0001
1
2 BEFORE THE BUREAU OF REAL ESTATE
3 DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS
4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
5 JOHN DECURE, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
6
7
8 In the Matter of the Accusation )
Against: ) Case No. H-03010 FR
9 ) OAH No. 2016051017
STACEY ANN HAVENER, ) Volume III
10 )
Respondent. )
11 ________________________________)
12
13
14
15
16 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
17 Los Angeles, California
18 Friday, February 17, 2017
19
20
21
22 Reported by:
23 SHELBY K. MAASKE
Hearing Reporter
24
Job No.:
25 14092OAH
0002
1 BEFORE THE BUREAU OF REAL ESTATE
2 DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS
3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
4 JOHN DECURE, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
5
6
7 In the Matter of the Accusation )
Against: ) Case No. H-03010 FR
8 ) OAH No. 2016051017
STACEY ANN HAVENER, ) Volume III
9 )
Respondent. )
10 ________________________________)
11
12
13
14
15
16 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS, taken at
17 320 West Fourth Street, Suite 630, Los Angeles,
18 California, commencing at 9:12 a.m.
19 on Friday, February 17, 2017, heard before
20 JOHN DECURE, Administrative Law Judge,
21 reported by SHELBY K. MAASKE, Hearing Reporter.
22
23
24
25
0003
1 APPEARANCES:
2 For the COMPLAINANT: BUREAU OF REAL ESTATE
By: DIANE LEE
3 320 West Fourth Street
Suite 350
4 Los Angeles, California
90013
5
6 For the RESPONDENT: CENTURY LAW GROUP, LLP
By: EDWARD O. LEAR
7 5200 West Century Boulevard
West Tower
8 Suite 345
Los Angeles, California
9 90045
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
0004
1 I N D E X
2 RESPONDENT’S
Witnesses: Direct Cross Redirect Recross
3
Stacey Havener 9 42 83
4 (Continued) 110 111
5 Vicky Kraft 89 93
6 Barbara Ladin 99 102
7 Lucinda Shankle 117 121
8
9
10
11
12 E X H I B I T S
13 Marked for Received
COMPLAINANT’S: Identification in Evidence
14
12 – Interview of 51
15 Stacey Ann Havener
March 2, 2015
16
13 – Declaration of 52 55
17 Stacey Ann Havener
March 2, 2015
18
17 – Residential Lease 56
19 for 2816 Highland Way
August 30, 2013
20
24 – De Mascio’s E-mail 125
21
29 – Documents submitted 127
22 by Ray Scott
23 31 – Complaint by David 130
and Jackie Ingram
24 July 23, 2014
25
0005
1 E X H I B I T S (Continued)
2 Marked for Received
COMPLAINANT’S: Identification in Evidence
3
32 – Residential lease 56 58
4 agreement with Ingrams
October 9, 2013
5
34 – Declaration of 131
6 David Ingram
November 11, 2016
7
35 – E-mails between 59 63
8 Jackie Ingram and
Stacey Ann Havener
9
49 – Partial timeline from 135
10 April 2015 to May 2015
11 51 – Transcript of voicemail 138
messages
12
53 – Wikipedia Articles 145 145
13
54 – Base Camp website pages 145 147
14
57 – Rachel Unell’s 147 149
15 letters and news articles
16 58 – Declaration from 149
Maral Eskenian
17
65 – Declaration of 153
18 Maral Eskenian
19
RESPONDENT’S:
20
A – Character reference 24 37
21 letter from Judith Cassis
22 B – Character reference letter 25 37
from Mar Preston
23
C – Character reference letter 37
24 from Michael P.M. Dulle
25
0006
1 E X H I B I T S (Continued)
2 Marked for Received
RESPONDENT’S: Identification in Evidence
3
D – Character Reference letter 37
4 from Mel Wienstein
5 E – Character reference letter 37
from Chad and Vicki Thomas
6
F – Character reference letter 37
7 from Rachel Unell
8 G – Character reference letter 37
from William Fair
9
H – Character reference letter 37
10 from Michael Howson
11 I – Character reference letter
from Stephen Tako
12
M – Character reference letter 37
13 from Lee Dunnavant
14 N – Character reference letter 37
from Peter Han
15
O – Character reference letter 37
16 from Pamela Gragg
17 P – Character reference letter 37
from Teresa Hitchcock
18
Q – Character reference letter 37
19 from Gill Karson
20 R – Character reference letter 37
from Sabine and Roy Morris
21
S – Character reference letter 37
22 from Joseph Ladin
23 T – Proof of payment 38 38
of security deposit to
24 the Ingrams
25
0007
1 E X H I B I T S (Continued)
2 Marked for Received
RESPONDENT’S: Identification in Evidence
3
W – All Seasons Property 39
4 Management Policies and
Procedure
5
X – Resume of Linda Sheldon 172
6
Y – Character reference letter 41
7 from Blumberg
8 Z – Character reference letter 41
from Sharon Andrade
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
0008
1 Los Angeles, California, Friday, February 17, 2017
2 9:12 a.m.
3
4
5 THE COURT: On the record.
6 Good morning. In the Matter of the Bureau of
7 Real Estate Accusation versus Stacy Ann Havener. Today is
8 Friday the 17 of February 2017. It’s approximately 9:12 a.m.
9 We had left off after the Agency had rested its case, and
10 Mr. Lear had presented Ms. Havener as a witness.
11 I’m not going to swear you in again, but you are still
12 under oath. Do you remember my suggestions?
13 THE WITNESS: The waiting to hear and take a moment?
14 THE COURT: I’ll give them to you. Just let a few seconds
15 go by that way if Ms. Lee has an objection or Mr. Lear has an
16 objection, we will have one voice at a time talking. If you get
17 asked a question and you don’t know what the question means, say
18 “I don’t understand the question,” and the attorney will
19 rephrase it.
20 If you get asked a question — and this is really
21 important and I should have told you this anyway again, if you
22 are asked a question and you really just don’t know the answer,
23 I don’t want you speculate. I don’t want you to guesstimate or
24 conjure up an answer because that’s not evidence. That’s just
25 you sort of trying to be a good witness and that’s not
0009
1 necessary. So if you honestly don’t know the answer to
2 something, say “I don’t know.”
3 THE WITNESS: Okay.
4 MR. LEAR: Your Honor, may I take a moment? These are
5 character witnesses.
6 THE COURT: Off the record.
7 (Pause in the proceedings)
8 THE COURT: Back on the record. You can proceed and
9 continue.
10 MR. LEAR: Thank you.
11
12 DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued)
13 BY MR. LEAR:
14 Q Ms. Havener, we’re back in trial. It’s been a while;
15 right?
16 A Yes.
17 Q You have already began your testimony?
18 A Yes.
19 Q In your prior testimony, we essentially went through
20 your background.
21 A Correct.
22 Q Is there anything else about your background that you
23 would like the Judge to know at this point?
24 A I apologize. I don’t quite recall where we left off.
25 THE COURT: Let me interject a little to try to give you a
0010
1 hand. I write notes as the witness is testifying. I’ll give
2 you a little bit of the last several notes I wrote. They had to
3 do with the trust account, and that you are responsible for it
4 now. You’d have to open those accounts, but Milton, your
5 ex-husband, would need to assist you. You were also running a
6 cafe.
7 You had asked Union Bank to open — there’s four
8 accounts and that Union Bank did not open a designated trust
9 account but you treated it as one. You know now that you must
10 have exact amounts and have an actual trust account. You still
11 can’t get back to change the designation to a “trust account.”
12 You tried to find the documents but your staffer named Katy,
13 K-a-t-y Cruz, was not available.
14 The last question Mr. Lear asked you, as far as I
15 could tell, is: Why bother with property management? And your
16 answer was that you knew the account was short, in so many
17 words, which is why Milton had surrendered his license. You
18 felt you had to make things right.
19 All right. That’s the last half page of my notes.
20 THE WITNESS: Okay.
21 MR. LEAR: Thank you, Judge.
22 BY MR. LEAR:
23 Q Let’s take that last point with respect to the
24 property management. Are you still engaged at all in property
25 management?
0011
1 A Very, very slightly. I have some people who ask me to
2 help them. And I told them I don’t do management anymore. I
3 would do a tenant locate if that was the only alternative, which
4 is the only related stuff I wanted to do.
5 Anyone who had any kind of management I would
6 officially end at the end of 2016. But if they had any issues
7 lingering that I would try to address those as best as I could.
8 But I would be taking on no new management-style rentals.
9 Q Why is that?
10 A A number of reasons. It wasn’t nothing — it wasn’t
11 something I wanted to do in the first place. I was also a
12 salesperson. I was a sales broker before. I enjoy sales. I’m
13 very good at it. Secondly, even through this whole course of
14 everything, I’ve tried to correct. And even this case, I’ve
15 just been learning and learning and learning about everything
16 that has to be done, and it’s too much.
17 I can’t do it justice. I can’t do it right. Because
18 I run three businesses, I volunteer for multiple organizations,
19 and I do property management, I would have to hire staff that I
20 don’t have. So I decided it would be better if I didn’t offer
21 the service at all.
22 Q You said you run three businesses. What businesses do
23 you run?
24 A I have an Internet cafe, and I have my sales business,
25 and I basically consider the rental another — almost a separate
0012
1 business because they’re dealt with so differently.
2 When I’m running a whole sales team selling
3 properties, that’s really treated differently than running a
4 management. Even though they are both real estate business,
5 they’re very, very different beasts in our industry. So they
6 almost have to be handled differently and separate.
7 Q Your Internet cafe is Base Camp?
8 A Yes.
9 Q You mentioned that you are involved with voluntary
10 activities. Which voluntary activities?
11 A Right now, I’m currently — I’ve been involved in
12 several over the course of the years that I have been up there.
13 Chamber of Commerce, Junior Falcon Football Leagues. Right now,
14 I’m on the Board of Trade for Kern County as a volunteer. I’m
15 still a volunteer for the Mountain Theater Alliance, which is a
16 theater group that puts on performances.
17 THE COURT: Let me make sure I got all those. Chamber of
18 Commerce — is that for Frazier Park?
19 THE WITNESS: Yeah. The whole mountain community. That
20 was a few years ago.
21 THE COURT: Okay. And the Board of Trade for Kern County.
22 THE WITNESS: That’s active.
23 THE COURT: Okay. There was one other I think you
24 mentioned.
25 THE WITNESS: The active one is Mountain Theater Alliance.
0013
1 THE COURT: Thank you. Go ahead, Mr. Lear.
2 MR. LEAR: Thank you.
3 BY MR. LEAR:
4 Q With respect to the Chamber of Commerce, what period
5 of time did you volunteer for the Chamber of Commerce?
6 A I basically started when the recession hit because I
7 was still doing sales but there wasn’t a lot of sales at that
8 time so I started in about in 2008. The other volunteers in
9 that organization, one in particular, was very supportive of me
10 putting more energy into my business. And realizing that she
11 saw that I tended to overextend myself because I wanted to help
12 everybody, she had made it clear that I should probably not
13 volunteer anymore because I had enough going on. So I ended it
14 about probably ’11 or ’12. I don’t recall exactly when I
15 stopped.
16 Q What were your roles and responsibilities with the
17 Chamber?
18 A I was the volunteer chamber president. To oversee
19 things like holiday fair; deal with inquires in the community
20 from people coming in and out; field phone calls that came in
21 from businesses, homeowners, people who lived in the community.
22 Q Approximately how many hours a year did you spend
23 working as the chamber president?
24 A I honestly didn’t pay attention.
25 Q More than 20?
0014
1 A Slightly.
2 Q More than 40?
3 A Over the years?
4 Q Yes.
5 A Yes.
6 Q Per year?
7 A Easily 100.
8 Q So about a hundred a year?
9 A Yes.
10 Q With respect to the Board or Trade, for what period of
11 time had you been involved with the Board or Trade?
12 A A dear person named Penny referred me. And I would
13 say it was — I have to have some reference points. I
14 apologize. It was before my sister passed away, so that’s 2010.
15 I would say 2009 is when I probably started with the Board of
16 Trade.
17 Q Can you give us the official name of the Board of
18 Trade?
19 A The Kern County Board of Trade. It’s appointed by the
20 Board of Supervisors for Kern County.
21 Q You’ve been involved continuously since 2009?
22 A Yes.
23 Q What are your roles and responsibilities?
24 A I am a volunteer director of the board. Someone gets
25 appointed in each district. There are five districts. I am in
0015
1 District 4 under David Couch. We meet approximately every other
2 month to talk about how tourism can help impact Kern County,
3 bring visitors into that county.
4 Q What are your specific roles and responsibilities?
5 A To attend those meetings, to share information with
6 the other Board of Directors that the, then, head director can
7 take to the supervisors or county people to discuss what things
8 might need to be considered.
9 Q Approximately how many hours per year do you spend
10 with the Board of Trade?
11 A That one is probably — our meetings run roughly two
12 to four hours, and we do that six times a year. And then I go
13 to a couple of special events.
14 Q So 30 to 40?
15 A Yeah.
16 Q Okay. You mentioned as well, your volunteer
17 activities for the Falcon Football League?
18 A Yes. That ended when my son went off to high school
19 and college. I only did that when he was younger.
20 Q For what period of time did you do Falcon football
21 volunteerism?
22 A That would be when he was 8 to 13. We stopped when he
23 started going to high school.
24 Q How old is he now?
25 A 22.
0016
1 Q So you haven’t done that for about nine years?
2 A Correct.
3 Q And you mentioned the last one, which I didn’t write
4 fully down. The Mountain —
5 A Mountain Theater. I was involved in the Mountain
6 Shakespeare festival since about ’07. And that eventually ended
7 after years and years of doing theater and plays. Every year we
8 would do a few events, and then it changed into the Mountain
9 Theater Alliance when that group ended. Now we try to do two to
10 three plays a year throughout the community.
