Crime Wave

March 12, 2013

A Chapala police truck with two officers entered El Parque Wednesday morning March 6, 2013. They delivered Chapala criminal prosecutor summons to owners of three homes.

One went to John, who insists on paying fees according to the manner prescribed by law. Another named both Howard and Diane, who 168 days ago properly requested access to yet unreleased condo financial records. The third was for George, who reputedly manages this web site.

The summons ordered arrivals at the prosecutor’s office at noon March 12, 2013 accompanied by interpreters. The stated reasons were investigation of criminal character. Included were warnings of 1,700 peso non compliance fines. None of the summons mentioned the others nor hinted at connection with El Parque affairs. Recipients had received no related communication from anyone in El Parque’s administration.

The criminal interrogations turned out to be unsuccessful intimidation by condemnation under cloak of a reconciliation hearing. Those summoned were all present with attorneys and interpreters. The board’s accusatory stance was represented by board member Terry Baker, and administrator Martha Cervantes. Board members Haffner, McCallum, Miller, Pritchard, and Wells were refused admittance to the hearing room and had to listen from the hallway.

Terry presented the board’s position by running through mis-believed transgressions of those summoned. Martha testified they made her job difficult. Those accused declined saying anything. The reconciliation that wasn’t lasted 18 minutes: It concluded with prosecutorial advice to have respect.

A good time was had by all (well, some).

This story just gets stranger and stranger. What IS the matter with the Board/Administrator and assorted supporters? What are they protecting, or hiding?

Public vilification didn't work. General trash-talking and disinformation didn't work. Deportation didn't work. Now, a (malicious) criminal prosecution (?!) didn't work. What next?

Outrageous behavior on the part of the Board/Administrator/hangers on. Good thing the Mexican authorities haven't bought into their game.

posted by Anonymous : 6:28 AM, March 13, 2013

The characters in this performance keep getting stranger and stranger. What is the matter with John, Howard and Diane, and George? What do they really want and why don't they make it clear?

Bullying the administrator did not work, threatening legal action has not worked, reneging on financial obligations leads no where. What will be next? Oh my, oh my!

Inexplicable behavior on the part of a small group of somewhat deluded discontents. Good thing their credibility is somewhere south of a dachshunds bellybutton.

posted by Anonymous : 11:56 AM, March 13, 2013

It appears the Administration is fast becoming the biggest joke on the north shore. Especially in the eyes of the municipality, Immigration, local Notario's and attorneys. Their criminal hearing consisted of nothing more than childish whining. They came across like 7 year olds in a play ground dispute. Apparently all they managed to accomplished was to royally piss off the pope. Oops, excuse me, I mean the prosecutor. Their own attorney didn't even have any idea why he was there. When they couldn't draw any of those summoned into an argument, all they could do is tell the prosecutor that they wanted respect. Excuse me, that one they have to earn!

posted by Anonymous : 11:56 PM, March 14, 2013

I agree with the "stranger and stranger" post, and disagree with the snide, rude post following (March 13, 11:56am).

The author CLAIMS to be baffled by the motivation of the homeowners named. However, I'm satisfied with detailed information that is provided on this blog. But in any event, what possible "motivations" could justify the extreme persecution of two or three homeowners. The fairly minor disputes should have been resolved by the board and administrator months or years ago.

The author mentions that they (?) are "threatening legal action". I HOPE they do more than threaten because its probably the only way left to stop this perpetual cycle of abuse on the part of the board etc.

I'm sick and tired of all this nonsense and for anyone tempted to respond to me with the usual snide and snarky comments, DON'T!!! Enough of this board, administrator and their supporters acting like the "bully clique" at a high school.

posted by Fed Up! : 9:56 AM, March 15, 2013

I agree with Fed Up.

posted by EDP : 4:21 PM, March 15, 2013


"The facts, ma’am, Just the facts“. For those of us who are old enough to remember "Dragnet" and Sergeant Joe Friday those words might invoke a moment of nostalgia. Let us hope that the following facts can elicit a moment of sane thought and contemplation from at least some in the El Parque community.

FACT ONE: An entity or entities recently arranged for two El Parque homeowners to be served with summonses to the Mexican office of immigration for undisclosed purposes. The potential outcome of those summonses to the immigration office could clearly have been the deportation from Mexico of those summoned homeowners. Two board members were in attendance at that meeting. Their role was NOT to defend the summoned homeowners.

FACT TWO: The immigration officer at this meeting listened to all parties, evaluated the testimony, reviewed the legality of immigration papers and made the following determinations. The immigration papers and status of the two individuals were in order and no complaints warranted any action or reprimand from the office of immigration.

