We spent last week talking about the mailer attack on Sue Greenwald by a third party, and this past week talking about a mailer attack on Judge Dan Maguire by his electoral opponent, but one of the nastiest fights is one between incumbent Duane Chamberlain and Woodland Mayor Artemio Pimentel for the Fifth Supervisorial District.
Most of our reading audience will not be able to vote in this race, which is why we have not covered it extensively as we have the judgeship race or the Davis City Council race.
However, it has been every bit as ugly, if not worse. After all, campaign workers came to blows following an April 26 campaign forum in which a volunteer for the incumbent supervisor and the campaign manager for the mayor’s campaign erupted over the allegations of removing lawn signs.
Woodland Police cited alleged battery and petty theft, but the DA’s office two weeks ago made the determination not to file charges.
“We have concluded our review of the reports surrounding the events at, and before, last week’s community candidate forum and have determined that the incidents do not warrant criminal prosecution at the present time,” said Michael J. Cabral, assistant chief deputy district attorney, to the Daily Democrat.
He added, “However, the theft of campaign materials is a serious issue that can have a significant impact on the integrity and reliability of our elections. Any systematic theft of campaign materials will be prosecuted to the fullest extent permitted by law.”
Then we have the scurrilous attacks by a Woodland blogger who attempted to seize on the Davis City Council controversy by attempting to spuriously tie Mr. Pimentel to the plumbers and pipefitters unions.
Dino Gay wrote: “Connect the dots to Lois Wolk who ‘continues to endorse Art Pimentel for county supervisor.’ Local 447 contributed $5,000 to the Pimentel campaign, the highest contributor who attained Pimentel’s ‘Farmers Level.’ The union will undoubtedly benefit from the City of Woodland’s surface water project… a project which has met opposition from Greenwald and the City of Davis.”
That’s pretty tortured logic in trying to attack Mr. Pimentel because he received $5000 allegedly from the Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 447.
Ironically, many of the attacks have focused on developments by Paul Petrovich, and yet Mr. Petrovich is a listed endorser of the Duane Chamberlain campaign.
Both candidates have assets and liabilities. Mr. Chamberlain has been an unwavering protector of rural interests and has opposed development of farmland. That has put him into being an ally with many on the left who seek to limit development.
However, the county is in trouble and the bigger issues may be social services and law enforcement – particularly realignment issues. Mr. Chamberlain is unapologetic at supporting jail expansion and opposing more research-based efforts at reform. He is also an unabashed supporter of Clinton Parish.
For his part, Mr. Pimentel told the Vanguard that he supports the current general plan including its provision with no county-based growth near Davis.
The Daily Democrat, in an excellent op-ed on Friday, distilled the race in giving their endorsement to Mr. Pimentel.
They wrote: “Being a voice for farmers on the Yolo County Board of Supervisors is all well and good, and in the race for the 5th District post on June 5, few would dispute that incumbent Duane Chamberlain has been a strong voice for farmers. But being a staunch supporter on any issue amounts to nothing for an elected official if the votes aren’t there, and Chamberlain has too often been the lone-person out on countywide issues.”
They add: “In contrast, Woodland Mayor Art Pimentel has shown during his eight years on the City Council he is willing to listen, willing to compromise, and willing to find effective solutions to community problems.”
“It may distress Yolo’s farmers in the 5th District, but we have to be pragmatic about the fact the district has changed with the addition of a significant portion of Woodland as a result of redistricting. This means Woodland’s voice must also be heard in addition to those living in the county. Pimentel is in the best position to hear all voices, and work to balance the diverse needs of the county’s largest district.”
“Pimentel, 33, directs a program at Woodland Community College that helps poor and first-generation students. And while we are adverse to so-called ‘professional’ politicians, we must acknowledge that Pimentel has been involved in politics since serving as student president of Sacramento State more than a decade ago, which gives him experience at finding compromise and working toward specific goals,” they add.