11 Q For what period of time were you involved with
12 Mountain Theater Alliance?
13 A I still am. They basically just got their nonprofit
14 status this year even though they were informally doing plays
15 before that — under that entity, a couple of years.
16 Q Then there was a prior entity.
17 A The Shakespeare Festival.
18 Q So approximately how many hours a year do you spend
19 with your theater volunteering activities?
20 A When we’re doing a play, we rehearse four to five
21 times a week for two to three hours. When we do the
22 performances, we get there at 6:00 to do a performance at 8:00
23 and then we shut down at 11:00 or 12:00. So once we’re doing a
24 performance, I’ll be there for about six hours a day. And we
25 would do, usually, at least six performances two to three times
0017
1 a year.
2 It would be — never mind the meetings and the getting
3 props and things, so that would be in the hundreds of hours per
4 year.
5 Q So somewhere between 150 to 300?
6 A Yeah.
7 Q You don’t get paid for that?
8 A No.
9 Q So let’s refocus and go back to the operative
10 document, which is the First Amended Accusation, which you do
11 not have, but which you’ve read; correct?
12 A Yes.
13 Q There’s an Accusation that deals with a property at
14 2716 Highland Way, do you recall that?
15 A Yes.
16 Q That is Karrie and Eugene D?
17 A Yes.
18 Q You recall that when we were in trial before, that
19 Karrie De Mascio testified?
20 A Yes.
21 Q You heard her testimony; right?
22 A Yes.
23 Q Did you agree or disagree with her testimony?
24 A Mostly I agreed with her testimony.
25 Q Okay. Were there any points with which you disagreed?
0018
1 A Really only one minor point. And that’s when we had
2 one meeting to go over the issues she was having. And I
3 remember in her testimony, she said that I acted as if I didn’t
4 care. I don’t remember her exact words, but I just — that
5 wasn’t the case at all.
6 I could understand how she misinterpreted it because I
7 was overwhelmed by certain things in the situation. So when she
8 came to me upset, it got me very upset. So I figured at that
9 time the most important thing I should do is try to stay
10 professional and help her. And so I should have apologized to
11 her for coming across that distant because that was not the case
12 at all. I was trying to figure out what I needed to do to help
13 her.
14 Q That’s when Ms. De Mascio testified it seemed to her,
15 Ms. De Mascio, that the situation didn’t bother you?
16 A Right. That’s absolutely incorrect. This whole
17 situation has bothered me tremendously. It’s probably been the
18 hardest thing in my entire life.
19 Q Anything else with respect to Ms. De Mascio?
20 A No.
21 Q Then we heard testimony from Ray Scott.
22 A Yes.
23 Q Do you remember him?
24 A Yes.
25 Q He was from Mountainside Disposal?
0019
1 A Correct.
2 Q You were here when he testified?
3 A Yes.
4 Q Was there anything with which you disagreed with
5 regarding his testimony?
6 A No. He seemed very understanding and reasonable when
7 we tried to resolve his situation.
8 Q Then there was testimony from Ms. Ashmore, do you
9 remember that?
10 A Yes.
11 Q Is there anything that Ms. Ashmore testified to with
12 which you disagreed? And we’re talking about the 17478 Lockwood
13 Valley Road property, which was the Fifth Cause of Action.
14 A Just a few items with Terry. One, when we placed her,
15 that was when I was trying to deal with only tenant locates and
16 not take on any new management. I was only involved in the
17 leftover management files. Any new stuff I wanted to structure
18 as tenant locates so that I wouldn’t take on more than I could
19 chew.
20 I had done her as a tenant locate. She wouldn’t
21 understand that structure because she’s just trying to find a
22 home. But the arrangement that I had with the owner is that I
23 would take a finder’s fee; place her; execute the contract, any
24 addendums they needed; and then we would be out of it. So it
25 was structured as tenant locate. I was not managing that
0020
1 property. I think sometimes she tried to contact me, and I said
2 there’s nothing else for me to do. I think that’s when she was
3 maybe feeling that I was blowing her off. That was not my
4 intent. That was the extent of my services.
5 Obviously, we continued to help them. We definitely
6 should have overseen that much better. Then she said something
7 to the effect that I called here a “troublemaker.” Absolutely
8 not. I thought she was completely reasonable as a tenant. I
9 understand she was in a difficult situation. I just wanted her
10 to be very clear that we did — what we call a “memo,” which is
11 your statement of condition, that is where you can list
12 everything.
13 I was trying to explain that for her protection.
14 That’s not a list that goes to the owner and he then fixes
15 everything on that list. She had a misunderstanding about that,
16 and I just wanted to make it clear. Obviously, she took that
17 very personally. I was not trying to attack her. I was just
18 trying to explain the difference.
19 Q You were here, as well, when Dr. Lareau testified.
20 A Yes.
21 Q Did you agree with his testimony?
22 A Yes.
23 Q With respect to the allegations in general, they
24 mainly deal with the property management issue?
25 A Yes.
0021
1 Q Why will those problems that you had not happen in the
2 future?
3 A Well, there’s two options from my perspective. One, I
4 would never do management again, unless I felt that it was
5 completely acceptable to the BRE, and I had the right staffing
6 and policies and procedures in place that I could do it with
7 100 percent, you know, accuracy, no problems. Knowing because
8 I’m a salesperson and that I can’t do that service, my other
9 option is that I would never do it again.
10 Q What about having Mr. Hudson do it for you?
11 A No. Absolutely not.
12 Q Why not?
13 A He’s not good at accounting and details. He’s a
14 wonderful person and he truly cares. He overextended us in
15 trying to be caring with people through the recession, and it’s
16 caused a lot of problems. I don’t ever want to put anyone
17 through that ever again.
18 Q Have you taken any continuing education classes since
19 these proceeding has begun?
20 A Yes.
21 Q Please explain.
22 A For a number of reasons. I’ve now been licensed for
23 quite some time. And I’ve been in the business for almost 20
24 years. This case has brought certain things to my forefront,
25 things that I should have known better, that I wasn’t planning
0022
1 for with management. Secondly, I am required to do education.
2 It’s coming up. It’s just the appropriate time for me to
3 continue taking classes and doing more education.
4 Q Linda Sheldon testified. Please explain
5 Linda Sheldon’s role in your company.
6 A I met Linda Sheldon years ago. Her son has actually
7 been involved in a number of our plays. I discovered she was an
8 accountant. I actually approached her when Milton first gave up
9 his license and I had taken over. I told her I had taken
10 everything over and I asked her if she was available to help me.
11 At that time she expressed that she did want to, but
12 her husband is a diabetic and was an amputee and his health was
13 not in a place that she could assist me at that time, which, of
14 course, I understood. And then some years past, the new audit
15 came up on me, and I met with you and realized that everything I
16 thought I was correcting was obviously not being done well
17 enough. So I reached out to her again to see if she would help
18 me.
19 Q What have you learned from this experience, mainly the
20 BRE prosecution?
21 A I’m not sure I quite understand the question.
22 Q Let me reframe it. So with respect to the way that
23 you operated your business, what have you learned as a result of
24 the allegations by the BRE against you?
25 A That I, as a broker, absolutely have to put the
0023
1 overall business functions of the company in front of my
2 personal area of expertise, which is sales. I was very
3 reactionary in dealing with what was coming at me, and I should
4 have been more proactive in making sure everything under the
5 whole umbrella of the real estate company was being dealt with
6 appropriately, as opposed to just my comfort level of the sales
7 area where I was comfortable and I know I was doing a good job.
8 Q Do you present a threat to the people of the State of
9 California by continuing to hold a broker’s license?
10 A Excuse me?
11 Q Do you present a threat to the people of California by
12 continuing to hold a broker’s license?
13 A Absolutely not.
14 Q Why not?
15 A Because I don’t know if anyone can understand how
16 serious I take this. I have excelled at pretty much everything
17 I’ve ever tried to do. This has been the most mortifying
18 situation I’ve ever been in and I never expected — it’s a very
19 good learning experience for me. I understand that. It has
20 been very, very hard on me. I would never ever, not only myself
21 want to go through this again, but I would never want to see any
22 client as dissatisfied with the services that were offered by a
23 company I am the face of, as what has happened to me in the last
24 two years.
25 Q There’s a stack of documents to your right.
0024
1 A Yes.
2 Q Taking a look at Exhibit A, which is a
3 August 29, 2016 letter from Cassis, C-a-s-s-i-s.
4 A Yes.
5 Q Who it that?
6 A That’s a woman I met through — when I was a volunteer
7 at the Chamber of Commerce, I’ve had many dealings within the
8 years since. She was a writer — or an editor, excuse me, of
9 the paper in Santa Clarita. And I met her thinking, again, in
10 promoting tourism and trying to help the community, that she
11 would be a wonderful connection of the people of Frazier
12 Mountain to meet and connect with.
13 Since then, she’s moved to the area. She’s rented
14 from me, she’s worked for me, she’s volunteered with me, and
15 she’s also headed up a number of groups in the community to help
16 writers and various things.
17 THE COURT: Okay. I’m going to mark that as your
18 Exhibit A.
19 (Respondent’s Exhibit A was marked
20 for identification by the Court.)
21 BY MR. LEAR:
22 Q Did you explain to her the allegations brought against
23 you by the BRE?
24 A Yes. Absolutely.
25 Q Then you asked her to write this letter?
0025
1 A Yes.
2 MR. LEAR: Your Honor, would you like me to have each of
3 the exhibits admitted as we go along, or after go through the
4 entire stack?
5 THE COURT: That’s a good question. I think to save
6 time — my concern today is that there is supposed to be the
7 worst storm in several years bearing down on us and everybody’s
8 got to drive back out of downtown LA. I know the Respondent has
9 to go up the 5 Freeway to Frazier Park.
10 THE WITNESS: One semi was blown over when we left.
11 THE COURT: It might be a very vulnerable community. So
12 I’m sure that’s on your mind. So to save time, I’ll make sure
13 that I remind you. You are not going to walk out of here
14 without any documents having been dealt with. We can do them
15 altogether. I think they all — I looked at them. I didn’t
16 read them, but it looks like they’re all signed and dated and we
17 can deal with them in bulk and save some time that way.
18 MR. LEAR: Thank you, your Honor.
19 THE COURT: All right.
20 BY MR. LEAR:
21 Q Ms. Havener, looking to the premarked Exhibit B, which
22 is a letter from Preston, P-r-e-s-t-o-n.
23 A Yes.
24 THE COURT: I’m marking that as B.
25 (Respondent’s Exhibit B was marked
0026
1 for identification by the Court.)
2 THE COURT: Go ahead.
3 BY MR. LEAR:
4 Q Who is Preston?
5 A Mark Preston is a long-time member of the community
6 and she asked me to list her home.
7 Q Did you explain to her the allegations brought against
8 you by the BRE?
9 A Yes.
10 Q Did you ask her to write this letter?
11 A Yes.
12 Q I don’t see a date here. On our about when did you
13 ask her to write this letter?
14 A It would have been after my discovery of this hearing.
15 So I would say probably in September.
16 Q September of?
17 A Of 2016.
18 Q Take a look at the document premarked as Exhibit C,
19 which is an August 25, 2016, letter from Dulle, D-u-l-l-e. Who
20 is Dulle?
21 A He is a member of the community I met when his, I
22 believe, girlfriend — I apologize. I don’t know if they’re
23 married or not. He asked to have me help her buy a property
24 behind Mountain Club. He was not a party to the purchase, but
25 he became aware of my involvement with the theater. That was
0027
1 something close to him so we began interacting in the Theater
2 Alliance and in the different theater productions.
3 THE COURT: Okay. We are going to go off the record
4 briefly.
5 (Pause in the proceedings)
6 THE COURT: Back on the record.
7 BY MR. LEAR:
8 Q Did you explain to Mr. Dulle the allegations that were
9 brought against you by the BRE?
10 A Yes.
11 Q Did you ask him to write this letter?
12 A Yes.
13 Q Taking a look at what has been premarked as Exhibit D,
14 a letter from Weinstein, W-i-e-n-s-t-e-i-n, dated October 23,
15 2016. Who is Wienstein?
16 A He’s another member of the community. He’s a retired
17 photographer. He also does quite a bit of community service.
18 He and some partners own an art gallery in town. He’s assisted
19 me with taking photographs of my listings.
20 Q Did you explain to Wienstein the allegations brought
21 on you by the BRE?
22 A Yes.
23 Q Did you ask him to write this letter?
24 A Yes.
25 Q Taking a look at what has been premarked Exhibit E, a
0028
1 letter from Chad and Vicki Thomas, T-h-o-m-a-s, dated
2 August 29, 2016. Who are Chad and Vicki Thomas?
3 A Clients who used me to purchase their home in
4 Pine Mountain.
5 Q Did you explain to them to the allegations brought
6 against you by the BRE?
7 A Yes.
8 Q Did you ask them to write this letter?
9 A Yes.
10 Q Taking a look at what has been premarked Exhibit F,
11 which is a September 7, 2016, letter from Unell, U-n-e-l-l. Who
12 is Unell?
13 A Rachel Unell was another volunteer in the community.
14 She is the one that worked with me at the Chamber of Commerce.
15 She was the one that told me I overextended myself too much and
16 should stop volunteering for everything under the sun. And in
17 her words, she was firing me from the chapter because I was
18 doing too much. We continued to have interactions through
19 various volunteer organizations. I’ve helped her husband look
20 at property and do various things like that.
21 Q Did you explain to her the allegations brought against
22 you by the BRE?
