Words And Phrases To Avoid….


….when you are trying to accomplish a specific goal.

There are certain phrases that you never want to have connected to a product you’re selling, or a ballot measure you are proposing, such as:

1) New prescription drug manufacturers want to avoid disclosure, “may cause heart attack or stroke, resulting in death or serious disability, or birth defects.”
2) Reduced-fat food product manufacturers want to avoid disclosure, “may cause anal leakage.”
3) Children’s toy sellers want to avoid disclosure, “contains lead.”
4) Tobacco product distributors want to avoid disclosure, “may cause cancer.”
5) Residential land developers want to avoid disclosure, ” Mello Roos.”

The publication of such disclosures make potential buyers uncomfortable with the product, which reduces acceptance.

Back in the 1980s, a much-younger Zak Turango ventured into the Real Estate industry, rapidly becoming the Top Listing Agent for all of the ERA Real Estate franchises in the Central California region.

One of the things I learned, when showing a house to a prospective buyer, was that any negative discovery by the potential buyer would almost automatically eliminate that house from consideration for purchase by the potential buyer. “Something just doesn’t feel right,” they would say, during a follow-up discussion.

As a result, whenever I  listed a residential property, I would advise the sellers as to how to “eliminate their negatives.”

Last evening, as I drove to Lake Elsinore to observe the watery landing of the Martin Mars air tanker (which did not show up when it was supposed to; it is now scheduled to arrive later this afternoon), I spotted a rather prominent “Vote No on Measure D” sign attached to the fence opposite the entrance to Windsong Valley.

As you can see, a very prominent part of the signage includes the phrase, “NO MELLO ROOS Parks Tax.”

That’s not even a complete sentence, but it is effective, nonetheless.

Believe me, although not every homeowner understands the implications of what a Mello Roos is, despite any hapless efforts to “educate” them, they know that it may be something bad and should be avoided.

Faced with the daunting task of securing a two thirds majority vote for a simple $28 per year “replacement” tax, the Wildomar City Council foolishly indulged the politically-naïve Blue Ribbon Commission’s recommendation to create a “Mello Roos/Community Facilities District,” a vehicle for what has become Measure D, which expands the scope of the original tax from “maintenance only” to include recreation services/programs, and increases the number of parcels to be taxed from 8000 to 12,000 parcels.

Measure D is just not the same, simple little tax of $28 per year that it  purports to replace.

In doing so, the City Council handed their political adversaries, whom they knew to exist, the most effective weapon available with which to defeat Measure D.

If you want to see how effective a weapon that it  is, please click on the following:


There is not an effective way for the pro-Measure D advocates to “educate” any voters differently about Mello Roos’ inclusion in the measure, because much of what is published on the webpage is, unfortunately, true.

The City Council will have no one else to blame but themselves, if Measure D fails to secure a 66 2/3% majority vote on June 07, 2011.

Comments can be made to zakturango@excite.com.

It almost seems as if the Council and their surrogates, are going through the motions of an election doomed to failure, yet at the same time attempting to retain the basis to blame someone else for their failure; ( i.e., stingy voters, Steve Beutz/Martha Bridges, etc.), when they will only have themselves to blame.

This process could have/should have been done differently, but they would not listen to anyone but themselves.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: