Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
...and they bid against 70 others in a public auction... so this wasn't secret or under the table.
I have no idea what's up for public auction around me RIGHT NOW.
I'm guessing it got missed by the residents just that way. People are busy. The town where I live does have to mail the residents letters if there's going to be any sort of hearing that affects the property owners in a given area and I'm really surprised that SF doesn't have similar rules because selling the very street in front of those houses does impact every resident.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
I doubt that Pelosi and Feinstein living there is cause to label it as a liberal enclave. I think that "it's in San Francisco" is more of an indicator than anything else.
Most of that city is liberal.
True, although the liberal points between those two alone sets a much higher overall liberal score.
what? I thought all libs were lazy bums who didn't want to work.
When I lived and worked in San Fran, I worked closely with two very liberal/progressive guys. One went to Swarthmore College, and since I grew up near there, I knew EXACTLY where he was coming from. They were two of the hardest working people I knew, and I liked them a lot. We rarely talked politics, as I don't like to mix that with work. They both were very well intended, and just had a social conscience. I may have disagreed with them, but I respected their intentions, and goals.
You can make this up: the SF liberals are unhappy that their GATED community street has a new owner. Here are some suggestions:
Take down the wall around the community. A wall is racist.
Allow homeless people to live in the street. Refugees are welcome!
Let's not call the cops in case of a crime: make it a sanctuary street.
I posted this in the SF forum yesterday. I find it absolutely hilarious. Rich weren't paying their taxes, whining that the address changed. Boo hoo, now you're owned by a young Asian couple from San Jose. Hahahahahahahahahaha!
The sale occurred in April 2015. I'm not even sure if there's any legal recourse left?
A bit of online research indicates that in CA, the redemption period for delinquent property taxes ends at the close of business on the day before the day the tax sale occurs. The day after the redemption period expires, the tax sale occurs, and once the gavel comes down, the only recourse for the foreclosed taxpayer will be to have the sale set aside for some procedural irregularity. (In contrast to other states, where the foreclosed taxpayer may have some period of months or years after the tax sale in which to redeem the property by reimbursing the buyer at the tax sale for the back taxes, penalties and interest.)
Bear in mind that in CA, a property cannot be sold for back taxes until five years after said taxes become delinquent. Apparently, the taxing authority in this case waited not just five years, but about 30 years before they posted this property for tax sale. The taxing authority could have legally foreclosed long before they in fact did. The HOA says that the tax bills were being sent to the office of an attorney the HOA had used decades ago, but you'd think that at some point during the intervening thirty years that someone at the HOA would wonder, "Why haven't we gotten a tax bill from the city/county recently?"
The foreclosed property consists of the street and other limited common elements of this small, very exclusive neighborhood. The street is gated with a guarded entrance, manned 24/7/365. No doubt the HOA collects assessments from the residents to pay for this service, and the HOA probably has the power of foreclosure and sale for the purpose of collecting delinquent HOA assessments.
And this same HOA, which would probably have no compunction whatsoever about posting a property for auction where the homeowner was delinquent in paying their assessments, itself manages to lose the entire property they were charged with adminstering for failure to pay a measly $14/yr. worth of local ad valorem taxes.
Truly...it is to laugh.
Barring some irregularity in the sale (and none is apparent in the article), it is very unlikely that this sale will be set aside.
Come on, that's not hypocrisy. These are false equivalencies... how does a gated community = gated COUNTRY? Are you saying liberals are also hypocritical if they have a fence in front of their house? A garage to protect their car? Iphone case? Most liberals who oppose the wall don't do it because they don't like the idea of protecting the border... it's because they don't think the wall is a cost-effective or effective way to do it.
Wait.
Wait..
Wait...
Wait....
Wait.....
(sorry, but liberals wanting to protect the border is almost as funny as the article itself)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