FACT THREE: An entity or entities recently arranged for the two El Parque homeowners referenced in FACT ONE plus one additional El Parque homeowner to be served with summonses to the Mexican office of Criminal Investigation for undisclosed purposes. The potential outcome of those summonses and the criminal investigation could clearly have led to the incarceration of those summoned homeowners in a Mexican prison. This time the El Parque Administrator and several board members were in attendance at that meeting. The roles of the Administrator and board members at this meeting clearly WAS to testify against the summoned homeowners.

FACT FOUR: The criminal investigator listened and evaluated the testimonies, complaints, and defenses of all participants and made the following determinations. The summoned homeowners were not in any way guilty of any criminal activity and no charges or even reprimands were appropriate.

Those are the unadorned facts. They are not rumor or gossip. They are simple, unaltered, no spin, no opinion, no hidden agenda facts. It doesn’t matter if you like or dislike the subpoenaed homeowners or the board or the Administrator.

A majority of the homeowners may not like what the perceived dissidents are doing but it should be clear that what they are doing is legal. When the smoke clears, like it or not, the only guilt of the dissidents is committing the socially unacceptable act of disagreeing with the board and the majority of their fellow homeowners. I am taking no stand on this. I simply have a question that I would like everyone to consider.

Do we, as supposedly caring human beings, actually believe that any of our fellow homeowners deserve to be deported from Mexico and/or incarcerated in a Mexican prison for simply disagreeing with the actions of a board of directors of a homeowners’ association? Given the facts listed above, it seems clear that the Administrator and the Board would have no problem with that scenario.

posted by Anonymous : 9:27 AM, March 16, 2013

To Anonymous with the question, "What is the matter with John,...."?. It is obvious your question is not serious. Since you took the time to put that foolishly disingenuous question on this blog, you surely must have taken the time to read the rest of the blog. You know exactly what they want. It is very clear what they want even if what they want is not particularly popular. I won't go into the specifics of their issues or even discuss whether their issues might or might not be valid. The office of Mexican immigration and the local Mexican office of criminal investigation have found what they want to be valid.

On the outside chance that you are misinformed and/or are attempting to misinform others, I will humor you. Whether they are right or wrong, this is what they want. John wants the Administrator and the Board to comply with El Parque's bylaws and Mexican condominium laws; Howard and Diane want to get independent verification that El Parque's finances are in order and they have every right to do so; and George just wants to be left alone. I also suspect he wants the attempts to deport or jail him for no valid reason to cease and desist.

Your second paragraph is nothing but inaccurate nonsense based on nothing but rumor and gossip. Were you on the scene when bullying or legal action threats occurred? Were you there or did someone tell you that someone else told them that someone else actually heard it was true from someone else who might have said he was present when it supposedly happened? The office of immigration and the criminal investigation office can verify that, as of this date, no financial obligations have been reneged on by any of the homeowners that were summoned to their offices.

Your third paragraph is confusing. Would you care to enlighten anyone on this blog as to exactly what the small group you referenced are deluded about? Their position on some issues may not be popular but it appears to me that these so-called dissidents are, in no way, deluded about anything.

In summation, I'm sure you must be a smart individual but your comments on this blog are what one might expect from an individual with the intellect of a dachshund's bellybutton.

Oh my, oh my!

posted by Anonymous : 9:41 AM, March 16, 2013

I also agree with comment by Fed Up.

posted by fed up 2 : 11:57 AM, March 16, 2013


As a homeowner here in El Parque, it would seem to me, that the latest in a series of events instituted by this Administration against individual homeowners, would be the last straw and motivate all homeowners to say ENOUGH. As people here are fond of saying we are a community of "Neighbors and Friends". I for one find it hard to believe that we could condone the use of these tactics against our neighbors. I am not convinced that everyone here considers everyone "FRIENDS". When we came here we had no idea who our neighbor would be or if friendships would develop over time. People tend to associate with people with common life views and tolerate those whose views differ from their own. Unfortunately, there are others who feel a need to attack when their views are questioned. The last couple of months have shown us what happens when you have the Audacity to question THE BOARD.

When we as a community sit by and say nothing, then we become complicit in these tactics. To say this Administration has crossed the line would be the understatement of the year.

The "manufactured" outrage against these individuals by the board, caused quite a stir at a clubhouse meeting where many Neighbors and "FRIENDS", took the opportunity to show the ugliness that lives under the surface of our community. If you were not there, an audio of that meeting is available on this blog.

Many who write on this blog take offense at these posts and contribute nothing to the conversation, other then to demonize and vilify those who have concerns and no way too address them other than here.