They write that the political differences between the two men are minimal. We are not that sure. They write: “Both agree that growth should occur in the county’s four cities and not the rural areas, both acknowledge the need for more jobs. Pimentel is stronger on the need for Woodland to have a stable source of water for the future. Chamberlain is more focused on law enforcement.”
They argue that the distinction between the two is approach, and that Mr. Chamberlain is more contentious, particularly “in his desire to stand fast on ag issues, which is a fine thing if the votes are there. However, being unwilling to find compromise means – in the end – being ineffective at representing agriculture and farmers.”
The Daily Democrat writes: “The Yolo County Farm Bureau this week endorsed Chamberlain for re-election citing his ‘fiscal conservatism and responsibility’ and his opposition of unspecified ‘budgetary actions’ that ‘the board approved by votes of 4-1 or 3-2.’ We don’t know what those actions were, but they were approved nonetheless, so Chamberlain’s standing firm didn’t do any good.”
They add, “We don’t want a supervisor who supports only rural residents (be they farmers or laborers). We don’t want a supervisor who supports only city residents (be they merchants or office workers). We want a supervisor who supports the best interests of the community at large. That would be a more productive approach, and that’s why we’re supporting Pimentel.”
From our standpoint, here is a critical difference: “Both are concerned about the state’s prison realignment that is sending lower-level inmates back to counties. Chamberlain puts a priority on law enforcement, while Pimentel places more emphasis on job training and education programs.”
We sat in the chambers during the long discussion on how to proceed on AB 109. After some very thoughtful commentary by his colleagues, Mr. Chamberlain simply said, “I support law enforcement.”
What did that mean? It means he was going to vote how law enforcement recommended.
We have nothing against law enforcement, but there were some nuances to that discussion and ideas put forward in a thoughtful manner by several of his colleagues, but Mr. Chamberlain was not interested in discussing or considering them.
As I told someone this week, in the next four years, we need to worry far more about what happens with county-level social services and AB 109, than we do about growth on Davis’ periphery that everyone has said is not going to happen in the near future anyway.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
When I read the Daily Democrat’s editorial I was amazed at how their arguments against Chamberlain were the same ones I have been making against Sue, especially the part about standing fast but losing by not getting the votes you need to win the debate.
I noticed that as well Toad.
Both candidates have their baggage, to wit:
From the Vanguard:
[quote]Woodland Mayor Art Pimentel told the Daily Democrat that he “is hopeful the community can move on. He is pleased with the outcome of the federal Gutierrez investigation.”
“I’m glad a thorough investigation has been done by the state and the federal government on this particular issue,” he told the paper. “I know there was a lot of concern from the community regarding the unfortunate incident.”[/quote]
Or try this link for alleged controversial Pimentel ties to developer Petrovich: [url]http://www.woodlandrecordtv.com/files/WoodlandRecordJAN10WEB.pdf[/url]
See Sac Bee article:
[url]http://www.sacbee.com/2012/02/27/4293208/two-well-known-candidates-to-vie.html[/url]
Elaine: it seems you have stopped posting your own opinions and now either paste links or cheerleader for other opinions. What gives are you now the decider of all things right and relevant?
Spurious? Tortured logic?
It is a FACT that Pimentel accepted $5,000 from Local 44, it’s not “alleged.” Check the FPPC Form 460s. Lois Wolk endorses Pimentel. In their year-end legislative report, the plumbers and pipe fitters published a list of actions taken by the legislature. They stated, “The 2011 legislative year was one of the most productive for California Legislative Conference of the Plumbing, Heating and Piping Industry (CLC) member contractors in recent memory.” Wolk is the author of two bills (SB489, SB835) included in their list of highlights.
Speaking of FPPC forms, why don’t you mention Pimentel’s convenient “inattention to detail” when it comes to Form 700s (statements of economic interests for elected officials)? Pimentel was on the deeds to three Woodland properties in 2005… two of which were eventually foreclosed upon and the third was short-sold to avoid foreclosure. Two were not reported to the Fair Political Practices Commission, nor was his employment at a bank (also a requirement of Form 700). In fact, he was put on the deeds of two of his parents’ properties and then was taken off… all this because of a refinancing scheme. So not only did Pimentel fail to add the acquisitions of real property, he failed to add the disposal of the properties (also a requirement of the FPPC).