23 A Yes.
24 Q Did you ask her to write a letter?
25 A Yes.
0029
1 Q Taking a look at what’s been premarked Exhibit G, an
2 October 4, 2016, letter from F-a-i-r, both William and Kat,
3 K-a-t. Who are the Fairs?
4 A They have been volunteers with me in the theater, and
5 they were involved in the Shakespeare Festival. They are the
6 founders of the Mountain Theater Alliance. We have done many
7 volunteer theater productions together.
8 Q Did you explain to them the allegations brought
9 against you by the BRE?
10 A Yes.
11 Q Did you ask them to write this letter?
12 A Yes.
13 Q Taking a look at what has been premarked as Exhibit H,
14 which is an October 8, 2016, letter from Howson, H-o-w-s-o-n.
15 Who is Howson?
16 A He’s a local home inspector for — does home
17 inspections on properties for buyers.
18 Q Did you explain to Howson the allegations brought
19 against you by the BRE?
20 A Yes.
21 Q Did you ask Howson to write you this letter?
22 A Yes.
23 Q Taking a look at what has been premarked as Exhibit I,
24 that is an October 5, 2016, letter from Tako, T-a-k-o. Who is
25 Tako?
0030
1 A He is a gentleman I met who was doing some acting and,
2 like, children’s — all of, like, anti-bullying videos, and I
3 met him through my Base Camp Cafe.
4 Q Did you explain to him the allegations brought against
5 you by the BRE?
6 A Yes.
7 Q Did you ask him to write this letter?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Taking a look at what has been premarked as Exhibit J,
10 that is an August 26, 2016, letter from Adams, A-d-a-m-s. Who
11 is Adams?
12 A Someone I met through working at my previous job at
13 Mountain Properties whom later became a client who asked me to
14 list his home.
15 Q Did you explain to Mr. Adams the allegations brought
16 against you by the BRE?
17 A Yes.
18 Q Did you ask him to write this letter?
19 A Yes.
20 Q Taking a look at what has been premarked as Exhibit K,
21 which is an undated letter from Summerland. Who is Summerland?
22 A She’s a recent person who was in one of our rentals
23 that also became known to me this year, and expressed an
24 interest in learning real estate, and was wondering if I would
25 mentor her and teach her.
0031
1 Q And Summerland is now working for you at All Seasons?
2 A Yes. Part time.
3 Q What was the approximate date of this letter?
4 A She would have written this in August.
5 Q Of 2016?
6 A Yes.
7 Q Did you explain to her the allegations brought against
8 you by the BRE?
9 A Yes.
10 Q Taking a look at what has been premarked as Exhibit L,
11 that is an August 17, 2016, letter from Reese, R-e-e-s-e. Who
12 is Reese?
13 A He is a home inspector who has done home inspections
14 for some of the escrows I’ve had. He has also used our company
15 services to manage his property, his rentals in the past.
16 Q And apparently he’s a Guinness World record holder.
17 A Yes. He’s pretty proud of that. Pretty interesting
18 stuff if you like that stuff.
19 Q I see. Did you explain to him the allegations brought
20 against you by the BRE?
21 A Yes.
22 Q And then you asked him to write this letter?
23 A Yes.
24 Q Taking a look at Exhibit M.
25 THE COURT: I don’t like to interject, but what does he
0032
1 hold his Guinness Book of World Record in?
2 THE WITNESS: I hope I get this correct because I believe
3 there is a couple. I believe one of them is getting across the
4 United States in a BMW motorcycle in the shortest amount of
5 time. It’s like a —
6 THE COURT: Observing all speed limits.
7 THE WITNESS: Of course. At all times. It’s like a
8 cannonball run they call them, and the other one is he has a
9 Tesla. He has the longest — don’t quote me on this, but he has
10 the fastest time cross-country in a Tesla as well.
11 MR. LEAR: Okay.
12 THE COURT: All right. Very unique letterhead he’s got
13 there. Very subtle. It says, Guinness World Record, Record
14 Holder.
15 THE COURT: My guess is he might have had a few T-shirts
16 made also.
17 THE WITNESS: Yes.
18 THE COURT: Go ahead.
19 BY MR. LEAR:
20 Q Taking a look at what has been premarked as Exhibit M,
21 a letter from Dunnavant, D-u-n-n-a-v-a-n-t, looks like it’s
22 undated. Who is Dunnavant?
23 A She is another member of the community who I met
24 through various volunteer activities. She also rented some
25 commercial space from me at one point through my company.
0033
1 Q Did you explain to her the allegations brought against
2 you by the BRE?
3 A Yes.
4 Q Did you ask her to write a letter?
5 A Yes.
6 Q Approximately when was this letter written?
7 A She probably wrote this in September or October of
8 2016.
9 Q Okay. And taking a look at Exhibit N. Who is Han,
10 H-a-n?
11 A He is a lender that has been involved with me on a
12 number of real estate sales transactions.
13 Q Did you explain to Mr. Han the allegations brought
14 against you by the BRE?
15 A Yes.
16 Q Did you ask him to write a letter on your behalf?
17 A Yes.
18 Q Approximately when did he write this letter?
19 A Probably September of 2016.
20 Q Taking a look at Exhibit O, a letter from Gragg,
21 G-r-a-g-g, dated October 31, 2016. Who is Gragg?
22 A She’s an escrow officer that I’ve done many, many
23 transactions with over the 20 years I’ve lived up there.
24 Q Did you explain to her the BRE allegations against
25 you?
0034
1 A Yes.
2 Q Did you ask her to write this letter on your behalf?
3 A Yes.
4 Q Taking a look at Exhibit P, which is a
5 November 1, 2016, letter from Hitchcock, H-i-t-c-h-c-o-c-k. Who
6 is Hitchcock?
7 A She is the head of the Board of Trade and has been —
8 I met her through my volunteer work with the Board of Trade.
9 Q Did you explain to her the BRE allegations against
10 you?
11 A Yes.
12 Q And then you asked her to write this letter?
13 A Yes.
14 Q Taking a look at Exhibit Q, which is a
15 November 3, 2016 letter from Karson, K-a-r-s-o-n. Who is
16 Karson?
17 A He’s a parent I know from when our kids were five or
18 six. Our sons are the same age.
19 Q Did you explain to Karson the allegations against you
20 from the BRE?
21 A Yes.
22 Q Did you ask Karson to write this letter?
23 A Yes.
24 Q Taking a look at Exhibit R, which is a letter from
25 Sabine Morris and Roy Morris that is undated. Did you ask them
0035
1 to write this letter on your behalf?
2 A Yes.
3 Q Did you explain to them the BRE allegations against
4 you?
5 A Yes.
6 Q And who are the Morrises?
7 A They moved into the community when Mr. Morris was
8 appointed as the new ranger of Los Padres National Forest. He
9 asked me to help him buy a home. Then when he was transferred
10 back to his job in, I believe it’s New Mexico, they asked me to
11 list their home.
12 Q And approximately when did you receive this letter?
13 A I would say — it was before they left. So I would
14 say it’s October or November. Maybe November.
15 Q Of 2016?
16 A Yes.
17 Q Taking a look at Exhibit S, it’s an undated letter
18 from Ladin, L-a-d-i-n. Who is Ladin?
19 A He’s a member of the community that many people know
20 as he is in charge of our — what we call our, basically, our
21 trash site at the mountain communities. Pine Mountain Club is
22 an association. Everyone has to take their trash. We don’t
23 have trash pick up. He’s in charge of that. He and his wife
24 used to own a restaurant. I’ve known them for many years.
25 Q Did you explain to them the BRE allegations against
0036
1 you?
2 A Yes.
3 Q Approximately when did you receive this letter?
4 A I would say November of 2016.
5 Q Taking a look at Exhibit T, what is that?
6 THE COURT: Tell you what. Why don’t we, before we get
7 into T — I think we — at the end of A through S, which is all
8 character reference letters, and I stopped saying I was marking
9 them at about D. But I did mark Exhibits D through S as they
10 were already premarked as indicated by Mr. Lear. Anyway, why
11 don’t we deal with those now before we move into and proceed.
12 Is that okay with you, Mr. Lear?
13 MR. LEAR: Yes. Respondent moves into evidence Exhibits A
14 through S.
15 THE COURT: Okay. Any objection?
16 MS. LEE: No objection if admitted as administrative
17 hearsay with respect to Exhibits A through H, and N through S.
18 Objection as to Exhibits I through L because they are not
19 signed.
20 THE COURT: You know, I noticed that they were unsigned.
21 So what I can do, Mr. Lear, is if perhaps — Ms. Havener, do you
22 remember I, J, K and L, can you take a look at those right now?
23 It’s Mr. Tako, T-a-k-o.
24 THE WITNESS: Yes.
25 THE COURT: Adams, Summerland and Reese.
0037
1 THE WITNESS: Yes.
2 THE COURT: Those people forgot to sign their letters, and
3 in our culture, and as you know as a real estate agent, you’ve
4 got to sign off so that there’s authentication that it really
5 came from you. And sometimes when it’s electronic — unless
6 they have someone like Docusign, there’s no signature. Would it
7 be possible for you to get those people to sign these letters
8 and get them to Mr. Lear so he can submit them?
9 THE WITNESS: Of course.
10 THE COURT: Mr. Lear, we can talk at the end of the hearing
11 about how much time you need. A week? 10 days? Do that. I
12 can keep the record open and you can send copies of those signed
13 documents to Ms. Lee. If she has no objection, then I’m going
14 to give her a deadline to the make objections. If she has
15 objections, I’ll consider it, and I will rule on it.
16 MR. LEAR: Thank you, your Honor.
17 THE COURT: Okay. So I am going to receive A through H,
18 and M, as in Mary, through S. Those are received. They’re
19 received as administrative hearsay.
20 (Respondent’s Exhibits A through H, and M
21 through S are received in evidence by the Court.)
22 THE COURT: Go ahead, Mr. Lear.
23 BY MR. LEAR:
24 Q Ms. Havener, take a look at Exhibit T please. What is
25 that?
0038
1 A That’s a receipt for payment of a security deposit.
2 Q Why did you want the Court to be aware of that?
3 A Because one of the allegations was that we had not
4 paid this person.
5 Q Okay. And this is with respect the to Lion property?
6 Lion Court?
7 A Correct.
8 Q And when you say “this person,” which person are you
9 referring?
10 A Lion, that would be the Ingrams, I believe is the last
11 name.
12 THE COURT: All right. I’m marking that as your Exhibit T.
13 (Respondent’s Exhibit T was marked
14 for identification by the Court.)
15 BY MR. LEAR:
16 Q Taking a look at Exhibit W.
17 THE COURT: Before I get myself confused, let’s deal with T
18 Do you want to move to have it received?
19 MR. LEAR: Yes.
20 THE COURT: All right. Is there any objection to T being
21 received?
22 MS. LEE: No objection.
23 THE COURT: There’s being no objection, T is received.
24 (Respondent’s Exhibit T was received
25 in evidence by the Court.)
0039
1 BY MR. LEAR:
2 Q Turning your attention to Exhibit W. What is that?
3 A Those are policies and procedures I asked
4 Linda Sheldon to draw up so that if I was able to continue doing
5 management that I would have proper procedures in place.
6 Q And Ms. Sheldon testified about W when she was here?
7 A Yes.
8 MR. LEAR: Respondent moves Exhibit W into evidence.
9 THE COURT: Is there any objection to W being received?
10 MS. LEE: No objection.
11 THE COURT: All right. Being no objection, Exhibit W is
12 received.
13 (Respondent’s Exhibit W was received
14 in evidence by the Court.)
15 BY MR. LEAR:
16 Q There’s now a separate stack up there with you, and it
17 includes Exhibit Y, do you see that?
18 A Yes.
19 Q Exhibit Y is an October 27, 2016, letter from Blumberg
20 B-l-u-m-b-e-r-g. Who is Blumberg?
21 A She is a client that has used me for both rental and
22 sales services and purchase services.
23 Q Did you explain to her the allegations brought against
24 you by the BRE?
25 A Yes.
0040
1 Q Did you ask her to write this letter on your behalf?
2 A Yes.
3 Q Taking a look at Exhibit Z, that is a February 15,
4 2017 letter from —
5 A Andrade, A-n-d-r-a-d-e.
6 Q Who is Andrade?
7 A She is someone who I met through an agent who works
8 for me. She’s a sister of an agent that worked for me.
9 Q Did you explain to her the allegations brought against
10 you by the BRE?
11 A Yes.
12 THE COURT: What’s that first name?
13 THE WITNESS: Sharon.
14 THE COURT: Sharon. Thank you.
15 BY MR. LEAR:
16 Q Looking at Exhibit Y, is that her signature on that
17 document?
18 A Yes.
19 Q Taking a look at Exhibit AA, which is an October 29,
20 2016, letter from Cruse, C-r-u-s-e. Who is it Cruse?
21 A She was a previous property manager when Milton had
22 the company. And she hung her license under me but she was the
23 one who never came back because she contracted Valley Fever.
24 Q Did you explain to her the allegations brought against
25 you by the BRE?
0041
1 A Yes.
2 Q Did you ask her to write this letter?
3 A Yes.
4 MR. LEAR: Your Honor, I ask Exhibits Y, Z and Exhibit AA
5 be moved into evidence
6 THE COURT: All right. Any objections?
7 MS. LEE: No objection as administrative hearsay to
8 Exhibits Y and Z.
9 THE COURT: Y and Z are received as administrative hearsay.
10 (Respondent’s Exhibits Y and Z were
11 received in evidence by the Court.)
12 MS. LEE: Objection as to Exhibit AA due to unsigned
13 letter.
14 THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Lear, I’m going to give you a chance
15 to cure that as well as with the other letters. Can you get the
16 witness to follow up with that?
17 THE WITNESS: Yes.
18 THE COURT: All right. Great.
19 MR. LEAR: Thank you, your Honor. Nothing further.
20 THE COURT: Cross-examination? Let me ask you before you
21 begin with cross, are you going to go back through any of your
22 documents.