Not long ago three individual homeowners were the target, (of some other homeowners here or possibly the board members/administrator present), who felt justified in trying too have them DEPORTED. Mexican officials found NO reason to do so.

Much more recently the very same homeowners were again targeted with summons too address CRIMINAL CHARGES, this time the majority of the Board and the Administrator were in attendance, CURIOUS. Again the Mexican Authorities found NO reason to pursue these ridiculous complaints. My guess is that there is nothing this administration will not do to intimidate homeowners.

I suppose because of their failure with Immigration, and then the Prosecutor, we would target these same individuals again only this time with a firing squad, for the Capital Offense of Moderating a blog, attempting to pay Condo fees, month after month with pesos (LEGAL) as per the bylaws, and the unmitigated gall to ask for a review of El Parque's finances with no cost to the community.

That is how a community goes from Ridiculous to Absurd. You can sit back and say nothing and pretend this is "Paradise", or you can insist that the board elected to listen, actually will.

Time to stop "BULLYING", want Respect, give Respect, the people responsible for these actions against our Neighbors, do not deserve any respect.

Terry Gibbard Casa #90

posted by terry gibbard : 1:22 PM, March 16, 2013

wowwwwww terry, I agree with every word you said! Thanks for taking a stand.

posted by Anonymous : 4:52 PM, March 16, 2013

Thanks Terry!

Happy St Paddy's day.

posted by Howard and Diane : 5:00 PM, March 16, 2013

Clearly, the administration has badly mishandled the "disputes" (which need not be disputes) outlined here and elsewhere on this blog. Fortunately, there seem to be at least a few homeowners who are now recognizing this. Of course, the next question is "what else has the administration mishandled?"

posted by edp : 6:22 AM, March 17, 2013

I, too, agree with Fed Up and Terry. However, I won't sign this comment because reprisals from the Board are still possible.

posted by Anonymous : 9:48 AM, March 17, 2013

Tried posting yesterday but had problems with the identifying options, so I am choosing Anonymous but will sign.

I am sitting, in Miami, and am completely baffled about the whole brouhaha. Please continue to post audio recordings of meetings as this helps us hear things personally.

Sandy Kramer
casa 62

posted by Anonymous : 10:04 AM, March 17, 2013

Meetings to ostracize through vilification and attempts to deport and criminalize are not events based on mere political or social differences. They surpass comfort levels of any believing themselves somehow in charge, sale values of land and bricks, interpretations of law at any level, where, how, and to whom money in whatever form passes, who may inquire of financial concerns, with whom and where one goes to socialize, or where and how views on those or any matters may be expressed.

Those despicable actions went beyond fleeting of ephemeral ideas, opinions, and beliefs. They dwarf risks of any legitimate administrative endeavors or sustainable social relations. Their very real and clearly intended effects were to severely diminish well being and security of others’ lives. In that, they became measures of our moralities. They presented a picture of whom and what we are and prefer to be.

Perpetrators and supporters of those indignities, whether by action, belief, or silence, cast their lots. In doing so, they drew a line, one that forces a moral decision on which side of it each of us will choose to place ourselves. None can duck that choice. All will either make it or have it made for them. A gauntlet was dropped, and I am picking it up.

That will be in begging the marked victims to excuse a past distance and accept my presence where they’ve been relegated. Across the line will be the disgrace of plotters and accomplices along with supporters, whether openly so, by feigned neutrality, shying from decision, willful ignorance, or effectively granting approval by silence, I will have one advantage over them. That is in knowing who and what they are while they will not enjoy the same.

posted by Anonymous : 12:39 PM, March 18, 2013


posted by Anonymous : 4:32 PM, March 18, 2013

Yes, wow! Dare I hope that we're seeing the first glimmers of a return to civility in El Parque?

posted by edp : 7:50 AM, March 19, 2013

Don't hold your breath !! The Board is just waiting for the Majority of Homeowners to leave, before picking up where they left off. They walk the path of least resistance, do not for one moment think that they will change their true nature. Sad but true.

posted by Anonymous : 8:28 AM, March 19, 2013

How great would it be to have someone with this kind of intellect on our Board of Directors in ElParque?? WOW is spot on. Thanks for the March 18th post anonymous, you just raised our IQ level. Please keep on posting, we need people of substance to help open our eye's.

posted by Anonymous : 8:42 AM, March 19, 2013

As i read all the posts here, a question enters my mind. Maybe someone can answer? Has anyone from the board denounced the disgusting actions against these homeowners? And if i am reading correctly, there were others who also were in arrears on their fee's? Why were only these three targeted? Are there people on the board, be they voting members or alternates, that had the ball's and tried to stop this insanity, or do they just follow in the footsteps of the most vindictive among them? Surely there are people with some kind of sense on the board. I was just wondering because we have heard nothing from this board.

posted by Anonymous : 10:12 AM, March 19, 2013

I suppose that i should not be commenting on the internal affairs of a community that i have no vested interest in, however since i had come for a vacation and was interested in how the "gringo" community interacted with both the Mexican and American, Canadian communities, I was talking with a friend who i was visiting about this subject. He said that most people got along just great and the only conflicts that seemed to present a problem, usually cropped up in "Gringo" run condo's. I asked for some specifics, and he pointed me to this Blog. He also mentioned other condo's that experienced similar problems. I have to say that i was astonished by the blogs and responses to them.