This is all fact. The acquisitions and disposals of 18176 Gadwall and 921 Shiloh were not disclosed in any of Art Pimentel’s 2005 Form 700s as required by the Fair Political Practices Commission. What was he hiding? Also not disclosed in the Form 700 for that year was his income from Yolo Community Bank. What was he hiding?
If your readers are truly interested in Pimentel… which I think they might be because you devoted an article about him… then they should be be able to know the truth about him. They can access FACTS and irrefutable evidence of Pimentel’s misdeeds through the following three articles at WoodlandRecord.com (which is not a blog):
[b]Foreclosure doesn’t fall far from the tree, Pimentel and family caught in mortgage games[/b]
http://woodlandrecord.com/foreclosure-doesnt-fall-far-from-the-tree-pimentel-and-family-caught-in-m-p2620-1.htm
[b]Pimentel’s lack of reporting to FPPC reveals a twisted tale[/b]
http://woodlandrecord.com/pimentels-lack-of-reporting-to-fppc-reveals-a-twisted-tale-p2591-1.htm
[b]Pimentel is poster boy for local foreclosure trends[/b]
http://woodlandrecord.com/pimentel-is-poster-boy-for-local-foreclosure-trends-p2552-1.htm
Last notes:
Petrovich is NOT on the list of Chamberlain endorsements. Speaking of endorsement lists, have you noticed that Pimentel chooses not to include “organizations” (like Local 447) that support him? Nor does he include individual citizens.
And I haven’t even discussed the City of Woodland’s budget, another atrocity. I see you conveniently didn’t mention it either. The city budgets for FY 2010/11, 2011/12, 2012/13 are NOT available to the public. Pimentel has continued to say the city’s budget is healthy and that the budgets ARE available. Try emailing the new city manager or even Pimentel and try to get the budgets. The city, by its own admission, may be bankrupt by 2015.
“It is a FACT that Pimentel accepted $5,000 from Local 44, it’s not “alleged.””
I’m sure is but the rest is tenuous and strained if your linking Pimentel to the mailer
Never linked Pimentel to the mailer. When, where did I ever say that, Brian?
You are playing words games. The only reason to bring up the mailer and the unions endorsement was to link them. It is a commonly used guilt by association technique. That you don’t explicitly state is besides the point and actually undermines your plausible deniability defense your are attempting to use. On me.
No word games. Just plain facts. Here’s the link to which David refers:
http://woodlandrecord.com/pimentels-plumbers-and-pipefitters-union-caught-in-campaign-dregs-p2612-1.htm
I linked Pimentel to the Local 447. I did not link him to the mailer.
Don’t put words in my mouth. Focus on the facts. Read the three articles about Pimentel and try to discredit any of it.
And the title of the article was what?
[b]Pimentel’s plumbers and pipefitters union caught in campaign dregs[/b]
Does that connect Pimentel to Local 447? Yes. Does it implicate Pimentel in the mailer? No. It clearly states that Pimentel’s supporters were participants in a sloppy campaign piece. You can associate the ilk of the aforementioned if you like, I’m fine with that.
Simple facts and basic English. Again, don’t try to put words in my mouth.
