|
| Author
|
Post |
 
|
|
00SL2
F L I N T O I D
|
I'm not a lawyer but I don't believe DW's claim of interest (lien) constitutes
a form of ownership in the property. If the property gets sold, first mortgage
and taxes get satisfied, then any other liens against the property get paid
before the seller gets what's left over. I don't think DW's lien is reportable
under the § 1-145 you cited. It's not (a) earnings from an employer;
(b) self-earnings; (c) a corporation or business he has an interest in; or
(d) a loan received.
It is interesting that the same day DW loaned the couple money, Jason
Gamlin signed Quit Claim Deed to Deirdre Fuller Gamlin, just one week after
their mortgage to Chemical Bank.
Terry Bankert, what's your legal opinion about the "Claim of Interest" being
just a lien against the property or an actual form of ownership claim? And
whether it's reportable under the § 1-145 Public D cites. Note MCL 565.103
cited on the recorded claim.
Public D, if the allegation is that there was an inappropriate relationship
between the HUD director and DW, I would like to hear their side of the
story. Sorry I'm unable to watch your videos on my dial-up connection.
Wish I could. |
|
|
Sun Oct 28, 2007 8:13 pm |
|
|
Public D
F L I N T O I D
|
Thanks for that, 00SL2. I'm not an attorney either. But no, I don't think a 'lein' in any way constitutes 'ownership,' but under § 1-145 it is not ownership of property that must be established and disclosed, simply a financial [i]interest[/i/ in the property, which I think an official 'claim of interest' like the one above certainly amounts to.
You asked about what Don and Gamlin say about their 'financial relationship' and how it did or did not impact their 'professional relationship.' This is from the May 2006 Uncommon Sense article on the matter:
Williamson told The Uncommon Sense that he gave the $53,000 loan to Gamlin because he is “In the business of loaning money,” and that his reasons for the loan are “Confidential, between me and Jason Gamlin.”
According to the Flint City Charter, such financial interests are not “confidential.” Rather, all elected city officials must disclose them annually. Based on available documents obtained from the Flint City Clerk’s office, Williamson has made no such disclosure, though he has until June 30 of this year to do so.
By March 2005, Flint’s inability to administer HUD funding had become so dire, Gamlin was forced to report in the annual Monitoring Review of Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) that the city’s failure to execute and implement its approved community development programs was of “grave concern.” On August 29, 2005, Williamson filed the $53,000 claim of interest on Gamlin’s 3636 Hawthorn Street property.
United States Federal Laws 5 CFR 2635.501 and 5 CFR 2635.502 impose ethical standards on federal employees with regard to financial obligations, disclosure and conflict of interest. According to Flint ACLU attorney Gregory Gibbs, “These provisions are intended to ensure that a federal employee takes appropriate steps to avoid an appearance of loss of impartiality in the performance of his official duties. It would seem to me that if the federal employee in question is obligated by loan to the city official in question, then (quoting from the law) ‘the circumstances would cause a reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts to question his impartiality’ regarding any transaction between the federal and city official.”
Gamlin retired from HUD in June of 2005 and could not be reached for comment. Gamlin’s wife, Attorney Deidre Fuller said, “There was no loan from Don Williamson as far as I know.” When asked about the $53,000 claim of interest in real estate, on which her name also appears, Fuller responded, “It doesn’t mean that that document is correct, does it? It doesn’t mean that it is true…I’m sure that everything that you come across isn’t necessarily the truth, is it?”
________________________________
You said it, Deidre! |
_________________
http://www.toomuchonline.org/index.html
http://www.hr676.org
http://www.pnhp.org/publications/the_national_health_insurance_bill_hr_676.php |
|
|
Mon Oct 29, 2007 8:00 am |
|
|
The Mole
F L I N T O I D
|
| Another interesting aspect of this is that June Urdy, who is the notary on the above document, works for "The Con Artist currently known as Mayor". She is his secretary. |
_________________
Digging holes around City Hall |
|
|
Mon Oct 29, 2007 11:03 am |
|
|
Public D
F L I N T O I D
|
Here's how former Michigan Attorney General Frank Kelley describes claims of interest in real property under MCL 565.103; MSA 26.1273, the instrument used by Williamson to cover his $53,000 unpaid loan to the then owner of the property, former Flint HUD director Jason Gamlin:
http://www.ag.state.mi.us/opinion/datafiles/1980s/op06319.htm
"Any interest, claim or charge against such land may be preserved and kept effective by filing for record with the reqister of deeds in the county where the lands lie during such 40-year period, of a notice in writing, duly verified under oath, setting forth the nature of the claim, interest, or charge. MCL 565.103; MSA 26.1273."