He mentioned to me that elparque was one of the most extreme of the condo's in how they dealt with internal problems. After reading of the (extreme), his words, actions taken against 3 homeowners, i would concur. I always felt that responsible people would find a way to settle their differences, but I guess that is not the case in elparque.

Anyway I wish you luck in finding a solution to your problems, without the need to harm anyone in the process. I for one, having heard these horror stories, will not be joining a gringo run community should I retire in the Lake Chapala area.

J.Harrison, Canada

posted by J. Harrison : 11:04 AM, March 19, 2013

(Ed. Note: This comment was rejected as in conflict with publishing policy and later inserted with portions removed)

As an El Parque homeowner, I find it sad to read Mr. Harrison's comments. However, I can easily understand them.

Throughout the years, the Condo Commandos have been so intent on imposing more and more rules that I stopped having my usual "stop by and say Hi" parties when I am there.

First I was told that guests had to park in the three (?) guest spots near the entrance, which may or may not be available, or outside the community. Then I was told they weren't allowed to park around the pool (why not?). Then they can't park alongside any houses. If someone was having a party and I needed the spot in front of my house that had been taken, I would knock on the door and ask them to move it. If not, I don't care who parks there - as long as they don't block my driveway.

By making it difficult and embarassing to have to tell people they can't park near my home, this seemed to be a way to discourage people from inviting guests. They usually bring casseroles, coolers, and beverages and having to walk for several minutes when there are umpteen spaces all over the place is ludicrous.

I fear that El Parque is the northshore "joke." Yes, the community is lovely and many people live there and ignore the dirty little secrets quite happily. This is particularly difficult for me since I like to be friendly with everyone and dislike this animosity. I first met George and Roberta in July 2003 and they kindly showed me their house, which was one of the first ones built. The ( Ed: identifying name removed) were neighbors of mine. I don't want to choose sides. CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG?

My "take" is that some expats start out extolling the wonderful laid back life in Mexico and then go about imposing strict regulations from whence they came. e.g. When I first went in 2003 one didn't see "No mascotas" (no pets) signs anywhere.

As for a solution....I guess we would need some kind of arbitration. When I visit, everyone is friendly, the social events (I'm all for them and for the fundraising efforts that go for improvements and organizations such as the Cruz Roja) are great fun and a real plus for residents who want to socialize.

I think Terry's comments are right on "You can sit back and say nothing and pretend this is "Paradise", or you can insist that the board elected to listen, actually will."

Maybe the entire Board should resign and someone should conduct the requested audit. I don't know enough people to know who to vote for but something is definitely rotten in the State of Denmark!

Here's a thought I'll throw in since it does appear that we need some kind of referee. How about hiring (Ed: removed promotion of particular local attorney and suggestion to hire as mediator). I haven't spoken with him about this and he may not want to even touch this hot potato, but, hey, it's a thought. Any other suggestions?

Ultimately, the majority of the homeowners should take responsibility for our homes/community/investment, but how the heck do we do this? If we are not part of the solution then we are part of the problem, aren't we?

Sandy Kramer
Casa #62
sandykayak at yahoo dot com

posted by Anonymous: 12:58 PM, March 19, 2013

Personal matters have stopped me from paying much attention to all the political going-on in El Parque. A friend told me I really should read this blog to see what is going on now. Last year i tried reading the blog and just found it confusing and a bit to sarcastic fro my taste. Yesterday though I sat down and made an effort to read it and understand everything. I do not want to repeat that others have said that I agree with.

I am reminded of a taxi ride I took years ago when the cab driver kept talking about the damn blacks, using ruder words, but I was busy and didn't bother arguing or telling him he was wrong to talk like that. I remember feeling bad after that that I should have said something. I feel similar now. So I've decided to SAY SOMETHING. It is WRONG for the Administration to treat 3 homeowners this way, no matter what the problems are.