Just like Greenwald, Wolk, Rexroad and the rest, you focus on semantics to avert the the facts laid out in these articles:
[b]Foreclosure doesn’t fall far from the tree, Pimentel and family caught in mortgage games[/b]
http://woodlandrecord.com/foreclosure-doesnt-fall-far-from-the-tree-pimentel-and-family-caught-in-m-p2620-1.htm
[b]Pimentel’s lack of reporting to FPPC reveals a twisted tale[/b]
http://woodlandrecord.com/pimentels-lack-of-reporting-to-fppc-reveals-a-twisted-tale-p2591-1.htm
[b]Pimentel is poster boy for local foreclosure trends[/b]
http://woodlandrecord.com/pimentel-is-poster-boy-for-local-foreclosure-trends-p2552-1.htm
“Pimentel’s plumbers and pipefitters union caught in campaign dregs”
Apparently you want to be obtuse. So the link goes from Pimentel to the union to the mailer. Thus without stating it you have implicitly linked the mailer to Pimentel. And you retain plausible deniability. But don’t act like I’m stupid, you know, I know and the American people know it was intentional
Obtuse? I gave you the link to the source that you could not provide. I am very clear about linking Pimentel to the Local 447. And if that isn’t clear to you, I’ve just stated that I did not link Pimentel to the mailer.
Read the articles, then blow smoke.
I read the articles. It’s amateur stuff. Could been done by the people who did Parishs flier. Long on innuendo and leaps to conclusion. Very little of substance.
I knew you couldn’t refute any of it.
There is nothing there to refute. I’m not accessing the records as to whether or not Pimentel had his home foreclosed, but even if he did, so what? It’s not clear from the rather sloppy writing what you are trying to prove with all of that.
Did you ask Art or any of the people involved what the story was?
All the facts are in the reports.
He didn’t have his home foreclosed. He short-sold it to avoid foreclosure. He stopped making payments although he had a household income of $143,000 per year and made stock investments between $8,000 to $40,000.
The answer to your question, “So what?” about his home – – that is only one part of a lump sum – – is in the reports.
It’s easy… just read them, check the verifications of the facts, and you’ll understand why he shouldn’t be allowed to continue his political career as a supervisor. It’s not rocket science.
So in other words, you never asked him or anyone else what happened.
David: You asked, “Did you ask Art or any of the people involved what the story was?”
If you mean did I ask Art for an explanation for all the facts I strung together… yes. With each article I gave Art the opportunity to comment and to explain. He chose not to comment, nor explain why he didn’t report his acquisitions and disposals of two real properties in 2005. He chose not to comment, nor explain why he didn’t report his employment with the bank during that time.
I also asked his endorsers Wolk, Yamada, Rexroad, Saylor, Dote, Stallard, Marble (who also endorses Chamberlain), and Davies for their comments on each article. Only Dote and Rexroad replied. Dote did the same thing as you, only focus on his 1305 Fremont home and wondered what the big deal is. Rexroad gave me information about Form 700, and then later opined that my inclusion of Arts family in the reports is not acceptable. Because of their complicity in the refinancing schemes, I believe that making a report about the family involvement is, indeed, acceptable.
Just an FYI, I posted the previous comment (at 12:15) without seeing your question (at 12:09).
Regarding your comment (at 12:24), “So in other words, you never asked him or anyone else what happened.”
That is false. I did ask him to comment on my findings. See my answer (at 12:36).
You didn’t ask him, you posted something inflammatory and asked him to respond. There’s a big difference.
Dino said . . .
[i]”Obtuse? I gave you the link to the source that you could not provide. I am very clear about linking Pimentel to the Local 447. And if that isn’t clear to you, I’ve just stated that I did not link Pimentel to the mailer.”[/i]
Yes Dino . . . obtuse. You did the same thing David has done each time he includes the picture of Don Saylor with Bruce West standing next to him. The linkage you have drawn between Pimental and the mailer is not in words, but it is very clear and very real.
Matt: Even David did not suggest I was linking Pimentel to the mailer. Read David’s article again. Read my source again – that is simply a link to the Davis Enterprise article with an editor’s note at the end. And read my words here. I did not, and do not, link Pimentel to the mailer. You can keep crying about it all you want.
David: Perhaps in your way, you can get some answers from Pimentel. The facts remain.
Dino, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck and waddles like a duck, it is a duck. You need to stand up tall and be a man and accept the fact that you created a literary device that made it incredibly easy to take the next step beyond your actual words.