23 MS. LEE: I am.
24 THE COURT: Off the record
25 (Pause in the proceedings)
0042
1 THE COURT: Back on the record. Beginning with
2 cross-examination. Go ahead.
3
4 CROSS-EXAMINATION
5 BY MS. LEE:
6 Q Ms. Havener, you described your meeting with
7 Ms. De Mascio a few moment ago; correct?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Can you explain how you were affected by that meeting?
10 A Yes. When she explained that she was very upset about
11 the situation with her tenants and that she mentioned some
12 checks had been bounced. I just personally find bouncing checks
13 pretty mortifying. It wasn’t the first time I had heard that so
14 I had an emotional reaction that I didn’t want to seem
15 unprofessional and emotional, and she seemed upset.
16 Q So that was something memorable because it was
17 emotional to you as well, and —
18 A Yes.
19 Q Again, if you would let me finish for a clear record.
20 Did she mention to you the fact that the water had not been
21 paid?
22 A I don’t recall.
23 Q Do you know whether you should have been paying the
24 water?
25 A I did not recall if we should or shouldn’t.
0043
1 Q At this point do you know if you should have been
2 paying the water?
3 A We shouldn’t have been paying the water but I saw that
4 we agreed to do so.
5 Q So as you sit here today, your understanding of your
6 contract with her, should you have been paying the water?
7 A No.
8 Q Why not?
9 A Because it was not part of the contract to pay the
10 water. It should have been done as a courtesy.
11 Q Okay. Can you go to Exhibit 17, please. Page
12 number 8, last page of the exhibit. You see Addendum No. 3?
13 THE COURT: Okay. Ask another question.
14 BY MS. LEE:
15 Q Are you on that page?
16 A Yes.
17 Q Do you recognize this document?
18 A Yes.
19 Q Okay. Does it say that the tenant agrees to pay $50 a
20 month at All Seasons Realty for the water utility bill?
21 A Yes.
22 Q So does that mean the tenant pays All Season Realty?
23 A It could be interpreted that way.
24 Q Did they or did they not pay you the $50 a month?
25 A I personally didn’t receive it, so I don’t know if
0044
1 they did or didn’t.
2 Q If they did pay you, was it your responsibility to
3 turn over the water bill?
4 A Absolutely.
5 Q But to this date, you still don’t know whether they
6 paid you or not?
7 A I don’t understand that they paid every single month,
8 but if there was any deficit, it would be our responsibility.
9 Q So as you sit here today, how many times did they pay?
10 Did they pay you all the time for the water bill? Did they pay
11 you no times for the water bill? Did they pay you sometimes for
12 the water bill?
13 A I believe they sometimes paid us the water bill.
14 Q During those months, did you pay the water bill?
15 A Yes.
16 Q Can you provide proof of that?
17 A Sure.
18 Q You said there was one interpretation of this
19 language. What is your interpretation of this language?
20 A That they are able to bring us the money made out to
21 the water company to pay the bill, or they could make the check
22 out to us to pay the water bill.
23 Q That’s how you interpreted this one sentence; correct?
24 A That could be interpreted either way, yes.
25 Q Let’s go to Exhibit 12.
0045
1 A Okay.
2 Q This is a memo of the interview that the special
3 investigator did with you. About the middle of the page, it
4 says “narrative interview.” Do you recall on March 2, 2015,
5 that a Bureau auditor, as well as an investigator, Westin Horn,
6 came to visit you?
7 A Yes.
8 Q Do you remember talking to both of them?
9 A In general, yes.
10 Q Okay. Now, let’s go line by line and tell me, would
11 you agree or disagree with any of these sentences.
12 A Okay.
13 THE COURT. Okay. Here’s what we’re going to do. We are
14 going to let her read it, and then you are going to ask her
15 questions. That’s how cross-examination has to go. You going
16 line by line, we could be here a long time. So we’re going to
17 let her read. Do you want her to read this whole page? A
18 particular paragraph at a time? How would you like to handle
19 it?
20 MS. LEE: We could do the whole thing.
21 THE COURT: Okay. Why don’t we do this: We are going to
22 have you read from below. Is it “March 2, 2015,” is that where
23 you want her to begin?
24 MS. LEE: Yes.
25 THE COURT: Okay. Go to the final line of page 1. Is that
0046
1 right?
2 MS. LEE: There’s a second page.
3 THE COURT: Let’s do a page at a time.
4 MS. LEE: Sure.
5 THE COURT: That way when you asked focused questions, the
6 witness can know exactly where you are going. And that’s what I
7 want to do with this so that we make sure that cross-examination
8 is correct. Go ahead and read the first page and let us know
9 when you’re done with the first page.
10 THE WITNESS: Yes.
11 THE COURT: Okay. Ms. Lee, go right ahead.
12 BY MS. LEE:
13 Q Are you finished reading the full paragraph one?
14 A Yes.
15 Q Is there anything that you disagree with?
16 A No.
17 Q On the second paragraph it states — second to last
18 sentence of the second paragraph — actually, the third, it
19 says, “Havener advised me that Hudson continued to manage all
20 the property management issues and she was not aware of the
21 complaint.” And the complaint meaning Karrie Jo De Mascio’s
22 complaint.
23 Why did you tell him that you were not aware of the
24 complaint when she had gone to you with the complaint and you
25 had an emotional response to it?
0047
1 A I don’t recall what time one happened from the other.
2 Because my recollection of Karrie came — when I saw her
3 testify, of who she was.
4 Q Okay. Ms. De Mascio testified that she complained to
5 you on or about March 29, 2014. Is that your recollection?
6 Sometime in 2014?
7 A I would say that is correct.
8 Q And this interview occurred in March of 2015?
9 A Correct.
10 Q Okay. So based on that timeline — and you said you
11 had this meeting with Ms. De Mascio; correct?
12 A Correct.
13 Q It emotionally affected you; correct?
14 A Yes.
15 Q And you wanted to do the best you could for her.
16 A Correct.
17 Q And yet when the Bureau of Real Estate investigator
18 asked you about the complaint by Karrie Jo De Mascio, you
19 informed him that you were, “not familiar with Karrie Jo De
20 Mascio and her complaint issue.” Why did you say that?
21 A Because there’s two different things. Seeing Karrie
22 and recalling the conversation that I had with her, yes, I
23 understood her complaint to me. At the time the BRE asked me, I
24 did not know she filed a formal complaint. So to me, they are
25 two different types of complaints. And at that time I didn’t
0048
1 have a picture of Karrie in my head. I didn’t recollect who she
2 was until I saw her here during the hearing.
3 Q It said also you advised the investigator that Hudson
4 will be responsible for property management issues. Why is it
5 that Hudson would be responsible?
6 A I needed his consult to understand what’s going on
7 with the different management problems.
8 Q Do you recall that the auditor had to come back a
9 second time?
10 A I do recall someone coming back, yes.
11 Q Was it because that you were not able to provide her
12 any documents for her review?
13 A Correct. There was many files at that time that I was
14 not familiar with. It was very overwhelming and there was a lot
15 of files, and I was basically reacting to what came across my
16 desk.
17 Q Can we go to the page?
18 A Sure.
19 Q Can we do the same thing? You read the second page
20 and let us know when you are done. Take your time. And at the
21 end, I’ll ask whether you disagree with anyone.
22 THE COURT: All right. Well done, Ms. Lee.
23 MS. LEE: Thank you.
24 THE COURT: The thing about cross is it’s not supposed to
25 be by surprise. That you want to give someone all the
0049
1 information that you want them to review. You rolled that out
2 perfectly.
3 THE WITNESS: I apologize. After the first paragraph or
4 the whole page?
5 BY MS. LEE:
6 Q The whole page.
7 A Okay.
8 Q Are you done?
9 A Yes.
10 Q Okay. So the question is: Do you disagree with
11 anything on this page 2?
12 A No.
13 Q Let’s go to the second paragraph, the end of — strike
14 that. The second paragraph, line 4 states the two sentences.
15 “Havener stated again that she did not have a property
16 management business. Havener stated that Milton was conducting
17 the business through her license unsupervised.” Are those true
18 statements?
19 A Yes. I think that’s the main issue that I’m learning
20 here — is the lack of supervision for someone who used to have
21 a license and knew the properties better than I did.
22 Q And, again, next paragraph, second sentence. “Havener
23 stated she believed he was but would verify by providing copies
24 of the signature card from the bank.”
25 A He was not.
0050
1 Q Why did you believe he was the person who —
2 THE COURT: Okay. Here’s what I want to do. I want to
3 interject so that the record is clear as to what you are asking.
4 It looks like the two sentences are connected. Why don’t you
5 read the sentences before, and then read the second sentence and
6 then ask the question because the second sentence you’re asking
7 is out of context right now. Go ahead.
8 BY MS. LEE:
9 Q Let me read the two sentences. “I asked Havener if
10 Hudson was a signer on the account that issued the check.
11 Havener stated she believed he was but would verify by providing
12 a copy of the signature card from the bank.”
13 So the question is at — you testified at that time
14 you believed he was a signer on the account; correct?
15 A I don’t recall stating that, but —
16 Q What is your belief today?
17 A That he is not a signer.
18 Q And who is the person who was?
19 A I was responsible.
20 Q Why did you give him an ATM card?
21 A He does not have an ATM card. I’m sorry. For what
22 account?
23 Q For the only account that’s in issue.
24 A Absolutely not. There is no ATM card connected to the
25 2561 account, the one that was to be set up as a trust.
0051
1 Q And is there a reason that the auditor would testify
2 otherwise?
3 A No. I would imagine it was maybe a mistake because
4 there’s a different account that has an ATM to it, and it’s not
5 that one. And I can verify that with the bank. There’s no ATM
6 cards that are attached to that account. There are to others
7 accounts that we have, but not that one.
8 THE COURT: Which account was that again?
9 THE WITNESS: The one ending in 2561.
10 THE COURT: All right. Thank you.
11 BY MS. LEE:
12 Q But you understand the audit was only on that one
13 account; correct?
14 A Yes.
15 MS. LEE: Complainant moves Exhibit 12 into evidence.
16 THE COURT: Any objection?
17 MR. LEAR: No objection.
18 THE COURT: All right. There being no objection, 12 is
19 received.
20 (Complainant’s Exhibit 12 was
21 received in evidence by the Court.)
22 BY MS. LEE:
23 Q Let’s go to the next exhibit, Exhibit 13. Does this
24 document look familiar to you?
25 A Yes.
0052
1 Q Is this your writing?
2 A Yes.
3 Q Can you review page 1, and then let me know when you
4 are done? And at the end, I’ll ask you if anything is incorrect
5 on this paragraph.
6 THE COURT: 13 is being marked as a Bureau of Real Estate
7 declaration form that has a lot of neat handwriting filling it
8 out. And it appears to be signed by the Respondent.
9 (Complainant’s Exhibit 13 was marked
10 for identification by the Court.)
11 THE COURT: Okay. Go ahead. Let us know when you’re
12 ready.
13 THE WITNESS: Yes.
14 BY MS. LEE:
15 Q Is there anything incorrect on page no. 1?
16 A No.
17 Q Let’s go to page no. 3. Did you write this?
18 THE COURT: Okay. As the witness looks at that, I need to
19 correct myself. I thought Exhibit 13 was just the declaration
20 but I realize there’s a lot of documents attached to it. So now
21 we’re at page 3, which is a one-page letter, and the witness is
22 going to look at that.
23 And, Counsel, you can keep dealing with the other
24 documents in Exhibit 13 as we go. Did they all come together?
25 MS. LEE: Yes.
0053
1 THE COURT: As part of what?
2 MS. LEE: As part of Respondent’s interview and the
3 attachment she gave during the interview.
4 THE COURT: So I’m going do identify 13 as the declaration
5 that the Respondent provided and attachments that, according to
6 the Bureau, she provide, as well. It hasn’t been received, it
7 has just been marked. Go ahead. I’m sorry. You were on a
8 letter, page 3.
9 BY MS. LEE:
10 Q Did you write this letter?
11 A Yes.
12 Q Is there anything incorrect about this letter?
13 A No.
14 Q Is that your signature?
15 A Yes.
16 Q Let’s go to the next page. I believe the rest of it
17 you provided to the Bureau of Real Estate, pages 4 through 20;
18 is that correct?
19 A It would appear so, yes.
20 Q Now, let’s first deal with the first document, page
21 nos. 4 through 7. Is that an accurate document to your
22 knowledge?
23 A Yes.
24 Q And that’s your signature on page 7?
25 A Yes.
0054
1 THE COURT: Okay. For the record, this is the May 1, 2014,
2 California Association of Realtors form for Contract Brokers
3 Associate License three-party agreement. The names on the front
4 Stacey Havener, and Carol Swanson is the licensee.
5 BY MS. LEE:
6 Q Let’s go to pages 8 through 11, a similar document
7 with respect to Katy Cruse, K-a-t-y C-r-u-s-e. Is this an
8 accurate document to your knowledge?
9 A Yes.
10 Q And is that your signature on page 11?
11 A Yes.
12 Q Page no. 12 is a rental list from All Seasons Property
13 Management. Is that something that you generate?
14 A Yes.
15 Q Does this look accurate to you?
16 A Yes.
17 Q Pages 13 through 20, it looks like they are supposed
18 listings through your company; is that correct?
19 A Yes. May I clarify?
20 Q Sure.
21 A It’s an MLS sheet of all the listings available.
22 Q And you or someone in your company is the agent for
23 all these?
24 A No. This would be what we generate when we have a
25 buyer looking at all listings from the MLAs. So some of these
0055
1 would be our listings and some would not.
2 THE COURT: So MLS is a service that various Realtors can
3 tap into?