I agree with Sandy but I don't think her suggestions are realistic right now. However, there seem to be a number of intelligent articulate people writing here. Somewhere else on this blog someone says that the Board should be asked to EXPLAIN their actions. Maybe that would be a good first step. Also, maybe it would be useful to have a new category called Solutions that could collect all the different entries that give constructive advice about how to resolve this horrible situation. Maybe there would also be more constructive suggestions offered. I do not know enough about the by-laws and the problems to be useful, but maybe some of those who know could meet with the Board and discuss the situation and get them to explain their actions.

posted by praying for peace : 1:08 PM, March 21, 2013

I think that the rest of the homeowners should take a vote on whether we want the Board members to answers questions and justify their actions but am not sure how this should be accomplished.

Some people would have to take the initiative and would need authorization. Maybe we need to Speak to the Board members (who are undoubtedly reading this) and request a poll on whether homeowners are in agreement with this action.

I would like to believe that things are being done properly and strongly disagree with the publication of a letter in a local newspaper and the original denouncing of gambling and sale of liquor on the premises carried out by the dissidents.

So it seems as if the Board decided to retaliate. If so, the decisions should have been made with the agreement of the majority of the Board members and it should have been done officially and recorded in the minutes. If the Administrator was instructed to take these actions then she would have been wise to have requested and kept documentation of these instructions in order to protect her backside. When you start making denuncias to the Mexican authorities there is no assurance of where this will end. Personally, I would like to see this settled in house. This is like an abscess that needs to be lanced in order for our community to heal.

This is what we call a real arroz con mango (mango and rice mix-up).

Sandy Kramer
Casa #62

posted by Anonymous : 4:43 PM, March 21, 2013

This is a reprinting for informative purpose of essential portions of original text from an article appearing in the current edition of Página, Chapala's Spanish language weekly, and followed by an English translation. Full names are partially blanked to conform to comment publishing rules of this blog.


El martes 12 de marzo una vez más la mesa directiva y algunos colonos del Parque Villas y Country ubicado en San Antonio Tlayacapan citaron a los señores John (...), Howard (...) y a su esposa junto con el señor George (...). a la agencia del ministerio público investigador sede Chapala por la problemática que existe acerca del funcionamiento del bar restaurant que se ubica en la casa club dentro del fraccionamiento así como por la inconformidad que tienen acerca de los movimientos financieros entre otros.

La mesa direciva representada por la administradora (...) Martha (...), explicaron el por qué de la citación así como argumentaron de la supuesta legalidad del negocio, los citados por su parte en esta ocasión no manifestaron su dicho pero sí agregaron que están molestos ya que es gubernamental y saben de la molestia de la mesa directiva ya que en meses anteriores han tratado de verificar los movimientos financieros tanto de la admistración del fraccionamiento, como del restaurant, ellos los han hecho víctimas de acoso administrativo, problemas con autoridades y críticas por parte de la admistración y de algunos colonos y agregan que no es más que una estrategia para mantener su boca callada. No nos vamos a dejar aclaró el señor Howard (...) y yo no estoy en contra del bar o acusando a alguien de algo que no me consta sólo exigo mi derecho de saber de la legalidad del restaurant bar, ya que formo parte del fraccionamiento. La cita se dio por terminada al transcurso de una hora sin que hubiera alguna conclusión así como la autoridad del Ministerio Público exhortó a las partes a denunciar ante la autoridad correspondiente algún ilícito o inconformidad.


On Tuesday March 12 once again the board and some residents of El Parque Villas and Country Park located in San Antonio Tlayacapan summoned John (...), Howard (...) and his wife along with George (...). to the Public Ministry of Chapala prosecutor for the problems which exist about operating the restaurant and bar that is located in the in the clubhouse inside the condominium as well as the disagreement they have about financial matters among others.

The condominium board of directors, represented by its administrator Martha (...), explained the reason for the subpoenas and supported supposed legality of the business. Not mentioned were that the board is upset government is aware of the troubles and has been pressed in recent months to look into financial matters of both the administration and restaurant as well as making those summoned victims of administrative harassment, problems with authorities, and ostracism by residents of the condominium as a strategy for keeping their mouths shut. “We will not stop” Howard (...) explained and “I'm not against the bar or accusing someone of something of which I am not aware but I ask only my right to know the legality of the restaurant bar as part of the condominium”. The hearing was terminated within an hour without any conclusion and the prosecutor called on the parties to report to the appropriate authority any illegal matters or disagreement.

posted by Anonymous : 6:25 PM, March 24, 2013


Full names are blanked for internet posting.