When your wife gets mad at you for staring at another woman’s assets it isn’t because her brain has stopped at the point where those assets end.
For the record, I am a long time supporter of Duane Chamberlain, and am just beginning to come up to speed on Art Pimental. So if there were any candidate I might actually shed any tears for, it would be Duane.
I agree. Facts are facts. And your analogy is poor.
Stand up tall and be a man? Really? Do you actually think I would change my words – – which have been crystal clear — because of your sophomoric “literary device?” Again, even David did not suggest I was linking Pimentel to the mailer.
I’ve enjoyed the platform to reveal truths about Pimentel. I know it wasn’t David’s intent, but I’m glad to have the opportunity to spread the word.
Here’s my email if you want to further discuss my character: dinogay@sbcglobal.net
Unbelievable.
“Foreclosure doesn’t fall far from the tree, Pimentel and family caught in mortgage games”
So he got out from under bad real estate debts and moved to where he could run for supervisor. Sounds smart to me. Better than the people who liquidated all their assets trying to save their upside down mortgages and then still lost their homes.
Attacking someone about real estate deals that went bad in Woodland you might as well attack the entire town. I’m sorry that dog won’t hunt.
“I’m sorry that dog won’t hunt.”
Toad, maybe that’s why he calls him self Dino.
Real juvenile, Matt. Let’s make fun of his name. If you knew Dino you’d know that that’s been his name since childhood. Agree or disagree, you can do better than sink to cheap shots.
I was sent a link to this story and while I typically do not voice my opinion on Blogs. I do however feel that I must address some of the comments on here.
David M. Greenwald
05/19/12 – 12:06 PM …
Dino: I’ll jump in here, what is there to refute. I’m not accessing the records as to whether or not Pimentel had his home foreclosed, but even if he did, so what?
That is a pretty big so what to me Mr. Greenwald
I currently pay 2,243.65 per month payment on my house and have done so for the last 15 years. The value of my home is way below the price on which I paid for it. Just stating the facts here. So do I care about the fact the Mayor of Woodland Art Pimentel intentionally short sold his home to move for political reasons?
You bet I do! You Mr.Greenwald says who cares.
I realize that this is purely hypothetical but what if I and other responsible homeowners just walked away from the houses. Where do you think that would leave us?
What really gets to me is that for some reason you think that it is okay to do that and yet complain when social services are being cut. Well how do you think those programs are paid for? By Business owners and homeowners and people who are working to contribute and that is done when the economy is moving not while homes are being walked away from.
We already know the answer to that.
Mr. Toad makes the statement
“So he got out from under bad real estate debts and moved to where he could run for supervisor. Sounds smart to me. Better than the people who liquidated all their assets trying to save their upside down mortgages and then still lost their homes.”
The real question is. [b]How come that people never talk about the fact that people bought houses they couldn’t afford and spent more than they should have? [/b]
[b][u]In the case of Mayor Pimentel he clearly could afford his house payment. He and his wife make $140,000.00 per year Have you seen the mansion he is living in now? Pretty big step up.
[/u][/b]
For Mr. Pimentel to send me a mailer blaming the bank for his financial mess was the last straw for me personally. I originally thought I would vote for him however when he chose to blame the bank and not be honest about what he did my vote went to Mr. Chamberlain.
Mr. Chamberlain may be the lone vote as you state. However, [b]Mr Chamberlain has something that Art Pimentel will never have. Honesty and Integrity. That is what we need and deserve as a representative for any elected official to be.[/b]
I’m sorry, but am I the only one who thinks Art’s financial and real estate history [i]does[/i] matter? I mean, hello, we’re going to be trusting this man with the county district’s budget. If Art can’t manage his own money, how can we expect the man to handle millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money?
Let’s get real here, people. The man had to short sell his home (while his household income was approximately $143,000)… before going to Bora Bora. Does that sound like someone who is financially responsible? Someone who knows how to “live within [their] means?” NO. If I was in tough financial times and had trouble paying for my housing, I don’t think I would be going to Bora Bora.