4 THE WITNESS: Correct.
5 THE COURT: All right. Thank you.
6 MS. LEE: Complainant request that Exhibit 13 be moved into
7 evidence.
8 THE COURT: Any objection?
9 MR. LEAR: No objection.
10 THE COURT: All right. There being no objection, 13 is
11 received.
12 (Complainant’s Exhibit 13 was
13 received in evidence by the Court.)
14 BY MS. LEE:
15 Q Let’s go to Exhibit 17. It’s a residential lease and
16 addendum with respect to the N-a-j-e-r-a. Are you there?
17 A Yes.
18 Q Okay. Does this document look true and correct to the
19 best of your ability?
20 A Yes.
21 MS. LEE: Complainant moves Exhibit 17 into evidence.
22 THE COURT: Any objection?
23 MR. LEAR: No objection.
24 THE COURT: All right. There being no objection, 17 is
25 received.
0056
1 (Complainant’s Exhibit 17 was
2 received in evidence by the Court.)
3 BY MS. LEE:
4 Q Under Exhibit T, as in Tom, it is basically a receipt
5 to the Ingrams for $1,939?
6 A Yes.
7 Q Do you know — and it’s dated July 25, 2014.
8 A Yes.
9 Q Do you know if that check cleared?
10 A This was cash.
11 Q Okay. And you paid them on or about July 25, 2014?
12 A Yes.
13 Q Did you owe them any more money after that?
14 A No.
15 Q Let’s go to Exhibit 32, it’s the residential lease for
16 the Ingrams.
17 THE COURT: Is this the first time we’re looking at this?
18 MS. LEE: Yes.
19 THE COURT: Okay. I’m going to mark it. I don’t know if I
20 forgot to mark it. It’s a residential lease and the name at the
21 top a Jacqueline, J-a-c-q-u-e-l-i-n-e, Ingram, I-n-g-r-a-m, and
22 then, her husband, David Ingram. So that’s 32.
23 (Complainant’s Exhibit 32 was marked
24 for identification by the Court.)
25 MS. LEE: And there’s three other documents attached to it,
0057
1 but we’ll go through them separately.
2 By MS. LEE:
3 Q Does the first page look familiar to you?
4 A Yes.
5 Q Is this true and correct to the best of your
6 knowledge?
7 A Yes.
8 Q Let’s go to page no. 2, it appears to be, essentially,
9 a receipt from All Seasons Realty to the Ingrams; is that
10 correct?
11 A Yes.
12 Q Is that true and correct contained therein?
13 A Yes.
14 Q Let’s go to the fourth page, it appear to be a bounced
15 check with your signature on it to the Ingrams dated July 15,
16 2014 in the amount $1,875.
17 A Yes.
18 Q Is this true and correct?
19 A Yes.
20 Q I notice that the amounts are a little different from
21 this check and what you’ve paid them on your receipt in
22 Exhibit T, why is that?
23 A We owed them bounced check fees.
24 MS. LEE: I move Exhibit 32 into evidence, except for page
25 no. 3.
0058
1 THE COURT: Okay. I’m going to take page three out.
2 MS. LEE: Sure.
3 THE COURT: That’s a letter from somebody at a bank. Any
4 objection to page 1, 2 and 4 of Exhibit 32 being received?
5 MR. LEAR: No objection.
6 THE COURT: Okay. There’s being no objection, 32 is
7 received.
8 (Complainant’s Exhibit 32 was received
9 in evidence by the Court.)
10 BY MS. LEE:
11 Q Let’s go to Exhibit No. 33. It appears to be an
12 E-mail from Jackie Ingram to your husband stating that,
13 basically, they haven’t seen the money. Do you know why she
14 would say that?
15 A No.
16 Q You don’t know why she would state on July 17th, why
17 she didn’t have the money?
18 MR. LEAR: Objection. Calls for speculation.
19 THE COURT: Yeah. That’s cumulative as well. It’s
20 sustained. If the witness doesn’t know why, that means the
21 witness doesn’t know why. You’ve got to move on.
22 BY MS. LEE:
23 Q Let’s go to Exhibit 32.
24 THE COURT: Which page?
25 MS. LEE: Exhibit 32.
0059
1 BY MS. LEE:
2 Q This appear to be an E-mail string between —
3 THE COURT: 32 you just marked and had it moved to be
4 received. That was the contract and —
5 MS. LEE: I’m sorry. I did misspeak. Sorry.
6 THE COURT: Which one are you on?
7 MS. LEE: Exhibit 35.
8 THE COURT: We’ll go to Exhibit 35, which I am marking and
9 it looks like E-mails. I don’t know who they’re from.
10 (Complainant’s Exhibit 35 was marked
11 for identification by the Court.)
12 BY MS. LEE:
13 Q This appears to be an E-mail string between you and
14 Jackie Ingram; correct?
15 A Yes.
16 Q Are these a true and accurate depiction of the E-mails
17 sent back for forth between you two?
18 A Yes.
19 Q And the dates are correct as well?
20 A Yes.
21 Q Let’s go to page no. 1, which is the most recent
22 E-mail.
23 THE COURT: Do you want her to read it before you ask
24 questions because this goes back to last year.
25 ///
0060
1 BY MS. LEE:
2 Q Let’s — actually. Let’s go to page no. 3. It starts
3 off the E-mail string. It’s dated November 2, 2016, the E-mail
4 from you to and Jackie and David; correct?
5 A Yes.
6 Q Can you read that?
7 A Yes.
8 Q At this point were you aware that they were part of
9 the Accusation?
10 A Yes.
11 Q Why did you reach out to them on November 2nd, 2016,
12 after that Accusation was filed.
13 A Because it came up that we hadn’t paid them and we had
14 record that we had.
15 Q I thought you said that Exhibit T showed that you paid
16 them off already.
17 A Correct.
18 Q Can you explain?
19 A That’s why I asked. I am trying to show proof that we
20 paid them and I needed to give it in and she said that we — and
21 I reached out to them to verify that was accurate.
22 Q Okay. Let go to page no. 2, in chronology, it’s the
23 next number of E-mails. Can you read that? And let me know
24 when you’re done so I can ask you some questions.
25 THE COURT: Which part are we reading? The whole thing?
0061
1 MS. LEE: Yes.
2 THE COURT: Okay.
3 THE WITNESS: Yes.
4 BY MS. LEE:
5 Q Why did you offer to pay her more money?
6 A Because he was upset.
7 Q So it wasn’t because you actually owed her more money?
8 A I was trying verify if my records were inaccurate.
9 When I verified they were not, she was still upset. I ask her
10 could she please explain what was creating the different because
11 my file was showing she was paid in full, and her feeling was
12 she was shorted.
13 Q How were you able to verify that?
14 A By pulling the file, showing the receipt, showing the
15 breakdown when she was returned the money.
16 Q And from what in this E-mail — in this E-mail was she
17 able to show you that you owe her more money?
18 A Nothing. She called them “nag fees.” I said, “If you
19 are still that upset, we’ll just call it an error and I’ll
20 correct it.”
21 Q Let’s go to the first page, which is the most recent
22 E-mail in this E-mail string.
23 A Yes.
24 Q You said you are able to look solely at your files and
25 see the discrepancy; correct?
0062
1 A I’m not sure I understand the question.
2 Q You said you were able to understand that you had not
3 paid her properly; correct?
4 A No.
5 Q Okay. Please explain.
6 A I paid her correctly but she was still upset. There
7 was a discrepancy in the fact that she recalled paying $2,200
8 but I have no records as of such. So I said, “Just for peace,
9 I’ll go ahead and just say that you are correct and pay what you
10 feel is correct.”
11 Q Okay. The E-mail, though, on page no. 1, the most
12 recent E-mail you sent back. It says you’re “going to get those
13 numbers, get the cash shortage, and get back in touch with you
14 to pay you the difference.” Do why did you call it a “cash
15 shortage” if it was out of the goodness of your heart to pay her
16 this extra money?
17 A It’s what she felt she was shorted, so I said okay,
18 even though I didn’t — I had nothing to support the shortage.
19 And I understood her anger and frustration, and I would do it
20 just in good faith. We had phone conversations along this
21 timeline as well.
22 MS. LEE: Complainant moves Exhibit 35 into evidence.
23 THE COURT: Any objection?
24 MR. LEAR: No objection.
25 THE COURT: All right. There being no objection, 35 is
0063
1 received.
2 (Complainant’s Exhibit 35 was received
3 in evidence by the Court.)
4 THE COURT: Okay. How much more cross is there timing-wise
5 because we’ve been going for nearly an hour and a half and we
6 need to take a morning recess.
7 MS. LEE: This is a good time to break.
8 THE COURT: Good time? How much more do you have?
9 MS. LEE: A half hour.
10 THE COURT: Okay. We’re going to take a break until 10:45.
11 We’re off the record.
12 (Recess)
13 THE COURT: Back on the record.
14 Cross-examination is still going on with Ms. Havener.
15 Go ahead.
16 BY MS. LEE:
17 Q Do you recall the Accusation being filed against your
18 husband?
19 A Yes.
20 Q Did you read the Accusation?
21 MR. LEAR: Objection. Relevance.
22 THE COURT: Do you want to make an offer of proof?
23 MS. LEE: I want to know if she was aware of what the
24 allegations were against him since she’s putting everything on
25 him. Is she aware of the allegations against him?
0064
1 MR. LEAR: Objection. She’s not putting everything on him.
2 THE COURT: Putting everything on him?
3 MS. LEE: Correct. She says that she didn’t supervise him;
4 correct?
5 THE COURT: I’m going to give you a couple of questions on
6 this because that was a different proceeding and he’s not here
7 before me.
8 MS. LEE: I understand that.
9 THE COURT: And you’ve already rested your case, so I
10 already know how much a part of your case it is. And she’s
11 testified — she’s answered all your questions so far about what
12 she knows about her husband’s involved in the case or any of the
13 dealings with this Accusation. So I’ll give you a couple of
14 questions about that. The question was: Had you read the
15 Accusation? And did you know what the allegations were?
16 Basically.
17 THE WITNESS: I read it some time ago. I’m basically aware
18 of what it was.
19 BY MS. LEE:
20 Q Okay. Let’s go to Exhibit 63, which is already marked
21 and entered into the evidence, basically, your signatory card.
22 A I apologize. Mine ends at 61.
23 MR. LEAR: So does mine.
24 MS. LEE: It was added on.
25 THE COURT: Do you want to help the witness locate it?
0065
1 Maybe it’s in the binder.
2 THE WITNESS: Here it is. It just doesn’t have a number.
3 THE COURT: All right. Okay. So we’re at 63. Go ahead.
4 BY MS. LEE:
5 Q It’s a four-page document. Do you see that?
6 A Yes.
7 Q Okay. Is that your signature on the second page?
8 A Yes.
9 Q And I notice on the third page that you named it —
10 see on top? You named it “Base Camp LLC, DBA All Seasons
11 Property Management, DBA All Seasons Realty;” correct?
12 A Correct.
13 Q Is Base Camp LLC — is that your cafe?
14 A Correct.
15 Q Does your cafe have anything to do with your property
16 management?
17 A No.
18 Q Does your Base Camp have anything to do with your
19 realty business?
20 A No.
21 Q So why did you make this account to hold your trust
22 funds?
23 A That wasn’t my intent. So that’s why I asked them to
24 separate it out. But for some reason, me holding an LLC for my
25 cafe caused an issue.
0066
1 Q So if it wasn’t your intent, why did you name it “Base
2 Camp LLC, DBA All Seasons Property Management, DBA All Seasons
3 Realty”?
4 A I didn’t want to. That was how the bank wanted to
5 have my LLC on record.
6 Q So you just couldn’t put “Base Camp LLC”?
7 A Not that I’m aware of. This is how they told me to
8 sign the paperwork for the four accounts that I wanted to open
9 for the separate things.
10 Q When you open an account, you’re the one that tells
11 the bank what kind of account you want to open; correct?
12 A Correct.
13 Q And you are the one that tells them what to name your
14 bank account; correct?
15 A Yes.
16 Q Did you tell them to name your bank account this name?
17 A No. They asked for my LLC paperwork, and they asked
18 for my DBA paperwork. I gave it to them. And I told them the
19 way I want my accounts named, a separate one for the cafe, a
20 separate one for my sales business, a separate one for
21 management operation and a separate one for the trust account.
22 That’s why I set up four.
23 Q So why did the trust funds end up going to the Base
24 Camp LLC, DBA All Seasons Property Management, DBA All Seasons
25 Realty account?
0067
1 A That was one of my issues. I didn’t know why. The
2 account ending in 2561 from the — see, I opened the account and
3 spoke with the VP. I said that’s the trust account, this is the
4 cafe, this is the sales commission and this is the operating.
5 That’s why I did the four accounts.
6 Q Let’s go to the next exhibit. Keep flipping to the
7 next exhibit, Exhibit 64. This is already marked and entered in
8 to evidence. It’s basically a two-page document, first one
9 being a check. Do you see it?
10 A Yes.
11 Q Did you issue this check?
12 A Yes.
13 Q The memo says “Commission.”
14 A Yes.
15 Q Why did you make a check out to Milton Hudson for
16 $2000 as commission?
17 THE COURT: $2000?
18 MS. LEE: Yes.
19 THE COURT: Okay.
20 THE WITNESS: The memo didn’t get changed. It was for work
21 done at the property.
22 BY MS. LEE:
23 Q Do you know which property?
24 A I think it was — oh, yeah. The Ivan’s property, like
25 it says here.
0068
1 Q So that was simply a mistake on memo?
2 A Correct.
3 Q So you stated also before, and correct me if I’m
4 wrong, that basically you took over because you wanted to make
5 things right, essentially; correct?
6 A Correct.
7 Q And with respect it the De Mascios, you settled with
8 them for the amount you owed them; correct?