To: Bruce (_) President Board of Directors El Parque

Subject: Chapala Mediators Meeting Monday 11th March 2013 @ 1215 hrs

Reference: Endeavour to mediate with John H(_), Howard (_), Diane (_) and George (_)

Submitted by: Terry B(_)

CC: Gordon (_) - Treasurer Clark (_) - Secretary John M(_), John H(_) Terry (_), John P(_) Dona (_) Martha (_) - Administrator El Parque

Objective: The objective of this memorandum is to communicate the activity and discussions that occurred at the Chapala Mediators office held 11th March 2013.

This was the El Parque Board’s second attempt to mediate and understand the issues and problems that these individuals appear to have with the Board of Director’s in El Parque, the Administrator and the community. As President, (Bruce C(_)) you were unavailable to attend, the remainder of the Board asked me, (Terry (_)) to be spokesperson for the Board at the meeting.

Location: The meeting was held in a small office and was informal in nature. Due to the cramped space John H(_), Howard (_), Diane (_), George (_) and their legal representatives entered the office and Martha (_) and I were asked to enter as well.

The other Board members were asked to stay by the office entrance so they would be available to listen to the proceedings. Due to the office space limitations all attendees and the Chapala Mediator had to stand. As far as I know, there was no recording of the following events made by the Mediator or his staff.

Issues and Events: I was asked by the Mediator, through an interpreter, to open the discussion and explain the issues. I opened the meeting by stating that I was acting as a representative of the El Parque Board, who represented the majority of the El Parque owners.

I will outline each of the discussion points with their respective responses.

1. John H(_) I initially explained the difficulty that the Board and the community currently has with John (_); the non-payment of El Parque condominium fees that is now approximately MXP $36,000.00 outstanding.

John H(_) response, when the Mediator asked about this issue was that he would only respond in writing after he had spoken to his lawyer

2. Howard (_) and Diane (_). I outlined the issues concerning the detrimental newspaper article concerning El Parque submitted in 2012 that El Parque believes was initiated by them. I also mentioned the current ongoing problem of allegations that are being made by one or both of them to the El Parque guards/staff concerning Martha Cervantes’s honesty and character.

Both Howard (_) and Diane (_), when asked about these issues by the Mediator stated that they had no issues with El Parque.

3. George (_). I covered the issue of the Internet website Blog AKA and the information that was being published. We believe that the information contained on the website is damaging to El Parque home owners and is malicious and libelous in nature. The Mediator asked George (_) directly if the website was his. George (_) stated that the was not his and that he had nothing further to say.

4. Upon my completion of presenting the Board’s issues, Martha (_), in Spanish without translation, gave an overview of the issues relating to ongoing harassment and certain statements made by some of the attendees concerning her character and integrity.

5. At the end of the meeting, the Mediator mentioned that Mexico had freedom of speech, but it also had strict laws concerning libel and misrepresentation of facts. The Mediator also stated that Mexico immigration was aware of the problems in El Parque and that one of the attendee’s immigration application was under detailed review.

The issue of non payments of condominium fees by John (_) remains.
Howard (_) and Diane (_) state they have no issues with El Parque.

George (_) denies operating the malicious and libelous El Parque blog and web site.

posted by Anonymous : 12:35 PM, March 28, 2013


What follows in this comment is selected text from the Baker “Memorandum” of the above comment with editorial retorts bolded (AS HERE) and full names partially blanked for internet posting.


The objective of this memorandum is to communicate the activity and discussions that occurred at the Chapala Mediators office held 11 th March 2013.


This was the El Parque Board’s second attempt to mediate and understand


George (_). I covered the issue of the Internet website Blog AKA


The Mediator asked George (_) directly if the website was his. George (_) stated that the was not his …


5.At the end of the meeting, the Mediator mentioned that Mexico had freedom of speech, but it also had strict laws concerning libel and misrepresentation of facts. The Mediator also stated that Mexico immigration was aware of the problems in El Parque and that one of the attendee’s immigration application was under detailed review.


George (_) denies operating the malicious and libelous El Parque blog and web site.