[u]Face the facts[/u]: Art’s a two-faced, slick-talking politician. He advocates fiscal responsibility, but cannot show any himself. Why does Art have to comment on Mr. Gay’s article? The [i]facts[/i] (from public record) are pretty straightforward enough.
He sounds like a man who knows how to cut his losses. The hardest thing to do is sell at a loss. Its even got a term, loss aversion. It takes financial smarts and nerves of steel to do it. In So. California there are stories of people buying second homes on the same block at half the price and then walking away on their first homes.
Jagmeister said “I currently pay 2,243.65 per month payment on my house and have done so for the last 15 years. The value of my home is way below the price on which I paid for it.”
Yes, but you lived in it for 15 years. Do you have any equity? Have you thought about refinancing at these historic low rates? Did you borrow out equity? Boy, Woodland really got hit hard.
Why shouldn’t somebody do what is in their own best financial interest? You had bankers and real estate people telling you prices would never go down. Guess the bankers were wrong and there is absolutely nothing wrong with those who bought that bill of goods walking away from bad investments. Why should somebody keep paying interest on a balance that is not going to be recoverable. Your arguments here make no sense. Your idea that somebody who drank the kool-aid shouldn’t wake up and smell the coffee is a non-starter with me.
Shellhammer said . . .
[i]”Real juvenile, Matt. Let’s make fun of his name. If you knew Dino you’d know that that’s been his name since childhood. Agree or disagree, you can do better than sink to cheap shots.”[/i]
It wan’t a cheap shot. It was the acknowledgement of a pun. Sorry you couldn’t recognize humor when you saw it.
P.S. Shellhammer, if you know the Flintstones theme song there is a second pun in there as well.
“He stopped making payments”
Dino, can you provide us how you know he stopped making payments?
Whether or not Mr.Pimentel’s financial maneuverings with regard to his properties were “a smart move” or underhanded manipulation is something we are not likely to ever know since it likely depends on details of his personal finances and payments that we are unlikely to ever see. What is of much more concern to me is whether or not he made full disclosure of his financial dealings as required by law.
I do not buy the argument of “oversight” with regard to financial records of public figures. I know that I am not sophisticated enough to financially handle all the legal requirements involving my relatively modest assets. That is why I hire a lawyer, accountant, and financial advisor.
I expect that if a public official does not do the same, and makes an “oversight” of this type, that is fair game for considering whether or not they are capable of making huge financial decisions involving taxpayer money.
medwoman, I know absolutely nothing about the details of the Pimental situation, but there is a very significant indication that the short sale was both above board and made business sense for all parties . . . specifically, the bank that held the mortgage agreed to the sale. If it was a bad deal or an underhanded deal, I’m pretty sure the bank wouldn’t have gone along with it. I believe all short sales have to be approved by the lender or they don’t happen.
Matt
Again, this is not of greatest interest to me. What is of interest is whether or not Mr. Pimentel followed the financial disclosure rules that I believe is part of his responsibility as a candidate to follow. I have no idea whether the suggestion that he did not is accurate. I was merely expressing that which I feel to be the more important issue.
On a completely separate note, I would not be too quick to give “banks” in general a pass on not approving underhanded, if not illegal dealings in terms of many reports of inappropriate foreclosures.
medwoman, I completely agree with your point about the banks’ dirty fingerprints in [u]creating[/u] foreclosure situations. However, this was the ending of a foreclosure situation through a short sale, where if I understand things correctly, the bank is “eating” some of (perhaps a substantial portion of) the capital loss. Banks are very protective of their own money in such situations, and have been known to frequently kill some very logical deals out of self-interest.
Matt:
“this was the ending of a foreclosure situation through a short sale”
I’m not sure that we know that, it’s one reason I asked Dino to explain how he knows that Mr. Pimentel was not making his payments.
Good point David.
BTW, what is the url for Dino’s blog?
Yes, but you lived in it for 15 years. Do you have any equity? Answer: I did until the people who bought homes they could not afford started walking away from them.