That would explain why it is still on record with the Gensee County Register of Deeds. It does not explain, however, why Williamson doesn't feel he needs to disclose this interest in property as mandated by the Flint Code of Law:
§ 1-145 ANNUAL DISCLOSURE BY ELECTIVE OFFICERS OF EMPLOYER, BUSINESS AND REAL PROPERTY INTERESTS, GIFTS AND OTHER SOURCES OF INCOME.
Every elective officer shall, on or before July 1 of each year, file a sworn statement with the City Clerk which shall list the following information:
(d) The address or legal description of every parcel of land within the city valued at more than $2,500 in which the elective officer has an interest.
___________________________
My guess is he decided to take his chances with the Flint law not being enforced, or even discovered, rather than disclose a clear path to his role in federal conflict of interest violations.
Anybody know how to get a federal investigation launched around here? |
_________________
http://www.toomuchonline.org/index.html
http://www.hr676.org
http://www.pnhp.org/publications/the_national_health_insurance_bill_hr_676.php |
|
|
Tue Oct 30, 2007 1:23 pm |
|
|
00SL2
F L I N T O I D
|
Public D, we're interpreting differently. First of all, AG Opinion 6319 was
rendered for the question: "May a memorandum of land contract be
recorded by the county register of deeds without certification by the county
treasurer that there are no tax liens on the property and that all property
taxes have been paid for the last 5 years?" That means do I have to get a
tax certification on the bottom of the land contract memorandum from the
treasurer's office before I record it with the Register of Deeds.
Next, you state "Here's how former Michigan Attorney General Frank Kelley
describes claims of interest in real property under MCL 565.103; MSA
26.1273 ... 'Any interest, claim or charge against such land may be
preserved and kept effective by filing for record with the reqister of deeds in
the county where the lands lie during such 40-year period, of a notice in
writing, duly verified under oath, setting forth the nature of the claim,
interest, or charge. MCL 565.103; MSA 26.1273.'
Your choice of words with the quote is misleading because the AG is not
describing
a claim of interest, but rather how the claim of interest
may be
preserved and kept effective.
Here is the paragraph verbatim--you left out
the important sentence about
marketable title being subject to claims of
interest:
quote:
MCL 565.101; MSA 26.1271, provides that a qualified person who has an
unbroken chain of title of record to any interest in land for 40
years shall at the end of that period be deemed to have marketable title to
such interest in land
subject, however, to such claims of interest
in
such lands which have been recorded during said 40-year period.
Any
interest, claim or charge against such land
may be preserved and kept
effective by filing for record with the reqister of deeds in the county where the
lands lie during such 40-year period, of a notice in writing, duly verified under
oath,
setting forth the nature of the claim, interest,
or charge. MCL
565.103; MSA 26.1273. (Emphasis supplied.)
The claim of interest will forever be "on record with the Genesee County
Register of Deeds." It may, however, be resolved by the filing of a later
document stating that claim of interest is released, discharged or satisfied.
I still don't believe DW's claim of interest for a personal loan is rightfully
construed to be reportable under the Section you quote, barring a formal title
opinion to the contrary.
If you want to made a federal case of it contact a federal office. |
|
|
|
Tue Oct 30, 2007 9:49 pm |
|
|
Public D
F L I N T O I D
|
|
|
Wed Oct 31, 2007 9:45 am |
|
|
00SL2
F L I N T O I D
|
Maybe a title examiner who has a personal interest?  |
|
|
|
Wed Oct 31, 2007 11:46 am |
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
FlintTalk.com Forum Index
> Political Talk