9 A Yes.
10 Q Did you owe them any more than the amount you settled
11 for?
12 A I don’t believe so.
13 Q Clearly, Ms. De Mascios doesn’t think the same;
14 correct?
15 A I believe she testified that she did eventually get
16 paid as she requested to be paid.
17 Q She testified that she got paid the settlement amount;
18 correct?
19 A Correct.
20 Q But, in fact, she believed that the actual money that
21 you owed her before the settlement was more?
22 A She may, I don’t know. She was told a settlement
23 amount and we paid it. It was good and it was her suggestion.
24 Q My question to you, though, is not the settlement
25 itself, but the amount you actually owed her before the
0069
1 settlement. She believed it was more than the settlement —
2 hence, that’s what the word “settlement” is for. It’s to settle
3 the account for lesser or medium value?
4 A I believe it could be.
5 Q So that was her testimony; she believed you owed her
6 more. But having something in hand is better than nothing, so
7 that was the compromise between the two of you; correct?
8 A Yes.
9 Q So, again, your testimony was to make things right.
10 Is it to make things right that you pay someone less than the
11 actual amount you owe them?
12 A Well, I’ve shown I’m willing to pay people more if it
13 makes it right. I’ve shown I am willing to pay people what they
14 requested, that makes it feel right.
15 Q As a reason of the timing of it, for example, the
16 Ingrams, you didn’t reach out to them until after the Accusation
17 was filed with their name on it. Is there a reason why the
18 timing of it was after the Accusation was filed?
19 A Yes. Because I was learning about each — I was
20 really reactionary at this point. I have to just remind you
21 that I was obviously ill-equipped to take over the property
22 management. I sell 50 properties a year as a sales person. I
23 run another business. I was trying to separate from a new
24 business that would be dealt with cleanly, but not turn my back
25 on the old business that was a mess. So I basically dealt with
0070
1 it case by case.
2 Q Okay. Let’s go to Ms. Ashmore’s issues. You
3 described it as a tenant-locate business; correct?
4 A Yes.
5 Q And a tenant-locate business, my understanding is that
6 simply means you find a tenant, you put them in the property and
7 you are gone, basically.
8 A Correct.
9 Q And is there a reason why you kept collecting rent
10 from her? Is that a definition of tenant locate?
11 A No.
12 Q So if it’s not within tenant locate, can you explain
13 what the discrepancy is?
14 A Yes. That was, again, an example of my lack of
15 supervision. I did not know at the time that the owner would
16 not accept the tenant’s rent because he wanted nothing in the
17 check form, and she wanted to pay in a check. He did not want
18 to accept checks. So I did not know at that time — and, again,
19 that goes back to my lack of supervision that Milton was
20 facilitating bringing the check to the owner.
21 Q She actually testified most of her payments were in
22 cash.
23 A She did a combination of whatever. But same thing,
24 the owner doesn’t live near there. So he was probably asking
25 Milton —
0071
1 Q Let’s not speculate.
2 THE COURT: Let’s not interrupt the witness. If you have
3 an objection, you make an objection. But do not interrupt the
4 witness.
5 MS. LEE: Objection. Speculation.
6 THE COURT: Overruled. Finish your answer please.
7 THE WITNESS: Because Milton was still involved, whether
8 she paid cash or check, I should have supervised that more to
9 know what was happening because the owner doesn’t live in the
10 area. So if Milton offered to take them, he would have taken
11 them in whatever form she gave them to him.
12 Q So as you sit here today, do you believe that their
13 relationship was still tenant locate?
14 A No. I intended it to be tenant locate. It did not,
15 in actuality, function as a tenant locate.
16 Q What did it function as?
17 A We were facilitating rent. That’s management.
18 Q Let’s go to your exhibits. Do you have the packet in
19 front of you?
20 A Yes.
21 Q Okay. Let’s go to Exhibit A, which is a letter of
22 reference from Judith Cassis, C-a-s-s-i-s.
23 A Yes.
24 Q Do you see it?
25 A Yes.
0072
1 Q Let’s go to the second page.
2 A Yes.
3 Q This first full paragraph it states you own an
4 Internet cafe called Base Camp. Is that the same Base Camp that
5 is on the bank account?
6 A Yes.
7 Q She called it a “town center.” Would you describe it
8 as a “town center”?
9 A It’s in the town center, so that’s fair.
10 Q So would you say that people tend to gravitate there
11 daily to meet and become a part of the community?
12 A I’ve had newcomers express that to me, yes.
13 Q Well, is it true or not true — is her statement true
14 or untrue that newcomers —
15 THE COURT: Okay. I’m going to ask you to ask another
16 question. She’s already testified. You are reading from the
17 letter, it’s not her words. If you want to know if she agrees
18 with that characterization, ask her that. But, you know, at
19 this point — first of all, the witness didn’t write this.
20 Somebody else wrote it. So if you want to ask her to describe
21 what Base Camp is like, fine. She said she’s heard people say
22 that. Okay?
23 I just don’t know where you’re going sometimes with
24 these questions. If you want to ask her to describe Base Camp
25 herself, if you want to ask her specific questions, you can do
0073
1 that. But you were asking her if a letter where this is
2 somebody else’s words. So you’re already setting up an issue
3 where — I can see the witness is a little confused about what
4 you are asking.
5 If you want to ask the witness her own knowledge about
6 something, that’s fine. If you want to ask her about
7 Judith Cassis and where she got this, that’s fine. But please
8 don’t mix the two, okay?
9 MS. LEE: Okay.
10 THE COURT: Go ahead, Counsel.
11 BY MS. LEE:
12 Q Okay. Would you describe Base Camp as a town center?
13 A No.
14 Q Why not?
15 A Base Camp is very small. It’s only for a certain part
16 of the community that plans on using an Internet cafe or music
17 or art. Very specific things. It wouldn’t be someplace that
18 everybody in town would go.
19 Q So that’s an incorrect statement that she made there?
20 A It’s her opinion.
21 Q And you say that it’s a center for only a certain
22 amount of people, I guess. Is that what you said, basically?
23 A People with interests that happen at Base Camp.
24 Q Okay. What are those interests?
25 A Internet, coffee, music, writers, actors, people who
0074
1 like to chitchat over coffee.
2 Q Theater?
3 A Yes. I included theater, yes.
4 Q And how about Chamber of Commerce issues?
5 A We have had, maybe, two chamber events there.
6 Q And any other organizations? Because you mentioned a
7 few that you volunteered at.
8 THE COURT: Okay. I’m going to ask for an offer of proof
9 as to relevance. Why are we delving so deeply into what people
10 talk about in Base Camp? Is there anything in the Accusation
11 related to that? Because otherwise, I don’t know what the
12 relevance is.
13 MS. LEE: I’m going to rebuttal evidence, your Honor.
14 THE COURT: Rebuttal evidence?
15 MS. LEE: Correct.
16 THE COURT: Rebuttal of what? Base Camp is not part of the
17 allegations, as far as I know. Am I wrong?
18 MS. LEE: It’s not in the sense, but in a sense it is
19 because there is nothing to do with her property management,
20 even though it’s the name, quite frankly, of her trust, in
21 quotations, fund.
22 THE COURT: Okay. My understanding is that Base Camp is
23 not a real estate business. Isn’t that your understanding,
24 Counsel?
25 MS. LEE: Yes.
0075
1 THE COURT: Right. It is. My understanding from hearing
2 the witness’s testimony, which at this point is fairly
3 extensive, is that she’s not in the position that Base Camp is
4 anything but her cafe. And I have not heard any testify that
5 suggests that Base Camp is directly or indirectly related as a
6 business to the witness’s real estate endeavors. Don’t you
7 agree?
8 MS. LEE: Except for the fact that the account is named
9 “Base Camp.”
10 THE COURT: We’ve got that. You’ve already established
11 that. So in terms of the relevance now of what kind of things
12 happen at Base Camp, I think you need to give me an offer of
13 proof as to why we need to know about Base Camp. It is not in
14 the Accusations and I don’t see a connection there between what
15 you’re alleging. And at that point, I get to step in and ask
16 you to explain why it’s relevant. You know, we want to cover
17 evidence that usable, that’s going to help me make a good
18 decision. And right now, I’m not getting there.
19 MS. LEE: There’s character witnesses that may be involved
20 with Base Camp.
21 THE COURT: Pardon me?
22 MS. LEE: Her character witnesses might be a part of Base
23 Camp.
24 THE COURT: Are you calling them?
25 MS. LEE: No. Respondent is calling them.
0076
1 THE COURT: Right. So what are you basing that on? I
2 mean, that sounds mighty speculative. You do get to put on
3 rebuttal.
4 Here’s what I’m going to do for you. If you want, I
5 can ask the character witnesses to stay put, not to take off.
6 So if you want to put on rebuttal and you want to call them as
7 witnesses, you can do that. Or you can, perhaps, cross-examine
8 them. That might be even more efficient. But for right now,
9 I’m going to sustain my own objection. This is not relevant.
10 You’ve got to make a connection. I’ve tried to give
11 you several questions on some things, but I don’t know what you
12 are getting at. I want to ask you and give you the opportunity,
13 and right now I’m not hearing that there’s anything relevant
14 about Base Camp. You already established she named it and why
15 she named it that account at Union Bank. That’s been covered.
16 Go ahead and ask another question.
17 BY MS. LEE:
18 Q Let’s go up to — if you switch packets, Exhibit 56.
19 Let’s go to page no. 9, specifically on the bottom right-hand
20 corner.
21 THE COURT: Okay. Do you want to describe this for me
22 because I haven’t marked it yet.
23 MS. LEE: These are a number of articles from the Mountain
24 Enterprise. I’m only referring to a few pages within the
25 exhibit.
0077
1 THE COURT: What pages?
2 MS. LEE: Page 9 for now. Page 9 and 10 for now.
3 THE COURT: So these are newspaper articles from the
4 Mountain Enterprise. All right. I’m just marking this en masse
5 right now because it’s 15 pages.
6 (Complainant’s Exhibit 56 was marked
7 for identification by the Court.)
8 THE COURT: Go ahead. Page 9.
9 BY MS. LEE:
10 Q Okay. Here it purportedly reprints a letter that you
11 wrote. This is a letter that you wrote on the left side, at
12 least?
13 A An E-mail.
14 Q Okay. Did you write this?
15 A Yes.
16 Q Why did you write this?
17 A Because I was letting Patrick know that I did not want
18 her paper in my business anymore.
19 Q And who is Patrick?
20 A She’s the editor of the local paper.
21 Q I assume the business means your real estate business?
22 A Either of my businesses.
23 Q With respect to, at least, real estate. Because
24 that’s what we’re here for. With respect to real estate, what
25 did you feel that she was “in your business”?
0078
1 MR. LEAR: Objection. Relevance. Request an offer of
2 proof as to where we’re going with this, your Honor.
3 THE COURT: Okay. Counsel?
4 MS. LEE: Well, it goes to remorse. If she’s saying she’s
5 remorseful, yet she’s not expressing any remorse within this
6 article or within this letter.
7 THE COURT: So you want me to read the letter? All right.
8 First of all, let me read the letter because I don’t know where
9 your cross is going. Do you remember when you wrote this?
10 THE WITNESS: It’s a while ago. I don’t remember the exact
11 date.
12 THE COURT: We are going have a reading party. This is in
13 really tiny print so I am going to do my best to read this
14 article. And when we are done, you can ask a couple of
15 questions. Because I’m going to barely overrule the objection
16 as to relevance. All right. So we’re going to do some reading
17 here. All right. I’m finished reading it. Ms. Havener, have
18 you read it?
19 THE WITNESS: Yes.
20 THE COURT: Okay. Could you please go ahead?
21 BY MS. LEE:
22 Q Okay. So what proffered this response from you?
23 MR. LEAR: Objection. Relevance.
24 THE COURT: Overruled.
25 THE WITNESS: Because with the difficulties that my husband
0079
1 faced with the property management, I felt the paper was very
2 biased in their representation of what had happened.
3 BY MS. LEE:
4 Q Let’s go to your response message on the same page.
5 It says, “This is Havener’s second message.” Was that your
6 second message? Did you write that one paragraph on the right?
7 A Yes.
8 MS. LEE: Complainant moves the two letters into evidence.
9 THE COURT: Okay. That’s going to be page 9 of Exhibit 56
10 Is there any objection to page 9 being received?
11 MR. LEAR: Objection as to hearsay with the exception of
12 the letter from Ms. Havener.
13 THE COURT: All right. I’ll sustain the objection as to
14 hearsay. The only portion of the letter that I’m going to read
15 and consider and receive in evidence is the two letters
16 contained on page 9 that Ms. Havener identified that she had
17 written. There’s a first letter and then there’s a second
18 follow-up that’s one paragraph, is received.
19 (Complainant’s Exhibit 56 was received
20 in evidence by the Court.)
21 THE WITNESS: And may I say one thing? And there’s one
22 error in that.
23 THE COURT: Your attorney will have a chance to do that on
24 redirect. So he can ask you about that. Go ahead, Counsel.
25 ///
0080
1 BY MS. LEE:
2 Q Okay. I noted there are a number of checks from the
3 account the auditor had brought out that you had signed
4 yourself. Do you recall that as well?
5 A Where? Which number?
6 Q In general. That you had signed some checks from the
7 bank account in question?
8 A I’m always signing checks. I’ve signed a lot of
9 checks. So I’m not sure I’m clear on the question.
10 Q So when you signed the checks, did you not make sure
11 that they cleared? Or did you make sure that they cleared is
12 probably a better way to ask that?
13 A Explain how you want me to verify did they clear?
14 THE COURT: I don’t think the witness understood your
15 question. Can you rephrase it?
16 BY MS. LEE:
17 Q When you write a check, do you make sure a check
18 clears?
