Marin IJ Readers’ Forum for Feb. 6, 2022

Warnings, research could have helped fraud victims

The sale of Ken Casey’s properties (“Marin fraudsters’ scheme fuels $437M property selloff,” Jan. 24) prompts me to observe how often investors in the Bay Area get burned by investing in real estate with nice-sounding targeted returns when they are sold to unsuspecting investors.

I can recall the mid-1980s, when San Rafael mortgage broker Michael Woodson was convicted of fraud. It was one of the earliest real estate frauds and there have been many since, right up until this latest involving Casey.

This should be a cautionary tale to anyone investing in mortgage funds, first and second mortgages and the like.

According to a 1997 report in the IJ (later cited in a column by Dick Spotswood in 2020 following Casey’s death), Casey went to jail then for a felony conviction causing him to lose his license as an accountant. I wonder if any of these latest victims knew. There is a reason that criminal background checks are done by many employers.

Retirees should be warned that these types of investments are generally illiquid at a time when they might need funds to live on. They are also very hard to value.

— Paul Hough, San Rafael

Water district’s desal avoidance lacks analysis

Richard Rubin makes excellent points in his recent Marin Voice commentary (“Water district must expand supply by reconsidering desalination plan,” Jan. 30).

He notes that there are many functioning desalination plants in California, with many more in the planning stage. Yet, here in Marin County, despite the fact that 12 years ago the district’s managing director strongly supported building such a plant, the board has obstructed every effort to do so.

If its refusals had been based on analysis, these would be responsible decisions, but the records indicate otherwise.

I believe the current board members’ opposition to desalination is not based on scientific evidence, but on a seemingly quasi-religious belief that Marin must constantly get by with less and less — even as our population is mandated to grow. It’s time to elect new board members who will bring open minds to the crucial issue of having adequate water.

— Steve Stein, Larskpur

Site of Larkspur Homekey program is a good choice

Pending receipt of state funding, the Marin Board of Supervisors will soon be considering a substantial investment in the purchase of 1251 South Eliseo Drive in Larkspur for the Project Homekey program to house people in need.

If purchased, the vacant, skilled nursing facility will be repurposed to provide transitional housing for 43 homeless individuals. Homekey is a state-sponsored program offering grant dollars to local jurisdictions for the purpose of developing transitional housing for the homeless. Having been involved with the Project Homekey process for the 3301 Kerner Blvd. office building in San Rafael, I believe that the program is the right solution for Marin. The San Rafael project has been programmed to provide 44 transitional housing units.

Action by the county to pursue this Larkspur site should be a “no-brainer.” It offers broad housing opportunities. It is near transit, health care and other services.

In fact, it is perhaps an even better choice for Project Homekey than the Kerner site for two reasons. First, unlike the office building in San Rafael, the skilled nursing facility was built for habitation. Converting the Kerner building has numerous construction and building code challenges because it was initially built for office use.

Second, the Larkspur site is a few walking steps to MarinHealth Medical Center, a major medical center with full services that include the only in-patient psychiatric care unit in Marin County.

Every community in Marin needs to be part of the solution for housing the homeless as it is a countywide issue. I encourage county approval of this Larkspur site for the Project Homekey program.

— Paul Jensen, Marinwood

St. Vincent’s housing opposition always heavy

A recent article published in the Marin IJ (“Marin issues list of potential housing locations,” Jan. 31) mentions a current proposal to allow construction of 1,800 homes on the agricultural land owned by the St. Vincent’s School for Boys.

The article mentions that a previous plan for housing on the land was met with protests. Many people wrote letters against those plans at the time. I hope the voices of the people will be heard.

— Gil Deane, Mill Valley