s office, which did not exert anything resembling a reasonable effort to notify the HOA. They could have mailed the residents, or even stuck a notice on a utility pole. The SFWD manages to do this somehow when a property is behind on its water payments. There’s a reason why the US constitution forbids “takings” and it doesn’t get any closer to that. Either way, SF took on a lot of liability due to Cisneros’ laziness, but this kind of wanton incompetence is sadly par for the course for the SF municipal government. The supervisors had to choose the least unpalatable alternative, and they will have to reach a likely expensive settlement with Tina Lam. Jose Cisneros’ fat $230K paycheck (more than a US Cabinet Minister) and pension are safe from any consequences of the loss the City will take for his sloth.
To quote the opening of The Hitchiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, where Earth is being demolished to make way for a hyperspace bypass:
Vogon Captain: "What do you mean you've never been to Alpha Centauri? Oh, for heaven's sake, mankind, it's only four light years away, you know. I'm sorry, but if you can't be bothered to take an interest in local affairs, that's your own lookout. Energize the demolition beam. I don't know, apathetic bloody planet, I've no sympathy at all.
Are you disappointed with BoingBoing?
The City spent over 30 years trying to contact the HOA.
For 30 years, they did.
As I and others have repeatedly pointed out, the property owners–not the City–are responsible for maintaining their address-of-record so the City can contact them.
What about a print ad? “I don’t read dead tree publications unless my group of friends reads it too”
What about a web notice? “I don’t visit that site”
What about the letters we sent? “I don’t live there anymore”
We sold your stuff “But you did nothing to let me know I was a scofflaw”
1 Like
As I and others have repeatedly pointed out, the property owners–not the City–are responsible for
maintaining their address-of-record so the City can contact them.
What about a print ad? “I don’t read dead tree publications unless my group of friends reads it too”
What about a web notice? “I don’t visit that site”
What about the letters we sent? “I don’t live there anymore”
We sold your stuff “But you did nothing to let me know I was a scofflaw”
That’s your opinion. The Supreme Court ruled otherwise in 1983, that inadequate notice is an unconstitutional violation of 14th Amendment guarantees of due process, and the flimsy kind of notice the SF Treasurer used was the exact same kind they struck down:
The SF Treasurer exposed the City to tremendous liability by his incompetence. Believe it or not, constitutional rights apply to the rich as well.
Not with Boing boing as a whole, no.
Magic Eight Ball says, “All signs point to YES!”
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