19 A I mean, are you asking me if I reconcile bank
20 statements?
21 Q Whatever it takes to make sure a check clears?
22 A I don’t consistently reconcile my bank statements.
23 Q And did you ever do so with respect to your property
24 management business?
25 A No.
0081
1 Q So you never knew whether a check cleared or not?
2 A Unless I specifically looked for it.
3 Q And did you ever specifically look for a check?
4 A I have.
5 Q Which particular checks did you do so?
6 A I don’t recall.
7 Q Was that five checks?
8 THE COURT: What? The question is: Was that five checks?
9 She doesn’t recall. She didn’t give a specific answer.
10 MS. LEE: I’m trying to get an approximation now.
11 THE COURT: Can you give an approximation of how many
12 checks you might have gone back — all right. I don’t know what
13 the time frame is. Do you want to give a time frame, Counsel,
14 and ask her to estimate?
15 MS. LEE: Sure.
16 THE COURT: It’s hard to deal with these negatives dealing
17 in this regard. She hasn’t given you anything specific. Go
18 ahead and break it down into a couple of questions.
19 BY MS. LEE:
20 Q Okay. You stated that sometimes — there were at
21 least some time that you had gone back and checked for a
22 particular check whether it cleared; correct?
23 A Correct.
24 Q Now, during the audit period from January 1st, 2014,
25 to March 1st, 2015, approximately how many times did you go back
0082
1 and check on a particular check?
2 A Many times, say, 40 or 50.
3 Q Now, the auditor testified that there were
4 approximately 90 checks that had bounced. Is there a reason why
5 you didn’t check 90 checks?
6 A Well, I would have checked them to verify if they’re
7 the ones that bounced. I thought I was trying to check the ones
8 that cleared.
9 Q Okay. Your expert witness Dr. Lareau essentially
10 testified — I mean, his information was based on what you told
11 him; correct?
12 A Yes.
13 Q And he testified that essentially you inherited the
14 problems from Milton Hudson; correct?
15 A When Milton surrendered his license and I took over,
16 there were many rental files that were already in place.
17 Q You testified that you just took over the bank
18 account, which we know is not true because you have a signatory
19 card with only your name. Why would he say that?
20 A I don’t understand the question.
21 THE COURT: I don’t either. Maybe you can break that down,
22 too, Counsel.
23 BY MS. LEE:
24 Q Okay. He testified that you were simply working off
25 of Milton Hudson’s old bank account.
0083
1 A I don’t recall that he testified to that.
2 Q If he did testify to the that — because that’s what I
3 have in my notes, why would he say that?
4 THE COURT: That calls for speculation. Ask another
5 question. I sustained my own objection.
6 BY MS. LEE:
7 Q His report is based solely on what you told him. Did
8 you tell him that you had the — strike that. Did you tell him
9 that you had simply inherited Milton Hudson’s bank account?
10 A No.
11 Q Did you tell him that the bank account in question was
12 one that you had opened yourself?
13 A I don’t recall he specifically asked me that question.
14 Q Did you tell him that?
15 A I don’t recall that I told him that specifically.
16 MS. LEE: I have no further questions.
17 THE COURT: Okay. Redirect?
18
19 REDIRECT EXAMINATION
20 BY MR. LEAR:
21 Q Ms. Havener, taking a look at Exhibit 56, page 9.
22 THE COURT: That’s the only page left in this exhibit.
23 THE WITNESS: Okay. Got it.
24 BY MR. LEAR:
25 Q Was there an error?
0084
1 A Just one. I did not address it “Dear Editor.” I
2 addressed it “To Patrick,” but the only E-mail I had for her was
3 her work E-mail. But the — it was not — my intent was not to
4 write a letter to the editor to print in the paper. My intent
5 to was to express my feelings to another person.
6 MR. LEAR: I have nothing further.
7 THE COURT: Recross?
8 MS. LEE: None.
9 THE COURT: All right. Thank you. You are excused.
10 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
11 THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Lear, do you have any additional
12 witnesses?
13 MR. LEAR: Respondent calls Kraft.
14 THE COURT: You have a witness that’s down the hall?
15 MR. LEAR: Yes.
16 THE COURT: Off the record.
17 (Recess)
18 THE COURT: Back on the record.
19 Ms. Lee had brought up off the record something about
20 the issue about filing a First Amended Accusation. We should
21 deal with that now before we deal with the first character
22 witness. Ms. Lee, I do have a copy of it. Thank you very much
23 for doing bold print for anything you added because that makes
24 is so much easier for everyone to understand what you’ve added.
25 While we were off the record, I asked the parties if
0085
1 they could talk about what they could stipulate to. I’ll let
2 Mr. Lear, go first. Go ahead.
3 MR. LEAR: Thank you, your Honor. In the First Amended
4 Accusation, the BRE had indicated new language through bolding
5 the font and with respect to the bolded font in the Amended
6 Accusation, Respondent agrees to all the bolded font additions,
7 with exception to that in paragraph 17. And further, does not
8 agree to stipulate to the charges as bolded. So we are
9 agreeing, otherwise, to the allegations that have been bolded
10 but for paragraph 17.
11 THE COURT: Okay. So you do not agree with the bolded font
12 additional language in on page 7, paragraph 17 and anything that
13 would have been added to the actual legal violation allegations;
14 correct?
15 MR. LEAR: Correct.
16 THE COURT: All right. Thank you very much. That’s so
17 noted. Is there anything you want to add, Ms. Lee?
18 MS. LEE: If I may see the clarification, your Honor, on
19 page 7, paragraph 15, only half of it is bolded. So what is
20 your intent with paragraph 15?
21 THE COURT: 15? I thought we were talking about paragraph
22 17.
23 MS. LEE: I understand that.
24 THE COURT: Mr. Lear?
25 MR. LEAR: I’m not sure I understand, other than we are
0086
1 agreeing to all the bolded language in paragraph 15, but for the
2 bolded language in paragraph 17 and the bolded language in the
3 charges.
4 THE COURT: Right.
5 MS. LEE: I understand that. For example, on paragraph 15,
6 half of it is bolded and half of it is not. So are you stating
7 that you’re not stipulating the half that is not bolded?
8 THE COURT: Okay. I don’t understand your question.
9 Because my understanding is any legal violations or charges that
10 were added are not being stipulated to. Okay? So we got that
11 out of the way.
12 Secondly, the only thing specifically that was not
13 stipulated to that you added in bold was on page 7, paragraph
14 17. So why are we talking about paragraph 15? That’s what I
15 want to know.
16 MS. LEE: Because paragraph 15, half of it is bolded and
17 half of it is not. If you read paragraph 15 because half of it
18 is bolded, that means half of it he’s stipulating to and half of
19 it he’s not, and they’re going together.
20 THE COURT: I don’t know what you mean. I thought you
21 stipulated to paragraph 15 as previously written; correct?
22 MS. LEE: Okay.
23 THE COURT: Okay? So you’ve got one-half that’s been
24 stipulated to, and the other half that’s been added that’s been
25 stipulated to, and I think you are the only person who can
0087
1 answer that question because you are the one who amended it. So
2 let’s move on.
3 MS. LEE: So paragraph 15 is entirely stipped to?
4 THE COURT: I don’t know how else we can do this. Okay.
5 You got what you asked for, basically. You got Mr. Lear, who
6 talked with you off the record, and he’s stipulated to it. What
7 clarification do you need? It seems like this is a win-win for
8 both sides. They agree on the allegations. What else is there
9 to that? I mean, is there something I’m missing?
10 MS. LEE: I just wanted clarification on paragraph 15,
11 that’s all.
12 THE COURT: Okay. You’re satisfied?
13 MS. LEE: Yes.
14 THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Lear, call another
15 witness.
16 MR. LEAR: Respondent calls Vicky Kraft.
17 THE COURT: Please raise your right hand.
18
19 VICKY KRAFT,
20 called as a witness, having been first duly sworn by the Court,
21 was examined and testified as follows:
22
23 THE WITNESS: Yes.
24 THE COURT: Thank you. Please state your full name for the
25 record.
0088
1 THE WITNESS: It’s Vicky, V-i-c-k-y, and Kraft, K-r-a-f-t.
2 THE COURT: Okay. Ms. Kraft, a couple things really
3 briefly I want to advise you on. It’s a contested proceeding,
4 so you’ve got two attorneys.
5 THE WITNESS: Okay.
6 THE COURT: And at all times one of them will have the
7 floor to ask you questions, and that means the other one will be
8 listening.
9 THE WITNESS: Okay.
10 THE COURT: And sometimes the opposing attorney will make
11 an objection. What I want you to do is allow for a little bit
12 of time at the end of each question before you immediately
13 answer that question. Because if you immediately jump in and
14 answer the question —
15 THE WITNESS: The other might object.
16 THE COURT: Just like you did to me right there. We’ve got
17 a court reporter here who can only take down one voice at a
18 time. So just cool your jets a little and let three or four
19 seconds go by before you give an answer.
20 THE WITNESS: Okay.
21 THE COURT: If you get asked a question and you don’t
22 understand what the question means, tell us, and the lawyer will
23 rephrase it. If you are asked a question and you don’t know
24 what the answer is, I don’t want you to venture off with a
25 guess, that’s called speculation, it’s not evidence.
0089
1 THE WITNESS: Okay.
2 THE COURT: Any questions?
3 THE WITNESS: No.
4 THE COURT: All right. Go ahead, Mr. Lear.
5
6 DIRECT EXAMINATION
7 BY MR. LEAR:
8 Q Ms. Kraft, what do you do for a living?
9 A I do mostly blogs. I collect spousal and child
10 support. And I have other business interests.
11 Q What are your blogs about?
12 A I do a Yellowstone National Park blog. I do a Pine
13 Mountain blog. I do Pine Mountain Trading Post. I do a Greater
14 Yellowstone Bears blog. I do Los Padres Bear Aware. I do — I
15 don’t know. There’s so many. Mostly they’re related to
16 Yellowstone National Park or related to community events in Pine
17 Mountain Club.
18 Q Are you involved in the community?
19 A I have run a home-school group. I originally lived in
20 Santa Clarita, and I still support the people who are now taking
21 over my old home-school group that I ran for 15 years. I
22 organized field trips for children. We put together classes for
23 children. I put approximately 4000 families through my
24 home-school group over the entire time. It was a lot of fun.
25 Q And any other community involvement?
0090
1 A Yes. I am the co-chair of the Sierra Club in Pine
2 Mountain Club. And I’m sure I do something else.
3 Q Do you know Ms. Havener?
4 A Yes.
5 Q How do you know her?
6 A I met Stacey when I was starting to look for a house
7 in Pine Mountain Club with my father. We started going from
8 house to house, and so that’s how I became acquainted with her.
9 I rented two vacation homes, and then ultimately a house was
10 purchased.
11 Q For how long have you known Ms. Havener?
12 A I want to say somewhere around 2011 or 2012.
13 Somewhere in there.
14 Q Do you consider her a friend?
15 A I mean, I know everybody in the town. Our town is
16 really small. Like, I look at this list that’s sitting in front
17 of me, and, like, most of the people, I know who they are. But
18 I don’t hang out at Stacey’s house. I don’t go out to a
19 restaurant with her out of town or even in town or something of
20 that sort.
21 Q Would you say that you know her well?
22 A I know her just from business dealings and from
23 community events. And, you know, I attend a lot of stuff that
24 happens at their Base Camp Cafe. I eat at the Base Camp Cafe,
25 which is tied in the same complex as her All Seasons Real
0091
1 Estate.
2 Q Do you know her well enough to have an opinion of her
3 character?
4 A I have never had any issue with Stacey. If she wanted
5 to borrow my check book, I would give her my checkbook.
6 THE COURT: Okay. Here’s what I want you to do. Focus on
7 each question. He asked if you knew — what was it again,
8 Mr. Lear?
9 BY MR. LEAR:
10 Q Do you know her well enough to have an opinion
11 regarding her character?
12 THE COURT: He asked if you knew her well enough to have an
13 opinion about her character. He hasn’t asked about your opinion
14 yet, he just wants to know how well you know her.
15 THE WITNESS: Okay. I feel I do. I’ve been around her —
16 almost every other day I see her dealing with other people,
17 talking to other clients. I know a lot of her clients that have
18 purchased houses from her and things of that nature.
19 Q Do you believe Ms. Havener is honest?
20 A Yes.
21 Q Do you believe she’s a person of integrity?
22 A Yes.
23 Q Do you believe that she’s a person of good character?
24 A Yes.
25 Q Are you aware that there are charges by the BRE
0092
1 against her?
2 A Yes. I read the charges.
3 Q And with respect to my questions about her integrity
4 and her character, do you continue to believe that Ms. Havener
5 is of good character and high integrity even in light of the
6 charges against her by the BRE?
7 A Yes.
8 Q And with respect to that, does your opinion change at
9 all if you know that Ms. Havener has agreed with many of those
10 charges? In other words, she’s agreed she’s engaged in
11 wrongdoing in a professional context.
12 A Right.
13 Q Does any of that change your opinion about her honesty
14 and integrity?
15 A No.
16 Q Do you think that Ms. Havener presents a danger to
17 people of the State of California in continuing to hold a real
18 estate broker’s license?
19 A No.
20 Q Do you have any hesitation in referring to people that
21 you know to work with Ms. Havener in the real estate context?
22 A No.
23 Q Would you have any hesitation in using Ms. Havener on
24 the future basis together in the buying or selling of a house?
25 A I would let her sell my house.
0093
1 Q And that’s true even in light of the allegations by
2 the BRE against her?
3 A Yes.
4 MR. LEAR: Okay. I have nothing further.
5 THE COURT: Cross-examination?
6
7 CROSS-EXAMINATION
8 BY MS. LEE:
9 Q You mentioned you hang out at Base Camp. Can you
10 describe Base Camp?