posted by Anonymous : 1:06 PM, March 28, 2013


BAKER “Uhm To the one whose president director is not here to be reported as the uhm the. My Name is Terry Baker and I’m a member of the board of El Parque and the board represents the community as a whole of El Parque. Understand five over the past year or so the number of people have found ways to curb over the past year or so have been various problems relating to a group of people who for whatever reason have caused dealing with El Parque. Ah this gentleman here for some reason which we do not know why and will not pay his condominium fees in such a way. And this couple here if he were to have his way to do the condominium association Uhm they wouldn’t have audits Uhm they used to have audits of uh various out of these tantrums or procedures. And he’s writ there’s also the internet news report called the blog which we believe is not necessarily run by this gentleman here. On the blog at the internet is that is uh libel at the intro and represents El Parque very badly. We also believe this couple here belongs I’m sure but this is what we believe are programs for use of the blog that act if giving accusa accusations of El Parque uh saying we had an illegal uh restaurant we had an illegal bar we had illegal gambling. We as a board have been to the delegates to the federal Guadalajara to make sure the activities reported are not. So that’s what we know. We do not know why they continue doing this we would like it to stop. So this gentleman had and intends to pay El Parque pays tax well these savings and the El Parque in El Parque due to current system that we passed we do no ask tasks to refer to the administrator for pub. Now try and solve the problem. This gentleman is not inclined to do it as a cash to a board member in their office not the administrator the administrator being there with. We also we also tried having mediations between our lawyer and their lawyer the sort of has put forth to get we didn’t get the assurance he did not respond. Or let him pay and pay his fees. We would like this gentleman if he is running this blog to make sure that what he puts on this blog is inaccurate and truthful and not lying. And if these people want audit to respect the privacy of individuals information is contained in all that information and pay the cost associated with able.”

MARTHA (Says she is disrespected and they make her job hard - while waving conspicuously at those summoned with an extended right middle finger).

GEORGE “I ah really have no problem with these people. I have nothing to say if there is a problem. If they have a problem with me they can resolve it in a court of law.”

PROSECUTOR (in English with slight smirk) “And did you put these on the blog”

TRANSLATOR (his English to her English) “Is it true though that they did it on the blog”)”

GEORGE “No, it is not.”

DIANE “We don’t have any problems.”

HOWARD “We don’t have any problems. I’ve got no problem with anybody.”

TRANSLATOR “They are saying that you published an article that is bothering him.”

HOWARD: (shown Página copy) “I got no problem. I don’t know. I don’t know what is going on.”

JOHN (queried about fees) “I’m sorry Señor but I prefer to respond in writing.” (told not possible) “May I speak to my lawyer?” (denial again) “As I speak to him I will respond in writing.”

DIANE “He can answer in writing? I didn’t hear the question.”

MARTHA (Complains of Howard and Diane behavior.)

PROSECUTOR (Tells all to respect each other.)

posted by Anonymous : 1:11 PM, March 28, 2013


posted by Anonymous : 1:37 PM, March 28, 2013

I appreciate the audio of the meeting and wish that audios be made available of all meetings, ideally on the main El Parque website. Unfortunately it is not interactive, so this blog serves as a wY for people to communicate.

I speak Spanish and it was very obvious that the rep (notario? Attorney?) stated that the purpose of the meeting was to try and effect a reconciliation.

I was very disappointed that neither John, George, Howard, or Diane were willing to do so. I honestly think that they have opened a huge can of worms that will end up biting them in the butt big time.

My reaction at the end of the recording was, "oh, geez, enough already.". Why George or anyone would not take advantage of the opportunity to make peace and move on instead of pursuing the matter legally and possibly in a Mexican court if law is beyond my understanding.

Sandy Kramer
casa 62

posted by Anonymous : 1:40 PM, March 28, 2013

Interesting reading, and listening. I find no evidence that this was a legal "mediation", as takes place routinely at the level of the Jalisco Civil Court, before a judge, to resolve or expedite matters within the jurisdiction of that Court.

Whether or not the Mexican Criminal Courts actually DO conduct "mediations" is beyond my expertise, but it would seem unlikely given the nature of criminal prosecutions. The information presented here does nothing to persuade me that the "process" to which the targeted individuals were "summoned", under penalty of a substantial fine for failure to appear, was intended as a non-adversarial discussion and resolution of specific legal issues. Apparently, the lawyers representing the targeted individuals were also unaware that the meeting was intended to be a mediation.

In general, the parties to a mediation are provided with sufficient information in advance of the meeting to be aware of the purpose of the meeting and the specific issues that are being brought forward for discussion before a judge or a mediator designated by the court. I see nothing to indicate that this was the case here. Rather, the summons served on the individuals indicated that they were to appear for an "investigation of criminal character".

Consequently, I have to conclude that the "process" initiated by the Administrator/Board to bring the targeted individuals before a Chapala criminal prosecutor for "investigation" was intended as harassment and intimidation. The cited memo prepared and circulated by the Board is clearly misleading, at the very least.

posted by edp : 1:41 PM, March 28, 2013

I agree with "edp". If the board and/or administrator actually DID intend to organize a "mediation" to address and resolve the outstanding disputes, then they did a pretty lousy job of organizing it.