Have you thought about refinancing at these historic low rates? Answer: Yes and I did
Did you borrow out equity? [b]Answer:[/b] No because you don’t borrow against your home unless you are desperate.
Boy, Woodland really got hit hard. [b]Answer:[/b] Hmm and who is at fault for that the people who borrowed more than they could afford and falsify their income on their loan documents.
Why shouldn’t somebody do what is in their own best financial interest? [b]Answer:[/b] They should always.
So You had bankers and real estate people telling you prices would never go down. If you believed that then who is at fault.
Guess the bankers were wrong and there is absolutely nothing wrong with those who bought that bill of goods walking away from bad investments. [b]Answer[/b]: You agreed to the deal you have to take responsibility for it not on the backs of others if you did not validate or research then that clearly falls on you.
Why should somebody keep paying interest on a balance that is not going to be recoverable. [b]Answer:[/b] Then everybody including cities and business owners should then just walk away from their loans. I guess then you would say it’s okay for students who got degrees and now are not able to get the job with that degree should then just default on all of their loans. You really are out of touch with reality.
Your arguments here make no sense. Your idea that somebody who drank the kool-aid shouldn’t wake up and smell the coffee is a non-starter with me.
[b]Answer:[/b] That statement makes no-sense.
Matt Williams posted:
There is a very significant indication that the short sale was both above board and made business sense for all parties . . . specifically, the bank that held the mortgage agreed to the sale. If it was a bad deal or an underhanded deal, I’m pretty sure the bank wouldn’t have gone along with it. I believe all short sales have to be approved by the lender or they don’t happen.
[b]Answer[/b]: Are you even familiar with how a short sale occurs you have to show the bank financial hardship. How can you show financial hardship when you are making 140,000.00 a year? No kids. I know of many others who are making their house payments on much less income and they have kids in college. I bet your answer would be different if you were the lender on the homes that people are defaulting on.
Mr Greenwald posted this
I’m not sure that we know that, it’s one reason I asked Dino to explain how he knows that Mr. Pimentel was not making his payments.
[b]Answer:[/b] Read the documents on the http://www.woodlandrecord.com and you will see that he didn’t make his payments. You ask others here to read the information that you post however when it comes to validating the
information that Mr. Gay clearly has supplied you continue to be trying to spin it that that Mr. Pimentel made his payments. I read the documents and he Mr Pimentel did not make his payments on his house on 1305 Fremont St.
In my experience, short sales are bestowed quite arbitrarily. You may or may not be able to obtain one… unless you know the right people, have the right criteria, etc.
From Wikipedia:
[quote]A short sale is a sale of real estate in which the proceeds from selling the property will fall short of the balance of debts secured by liens against the property and the property owner cannot afford to repay the liens’ full amounts, whereby the lien holders agree to release their lien on the real estate and accept less than the amount owed on the debt.[1] Any unpaid balance owed to the creditors is known as a deficiency.[2][3] Short sale agreements do not necessarily release borrowers from their obligations to repay any deficiencies of the loans, unless specifically agreed to between the parties.
A short sale is often used as an alternative to foreclosure because it mitigates additional fees and costs to both the creditor and borrower. While credit is also typically damaged much less than from a foreclosure, both often result in a negative credit report against the property owner…
Most creditors require the borrower to prove they have an economic or financial hardship preventing them from being able to pay the deficiency.
Creditors holding liens against real estate can include primary mortgages, junior lien holders—such as second mortgages, home equity lines of credit (HELOC) lenders, home owners association HOA (special assessment liens)—all of whom will need to approve individual applications for a short sale, should they be asked to take less than what is owed.
Most large creditors have special loss mitigation departments that evaluate borrowers’ applications for short sale approval. Often creditors use pre-determined criteria for approving the borrowers and the terms of the sale of the properties. Part of this process typically includes the creditor(s) determining the current market value of the real estate by obtaining an independent evaluation of the property with an appraisal, a Broker’s Price Opinion, or a broker opinion of value (BOV). One of the most important aspects for the borrower in this process is putting together a proper real estate short sale package including hardship letter explaining why a short sale is needed.
