Mario Trejo Romero, CRS, CDPE

For those of you that have not voted and are a bit confused about the propositions I found this on the womens league of voters, a non-partison group.

I hope it helps

http://www.timetovote.info/VoterGuideEnglish1%20(1).pdf

Mario Trejo Romero
Certified Residential Specialist
2008 CRS Arizona State Chapter President
602-252-4191 office, 602-254-9810 fax
The Romero Team - Melcher Agency
www.TheRomeroTeam.com Please remember that your referrals are the lifeblood of my business.
We will continue to grow our successful real estate practice with your help.
Thank you always!

I attended the Friendly House annual wine tasting and dance at Corona Ranch last night Friday 24, 2008. The crowd was fun, and 2 bands played throughout the evening (Powerdrive and Tierra). I took a couple of pictures with my new camera and somehow, a few disappeared inside of the camera.

Enjoy!!!

Bertha and Sally from Chase Mortagage and Luis Ibarra from Friendly House

Corona Ranch entrance

Las Chicas and Chicos

Cece Kimura and ME!

Friendly House http://www.friendlyhouse.org/

Corona Ranch http://www.coronaranch.com/

PowerDrive http://www.myspace.com/powerdrive

The History of Friendly House

Established in 1920, Friendly House was part of a new national settlement house project of the federal government to assist both new immigrants to the United States and the poor. Founded by the Phoenix Americanization Committee the goal was to teach English and citizenship to foreign-born clients. The movement was geared to hasten the assimilation of America's immigrant population by promoting programs designed to make them legal, loyal, English-speaking United States citizens.

From the 1920's to mid-1960, Friendly House maintained a program of teaching immigrants English and citizenship and placing women in jobs as domestic workers. During the mid-1960's, Friendly House experienced it's first fundamental change since it's founding. The war on poverty and the nationwide civil rights movement had a profound effect on social service programs throughout the United States. Friendly House began to broaden it's focus with programs for senior citizens, establishing a social work department, training women for jobs other than as domestics and expanding its youth programs.

While programs of Friendly House continue to expand addressing the needs of it's constituency, the emphasis is still on the education of our youth, employment and training, social services and adult education. Annually, Friendly House serves 40,000 families, youth and children building success and independence for a better America.

Print it out, and mark your choices here - take it to the polls, and you don't have to spend as much time deciding there.


Proposition 100 - Real Estate Sales Tax

A Yes vote changes the state constitution to prohibit charging sales tax on the purchase of a house or land.
A No vote leaves the constitution alone, and allows politicians to charge a sales tax on house or land any time they want.

Realtors like Prop 100, Taxpayers like it, Local School boards hate it (They would get part of the money), Politicians hate it.

Proposition 101 - Health Care

A Yes vote prohibits laws that restrict choice of private health care systems or private plans.
A No vote keeps things the way they are.

This one is real muddy. Apparently some insurance companies are proposing the adoption of a standard health care system in the state and nationally - tying in with proposals on National Health Care. If any of you have better information - I'd love to hear it, and I'll pass it on.

Proposition 102 - Same Sex Marriage

A Yes Vote changes the Arizona Constitution to define marriage as ONLY One man & One woman.
A No vote leaves the Arizona Constitution the way it is. Current law prohibits same sex marriage - but it's not in the constitution.

Proposition 105 - Registered Voters decide Tax Increases

A Yes Vote says that on any kind of Tax Hike, or increase in any fees MUST be passed by a majority of all Registered Voters - even if they don't vote.
A No vote says that a majority of people who actually go to the polls and vote will count.

This is a cute little game. City, County, and States hide increases in taxes and fees in hopes that a low turnout will let unpopular increases pass. Local/State government CAN'T let this one pass. They will fight it, drag it through the courts, and -if all else fails- put a really twisted up bill next election that negates this one. But still, it's cute and makes sense.

Proposition 200 - A REALLY, REally Dishonest Payday Loan Bill

A Yes Vote prevents the controls already passed by the Legislature to regulate the "Payday Loan" industry from taking effect in 2010. It allows the industry to continue charging 400% on the people foolish enough to use the services.
A No Vote allows the legislation that has already passed to take effect in 2010 - and LIMITS interest rates to 36% - Regulates the Industry.

Don't get suckered into letting the Payday Loan industry to continue cheating our citizens. This is a definite NO Vote! The Arizona Attorney General calls this the most dishonest bill he has ever seen.

Proposition 201 - Sue Contractors & Homebuilders

A Yes Vote makes it much easier for a homeowner to sue contractors & homebuilders - and eliminates arbitration and easier ways to settle problems.
A No Vote leave the laws the way they are.

This law is VERY complicated, will increase lawsuits, and appears to support a strongly Unionized Construction Industry. I have many friends who have had major problems with Contractors, and were not able to get satisfaction. But this may be overkill. If you have more knowledge on this one - share it with me, and I'll pass it on.


Proposition 300 - Give the Legislators a Raise

A Yes Vote raises their salary to $30,000 a year.
A No Vote keeps their salary at $24,000 a year.

Originally, the job of Arizona Legislator was a "part time" job - about 6 months a year. Salary was low. Now, it's considered "full-time", although most of them have other jobs or are self employed. Everyone has mixed feelings about it - but $30,000 isn't huge as far as "professional" careers are concerned. And we don't exactly want to have them fishing for "supplemental income" among the lobbyists....

1. A husband and wife were buying a home with me. The wife wrote a check for earnest money from their joint checking account. Both their names were on the check. The husband was the primary. The wife's name was under his. Since the wife wrote the check and was not the primary on the account, the underwriter required the husband to write up a gift letter, donating the earnest money to his wife, in order to validate the funds. What a waste of time.

2. An FHA appraiser inspected a home for one of my buyers. She crawled up into the attic (first time I've ever had an FHA appraiser ever do this) and saw a bird's nest sitting next to a truss. She reported back that the financing would not be approved until the nest was removed. I thought "why didn't you just pick it up and take it down with you if it's so important?" Because of this contingency the seller, who was out of state, had to hire a vendor to go out to the home and remove the nest. Then, of course, the appraiser had to schedule a second visit out to the home to "verify" that the nest was gone. Ridiculous. This ordeal delayed my buyers' closing by three weeks.

3. Lender hadn't procured a receipt from buyer's homeowners insurance prior to closing, which really should be a big deal, but the deal won't close without it. She got on the phone and got a copy sent over. The underwriter didn't like the way it was worded. Do over. The underwriter didn't like the second one either. It said they had coverage, but it didn't explicitly say "paid". Do over. The third one also did not meet the underwriter's approval because the insurance agent had written "paid" on the receipt. The word "paid" evidently is only permissible if it's typed. The fourth receipt met the underwriters approval. This process turned a 40 minute closing into one that took almost 4 hours. The poor sellers were just sitting there. They were very gracious. So were my buyers, but NO ONE was happy.

4. We had to sign a Lead-Based Paint Disclosure verifying the home did not have lead-based paint on the property. This is a standard disclosure on homes built before 1978, but recently many lenders are requiring them on all homes, even brand new ones. The last several homes we've closed have been built 20+ years since lead-based paint was banned, but OK...what's one more disclosure going to hurt? I mean, let's just pile it on.

Moral of the story: if you're buying a home, put your seatbelt on and expect weirdness from your lender. It's not your loan officer's fault. It's not your Realtor's fault. It's just the way it is right now. They are inventing new disclosures and contingencies to financing every day. I would not be surprised if they start requiring blood samples to verify identity.

Mario Trejo Romero

www.talktoMario.com