Guadalajara Reporter

Dear Sir,

I continue to be quite concerned about the lack of progress to a solution of the impasse in the administration of one of the jewels of living in Chapala.  I’m sorry as well that your newspaper has recently given undue publicity to a few people intent on disruption. The “Associacion de Colonos del Fraccionamiento Chula Vista de Chapala, A.C.” has been the legal organization that has administered quite well the operation of our beautiful subdivision for the nearly five years that I have been a homeowner.  I have been acquainted with a few of the people who have accepted the position of director of that group during that time.  I can’t say I know any of them well, but have been pleased with the interest and effort they and the employees of Chula Vista have put forth to maintain Chula Vista as a first-class residential area with cost-efficient and effective services.  They have also, over the last few years, appropriately raised the need for longer term action to preserve basic services (water in particular) for future residents.

I’m sorry to read so much distortion from a group of dissidents who are attempting to wrest leadership of the fraccionamiento from those who unselfishly accepted positions of leadership.  You report they have “a court order,” secured apparently from a different court than the one which previously endorsed the legitimacy of the existing organization and its elected directors.  From what I have observed, that small group of people have gained “proxies” from owners of Chula Vista property and have used that authority to create a competing entity to take control of an area with nearly 300 parcels of land.  They claim to have had the authority of more than 50 of those owners – less than 20 percent.  I do not know the specific owners of most of those properties, but on the basis of my observation, I wonder if most of those proxies are from owners who are non resident and have delegated the duties of care to commercial interests.

That small group had the effrontery to disrupt the Annual General Meeting of the legitimate homeowners on January 31 – attended in person by well over 100 actual homeowners.  My rough estimate of Chula Vista residents, gathered by casual observation, is that no more than one-third of us are “permanent” residents.  The remainder are divided between Guadalajara “weekenders,” investors and snowbirds – some of the latter of who often cede an ownership proxy to a property manager, who is able to claim representation as an owner.

I sadly conclude that the group which has Ms. Peace as its leader is composed primarily of an avaricious number of people whose primary goal may be to exploit the streets of Chula Vista as an entry to property ripe for development (goodbye to tranquility) and a few actual residents who seem to be perpetually unhappy and offer no constructive suggestions.

We enjoy Chula Vista; it has made us cherish and love the area.  We equally regret that some with what appears to be a selfish motive are so intent on disrupting what has been a beautiful place to live.