posted by fed up 2 : 5:08 PM, March 28, 2013


It is understandable that you felt it was clear that the rep stated (at the meeting) that the purpose of the meeting was to try and effect a reconciliation. Your statement that you are disappointed in George and company for not jumping at the chance for reconciliation bears more consideration and thought than I think you have given it. How was the meeting arranged? Who arranged the meeting? Why were George and company not told until the meeting that the meeting was supposedly a reconciliation. My opinion is not important but this is how I would have reacted. Previously, at a homeowner's meeting, the Administrator and the board publicly fired up a bunch of homeowners and encouraged them to attack me. I had been called to the immigration office to defend my immigration status, numerous attempts to address the problem with the Administrator and the board were rejected on the basis that the board did not want negotiation they wanted capitulation. Keep in mind that, true or not, this would have been my thinking. Now I have been called in for criminal investigation. At no time and by no one was I told that this was any kind of attempt at reconciliation of any problem. I would not have seen the meeting as an attempt at reconciliation but rather as an attempt at intimidation. Here I am a gringo sitting in a Mexican office of criminal investigation confronted by a Mexican Administrator and Mexican criminal investigators and they are requesting that I make statements some of which could incriminate me if interpreted incorrectly. If that is not intimidation and intentional intimidation, I have no idea what it would have been. I don't know what you think George and company should have done. Were I, personally, placed in this position by an entity or entities that had already attempted to do me as much harm as possible, I would have clammed up and lawyered up as quickly as possible. If you think that the same group of people who had repeatedly attempted to persecute and prosecute them are going to suddenly become reasonable in a Mexican office of criminal investigation, I suppose you might have reason to be disappointed in George and company. I personally believe it was one of those you had to be there things. I'd have done the same thing they did.

posted by Anonymous : 9:52 AM, March 29, 2013

A further point I'd like to make. As is apparent from the audio of the "session", in his memo, Terry fabricated a final statement and attributed it to "the mediator" who, as a Chapala criminal prosecutor, is an officer of the court. I know we're all used to the kind of misinformation from the Board that we routinely see in the Minutes, etc., but I really think Terry should be careful about putting words in the mouth of a prosecutor. Of course, if Terry has a court-prepared transcript of the proceedings and a stamped, signed court order showing the "mediator's" statement, then of course there's no problem.

posted by edp : 10:35 AM, March 29, 2013

I'm puzzled. It's clear that the prosecutor or "investigator" did not make that general scolding statement set out in Terry's memo, then how would Terry know about "immigration issues" and why would he put it in his memo? Just asking!

posted by fed up 2 : 10:14 AM, March 30, 2013

Now that I've seen the actual "subpoena's" served on the targeted individuals (posted yesterday, I think), I'd like to amend my use of the word "prosecutor" to "criminal investigator". My point about falsely attributing a statement to the investigator remains valid, though.

posted by edp : 10:21 AM, March 30, 2013

Point taken. I guess I should try to keep my mouth shut since, as we all know, there are three versions to any story: "yours," "mine," and the "truth.". And most of us will never find out what really happened.

May the El Parque community survive this and continue to hold the social events that make it such a special place.

Sandy Kramer
Casa 62

posted by Anonymous : 5:28 PM, March 30, 2013

You may have taken the bait initially like so many others, however, you at least seem to have an open mind when so many minds are closed and so many eager to hate.
The Social Committee chose to dissolved itself last winter when the board wanted control of it. Approximately 2-3 people now control the club house and all funds generated.

posted by Anonymous : 7:26 PM, March 30, 2013

I note that the blog moderator has engaged in some "housekeeping", archiving some of the older posts and blogs. This prompted me to consider just how valuable this blog is as forum where persons are free to put forward views and facts that would otherwise be, shall we say, "unavailable" to some who care to look closely at the events of the past couple of years. Therefore, I'll say something that could be considered blasphemy by a segment of residents:


I just felt this needed to be said.

posted by edp : 7:00 AM, April 06, 2013

I'll second that. I especially like the audios of meetings and hope that recordings of all meetings will be available.

Sandy Kramer
Casa # 62

posted by Anonymous : 6:48 PM, April 06, 2013

Sandy, I think your idea of recording and releasing audio of meetings (I assume you mean Board of Director, Homeowners' and AGMs/EGMs) is a very good one. Certainly, it would reinforce the notion of transparency in Board decision-making and we do now "have the technology". However, I don't think this blog is the appropriate forum. If the Board decides to routinely release audio recordings of the meetings they organize, they should (and would want to) do so themselves.

The Board has actively discouraged residents and homeowners from looking at this blog, so putting forward your suggestion here is probably not all that useful. I would recommend that an individual or group NOT currently associated with the dissidents (aka the "troublemakers") put the suggestion to the Board for consideration. There are modalities that would need to be ironed out, but personally, I don't see any overriding impediments. I hope you decide to pursue your good idea.

posted by edp : 11:03 AM, April 07, 2013

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?