Depending on each creditor’s policy and the type of loan, creditors may accept applications from borrowers even if the borrower is not in default with their payments. Due to the overwhelming number of defaulting borrowers due to mortgage failures and other causes as part of the 2008–2012 global financial crisis, many creditors have become adept at processing such short sales applications; however, it can still take several months for the process from start to finish, often requiring multiple levels of approval.[/quote]
“Why shouldn’t somebody do what is in their own best financial interest? Answer: They should always. “
Agreed, as long as what is in their best interest is also legal and ethical and all actions are reported as legally required.
“Yes, but you lived in it for 15 years. Do you have any equity? Answer: I did until the people who bought homes they could not afford started walking away from them.”
Then an argument can be made that you too overpaid for your property. If there situation is their own fault then why isn’t your situation your own fault?
[quote]Then an argument can be made that you too overpaid for your property. If there situation is their own fault then why isn’t your situation your own fault?[/quote]
Because the banks gamed the system, got bailed out by the gov’t despite unconscionable behavior, drove smaller ethical banks right out of business, and are now making money hand over fist despite causing the problems in the first place…
Toad posted this comment
“Yes, but you lived in it for 15 years. Do you have any equity? Answer: I did until the people who bought homes they could not afford started walking away from them.”
Then an argument can be made that you too overpaid for your property. If there situation is their own fault then why isn’t your situation your own fault?
Answer: Yes and I continue to pay my mortgage on time. Even though my income has dropped. I would like to believe that many others that make $140,000.00 would do the same.
Especially as Mayor of Woodland Mr. Pimtenel is managing millions of our taxpayers money and he should have the same integrity to make sound financial decisions and borrowing money from one account to pay for another is not good financial advice. Just look at the City of Woodland Budget you will see that they are doing just that and the Mayor is leading the effort on it.
Jagmister, you are conflating microeconomics with macroeconomics. In microeconomic terms Toad did not overpay for his property when the transaction took place 15 years ago. In fact, in the years following a 1996 purchase decision the confirmable value of a home purchased in Woodland probably more than doubled . . . almost tripled in Davis.
Even when you factor in the macroeconomic factors, a house purchased in Davis in 1996 would still be worth more than it was purchased for. However, those same macroeconomic factors have hit Woodland much harder than Davis, and there is a reasonable chance that a 1996 Woodland purchase may indeed be worth less now than it was then. Do those intervening macroeconomic factors make the original microeconomic transaction an overpayment? In a word, no.
When you (or someone you know) make decisions about your house in the current market, how actively do you consider the concept of “sunk costs”?
Fact is foreclosures are going to happen. When a borrower loses his or her job or takes a 50% pay cut; being able to keep a mortgage current is no longer a possibility. [b]Except in the case Art Pimentel his income went up to $140,000.00
[/b]
If faced with the choice of putting food on the table or paying the bank; it is a no brainer that taking care of yourself and your family comes first. This is desperation. [b]Again not for Mayor Art Pimentel[/b]
Making the same monthly payments on a house that has gone down in value 50% is extremely frustrating; especially when many of the neighbors have walked away from their homes. But if the borrower’s income hasn’t taken a hit and the payments haven’t ballooned, they have not only a legal responsibility, but a moral responsibility to keep making the payments. This is pain, but this also shows character.
So how many of your car loans have you strategically defaulted on as they went down in value? Let me guess it’s the dealers and the bankers fault for selling you car that was suppose to go up in value.
Jagmister, you appear to be making a decision for the bank . . . a decision that they chose not to make. It is clear that a business proposition was presented to them and they chase to accept the business proposition. Why do you propose to deny them the right to make that business decision?
They didn’t have to accept the offer. They could have turned it down. They chose not to, and proceeded with the short sale. Why do you think they did that?