Posts: 1,264
Threads: 10
Joined: Sep 2014
I know a former HPPOA board member who actually sat down with the Watamul family chief a few years ago to discuss those properties. At that time they were neither interested in selling nor developing those parcels.
I know the rep you're speaking of. This is true and I recall that this conversation led the board back to square 1, regarding mailboxes, post ofc, stores and so forth, AND HPP stuck w/20 acre parcels only zoned for schools and parks.
Posts: 14,103
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
If only we could express the will of the people through a democratic process.
Posts: 3,198
Threads: 108
Joined: Jun 2010
County could take those 20 acre parcels by emminent domain, allow commercial use, and both improve life in HPP and reduce highway congestion. I'll hold my breath.
Posts: 8
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2012
Mailboxes haha haha. While we are contemplating spending tons of money on something soon to be obsolete lets add a hitching post, a beeper store and a bank of pay phones.
[
][
]
Posts: 14,103
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
allow commercial use
As described in the PCDP, which expresses the will of the people, and was given the force of law by our elected Council?
Posts: 703
Threads: 15
Joined: Jun 2013
posted above
"My issue with the $150/lot fee for new mailboxes wasn't that there would be new mailboxes in 4 designated areas thru out HPP.........."
Here are a few of my issues......
And this fee was based on what? and by whom? Our dysfunctional board members? The ones that are constantly ripped to pieces right here on this thread?
Our board is already less than forthcoming with financial information.
To further complicate this proposal, this board does not have legal authority to charge us for mailboxes.
Why would we even consider getting into that legal mess?
This is worse the bond issue. Remember "Just vote yes and ALL of your roads will be paved !!!" we voted no on the bond.........not because we did not want all roads paved. Of course we did! We simply wanted more disclosure on the accounting side and the more we tried to gain info.......the less we trusted the board.
It is frightening to me how my neighbors constantly overlook this volunteer Board's ability to legally run our corporation.
Posts: 1,247
Threads: 7
Joined: Sep 2014
DW12345, thanks for the chuckle. It really helps. Welcome.
Posts: 1,955
Threads: 100
Joined: Aug 2005
quote:
Originally posted by mermaid53
The hoa’s 20 acres can be used for a community use like a post office. Watamul restricted commercial use because they want to sell their 6 lots.
Or if not sell their lots, lease them out. The Watamulls also only pay one road fee for all 20 acres.
Seeb, please tell me where you got the info on the ability to use the 20 acres for Post ofc use? The current board has reviewed the documents and their conclusion, like previous boards pre Jul 2014, was only parks and schools.
It’s been a decade or so since I read it- but I think the issue is they need to lawyer not in the pocket of the big landowners for an opinion. Watamull created this mess they are not the good guys.
Posts: 1,264
Threads: 10
Joined: Sep 2014
Thanks Seeb. I totally agree w/your assessment. The Watamull's IMO are the source of a lot of the issues we're dealing w/today. To think the use of HPP's 20 acres are so restricted, and their 20 acres are open for development of their choosing. I think they should be paying 20 road fees for 20 acres. I wonder why the Watamull's aren't interested in selling or leasing their properties...
Posts: 14,103
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
their 20 acres are open for development of their choosing
See also the history in "Land & Power", the big landowners would simply declare "conservation" at tax time, but then re-declare "ag" whenever they were ready to use the land.
they should be paying 20 road fees for 20 acres
By what authority are they currently obligated to pay their "one" road fee? Perhaps the language can be stretched a bit -- and not just to "20 times", but maybe 2000 times.
Real estate speculation is only profitable if the land appreciates more than the cost of holding on to the land...