11 A I’m sorry. What?
12 Q You mentioned you hung out a Base Camp. Can you
13 describe Base Camp for us?
14 A Base Camp is an Internet coffeehouse that has
15 sandwiches, breakfast food, open from 9:00 to 5:00. Our little
16 town has Internet issues. A lot of times my Internet would go
17 out at my house. Because I do so many online things, I need to
18 have Internet and I use the Internet at Base Camp.
19 Q Okay. So would you characterize Base Camp as sort of
20 a big deal in your small town?
21 MR. LEAR: Objection. Vague and ambiguous.
22 THE COURT: Do you understand the question?
23 THE WITNESS: I thought I did.
24 THE COURT: Overruled. You can answer.
25 THE WITNESS: I think — say it again just to make sure.
0094
1 THE COURT: The question was: Is it a big deal in your
2 community? Do you understand the question?
3 THE WITNESS: Yes. There’s only three places with free
4 Internet within Pine Mountain Club. Her place is open from 9:00
5 to 5:00, so for me that’s convenient, as far as time frame goes.
6 The other place is open from 4:00 to 9:00. So if I need
7 Internet between 9:00 and 4:00. So for me, it’s a big deal,
8 other people might not feel that way.
9 BY MS. LEE:
10 Q You also mentioned some business dealings, can you
11 describe the business dealings you have had with Ms. Havener?
12 A My father and I we rented two vacations homes from
13 Stacey, and then ultimately purchased a house.
14 Q Do you have any other business dealing with her with
15 respect to your publications?
16 A No.
17 Q Has she ever advertised in your publications?
18 A I don’t take any advertising.
19 Q Okay.
20 A They’re not really publications, but —
21 Q So aside from the things you’ve already mentioned with
22 respect to the rentals and selling of homes, is there any other
23 business you’ve had with her where money has been exchanged for
24 any reason whether related to real estate or not?
25 A I’ve made photocopies in her real estate office.
0095
1 There’s, like, no Kinkos or anything. We live in a really tiny
2 town. So giving her money for photocopies, for faxing things,
3 totally not related to her. And, well, obviously for food at
4 Base Camp. Food, I don’t drink coffee, but I drink tea, that
5 sort of thing.
6 Q You said that you looked at the letters, this list of
7 letters —
8 A In front of me, yeah.
9 Q You said a lot of them seem familiar to you?
10 A We live in a really tiny town. I do all Pine Mountain
11 Club’s social media, trading post and whatever, so a lot of the
12 people interact with me constantly. So when I look at this list
13 I know that person, you know, I know who they are.
14 Q And you said you read the Accusations as well;
15 correct? The complaint that is at issue here?
16 A I read that link that I was sent, yes. It was about
17 six months ago, but I did read it.
18 Q But did any of those names seem familiar to you
19 besides Ms. Havener and Milton Hudson?
20 A I’d have to look at that list again.
21 MS. LEE: May I approach — actually, I’ll just read you
22 the names if that’s easier.
23 THE COURT: Go ahead.
24 BY MS. LEE:
25 Q Karrie and Eugene De Mascio?
0096
1 A Don’t know them.
2 Q Ray Scott?
3 A No.
4 Q Mountainside Disposal Company?
5 A Well, I know that it’s a company but I’ve never done
6 business at that company.
7 Q Do you know anyone at that company?
8 A If I do, I don’t know off the top of my head.
9 Q David and Jackie Ingram?
10 A No.
11 Q You’ve never heard their names besides in the
12 Accusation?
13 A No.
14 THE COURT: Okay. The pending question is: Do you know
15 them? So try not to change that up.
16 MS. LEE: Got it.
17 BY MS. LEE:
18 Q Terre Ashmore?
19 A No.
20 Q Romuls, R-o-m-u-l-s, last name Garskis, G-a-r-s-k-i-s?
21 A Never heard the name.
22 Q Henrick Tahmansian, T-a-h-m-a-n-s-i-a-n?
23 A Doesn’t sound familiar.
24 MS. LEE: No further questions.
25 THE COURT: Redirect?
0097
1 MR. LEAR: Nothing further.
2 THE COURT: All right. Thank you very much. Please drive
3 safely on your way back.
4 THE WITNESS: We have snow and mudslides and all sorts of
5 fun.
6 MR. LEAR: Respondent calls Barbara Ladin, L-a-d-i-n.
7 THE COURT: Come on up. Go ahead and have a seat. Take a
8 look at me and please raise your right hand.
9
10 BARBARA LADIN,
11 called as a witness, having been first duly sworn by the Court,
12 was examined and testified as follows:
13
14 THE WITNESS: Yes, I do.
15 THE COURT: Good. Please state and spell your full name
16 for the record.
17 THE WITNESS: My name Barbara, B-a-r-b-a-r-a, Ladin,
18 L-a-d-i-n.
19 THE COURT: Okay. And Ms. Ladin, I just want to mention a
20 few things to help get you oriented. Have you ever been a
21 witness before?
22 THE WITNESS: No.
23 THE COURT: Okay. Well, it’s not scary. It’s pretty
24 orderly and I run it the same way every time for each witness so
25 this is something everybody in here has heard before, but they
0098
1 will have to sit through it again because you haven’t heard.
2 This is a contested proceeding. We have an attorney
3 for the Bureau of Real Estate, Ms. Lee; and you have Mr. Lear
4 representing the Respondent, Ms. Havener. At all times, one
5 attorney or the other is going to be questioning you, and that
6 means whatever attorney is not questioning you, they’re going to
7 be listening carefully to the question.
8 They may make an objection at the end of the question.
9 So what I want you to do is be aware that we’ve got a court
10 reporter who can take down one voice at a time, and I’m writing
11 careful notes too. If you are really quick to answer a question
12 right away, a second after the question is over, there’s a good
13 chance that if there’s an objection, the two voices will
14 completely clash and we’ll have to start all over. So just let
15 three or four seconds go by of dead air time before you give
16 your answer. Just take a deep breath.
17 THE WITNESS: Okay.
18 THE COURT: The second thing is, if you are asked a
19 question and you don’t understand what the question is, what it
20 means, tell us. The attorney will rephrase it for you so it’s
21 clearer. If you are asked a question and you have no idea what
22 the answer would be, it’s just outside is the scope of your
23 knowledge, I don’t want you to guess. I don’t want you to come
24 up with a great answer anyway because that is called speculation
25 and I can’t consider that as evidence. All right. Any
0099
1 questions?
2 THE WITNESS: No, sir.
3 THE COURT: Okay. Go ahead, Mr. Lear.
4
5 DIRECT EXAMINATION
6 BY MR. LEAR:
7 Q Okay. Ms. Ladin, what do you do for a living?
8 A I work for Base Camp as a manager of the cafe, and I
9 am a certified — I apologize. I’m nervous. I’m a certified
10 CPR trainer for the Red Cross.
11 Q How long have you worked at Base Camp?
12 A Two and a half years.
13 Q And what are your roles and responsibilities there?
14 A I manage the restaurant, order food, cook, serve.
15 Pretty much anything that has to do with the actual restaurant
16 itself.
17 Q Okay. What did you do before that?
18 A Waitress at Denny’s.
19 Q Okay. For how long?
20 A About two and a half years.
21 Q Do you know Stacey Havener?
22 A Yes, I do.
23 Q How do you know her?
24 A I have been a resident of Pine Mountain Club for 15
25 years. And I think I met her about 12 or 13 years ago.
0100
1 Q Do you consider her to be a friend?
2 A I do.
3 Q Do you feel that you know her well enough to have an
4 opinion regarding her character, honesty and integrity?
5 A Yes, sir. I do.
6 Q What is your opinion regarding her character, honesty
7 and integrity?
8 A I think she’s an amazing person. As an employer,
9 she’s been one of the more forthright employers I’ve ever had.
10 She’s kept every promise she’s ever made to me. As a friend I
11 have found her to be incredibly reliable, and we have worked
12 together on a volunteer basis on the number of different
13 programs. She is always the first person I would turn to.
14 Somebody I could always rely on.
15 Q You’ve worked together on what programs?
16 A Center of the World Festival, Mountain Theater
17 Alliance, and another volunteer organization called the Word Art
18 Group, and they put on shows called Speakeasy Theater and those
19 are all volunteers.
20 Q And just to clarify, my other questions, do you
21 believe Ms. Havener is honest?
22 A Absolutely.
23 Q And you’ve had an opportunity to know her well enough
24 to render an opinion regarding that?
25 A Yes, sir.
0101
1 Q You know we’re here today because of the Accusation by
2 the Bureau of Real Estate against Ms. Havener; right?
3 A Yes, sir.
4 Q Have you had an opportunity to read and review that?
5 A I did.
6 Q And have you had an opportunity to speak to
7 Ms. Havener about it?
8 A Yes, I have.
9 Q So in light of my earlier question about your opinion
10 about her honesty and integrity, did anything that you read that
11 is in the BRE document or anything you heard from Ms. Havener
12 about the BRE allegations, change your mind about her honesty
13 and her integrity?
14 A No, sir.
15 Q Do you continue to have the same opinion that she’s an
16 honest person even after being made aware of the charges?
17 A Yes, sir.
18 Q Is that true even in light of my representation to you
19 that she’s has agreed with many of the charges?
20 A Yes.
21 Q In other words, she agrees that she made mistakes that
22 are violations of the BRE code?
23 A Yes.
24 Q Even in light of all that, you still continue to
25 believe that she’s an honest person of high character?
0102
1 A Yes, sir.
2 Q If you were in a position to either buy or sell your
3 home, would you use Ms. Havener?
4 A Absolutely.
5 Q Would you have any hesitation in light of what you’ve
6 learned about her through the BRE allegations?
7 A No, sir, not one bit.
8 Q If you have an opportunity to refer somebody who
9 needed a real estate agent, for either a buyer or seller of a
10 home, would you refer Ms. Havener?
11 A Absolutely.
12 Q Would you have any hesitation in doing that in light
13 of the BRE allegations?
14 A No, sir.
15 MR. LEAR: I have nothing further.
16 THE COURT: All right. Cross-examination.
17
18 CROSS-EXAMINATION
19 BY MS. LEE:
20 Q You stated that you work at Base Camp.
21 A Yes.
22 Q Do you currently work there?
23 A I guess I still do. I’m taking care of my mother
24 right now so I probably do one day a week.
25 Q When did you start working there?
0103
1 A Two and a half years ago. Two years ago last
2 September.
3 Q Do you have any family members that work there?
4 A My son worked there for a while but he no longer works
5 there, no.
6 Q When did he work there?
7 A He worked there until, I want to say, June of last
8 year.
9 Q Okay. Are you and your family members, are any of
10 them involved in any theater groups?
11 A Myself. My husband sometimes, but mostly myself.
12 Q Do you guys meet at Base Camp sometimes?
13 A Oh, yes.
14 Q Is that your primary place of meeting?
15 A Yes. Unless we’re doing — that’s one theater
16 company. That’s another theater company that does meet at the
17 clubhouse in town and across the street at the gazebo.
18 Q So what’s the theater company that meets at Base Camp?
19 A That would be Speakeasy Theater. Mountain Theater
20 Alliance does have some meeting there.
21 Q How often does Speakeasy —
22 A Speakeasy Theater, about three time as year. They put
23 on the show there.
24 Q You stated that you read the Accusation and it doesn’t
25 change your mind about her honesty and integrity.
0104
1 A Correct.
2 Q What would it take for you to change your mind?
3 MR. LEAR: Objection. Incomplete hypothetical, and calls
4 for speculation.
5 THE COURT: Sustained. We could be here for a long time
6 for the witness trying to think about what it would take.
7 BY MS. LEE:
8 Q In the Accusation it alleges that she bounced several
9 checks, so that doesn’t that change your mind about her
10 character?
11 A No, it does not.
12 Q Okay. In there it also states she didn’t return
13 security deposits, and that doesn’t change your mind about her;
14 correct?
15 A No, it does not.
16 Q In there she also states that she has approximately
17 $20,000 shortage of trust funds, which means she should have
18 $20,000 kept for other people that she does not have.
19 THE COURT: Where is that alleged?
20 MS. LEE: That is alleged in the audit section, page 4,
21 paragraph 8A. The exact amount you owe is $20,941.47,
22 $19,317.92, and $24,812.58 for the years of 2014 and 2015.
23 THE COURT: Okay. Let me look at this. What that alleges
24 is less than the existing aggregate trust fund liability.
25 MS. LEE: Trust fund shortage.
0105
1 THE COURT: Right. So the figure you are giving is how
2 much?
3 MS. LEE: Approximately $20,000.
4 THE COURT: That’s not what it says. The disbursement
5 reduced the total amount of aggregate funds to the amount of
6 $20,000 and change, $19,000 and change, and $24,000 and change
7 on February 28, 2015, less than the existing aggregate trust
8 fund liability. Okay. That means that there was $20,000
9 missing from that account.
10 MS. LEE: Yes.
11 THE COURT: Where is that alleged?
12 MS. LEE: Less than the aggregate trust fund liability.
13 THE COURT: I don’t know what you mean by aggregate trust
14 fund liability. That doesn’t say that there’s $20,000 missing
15 from the account, that’s what I’m having trouble with. Because
16 that’s how you characterized the question. Is that information
17 somewhere else in the Accusation?
18 MS. LEE: That is what is stated here. What is your
19 understanding, your Honor? What does this state?
20 THE COURT: Excuse me?
21 MS. LEE: I mean, what does this state to you? Because
22 that’s what my reading is. My honest reading of this and of
23 when I was questioning the auditor, there is essentially
24 more/less a $20,000 shortage. That’s what this paragraph means.
25 And that’s what the findings of the audit is. I can refer to
0106
1 the audit itself, your Honor.
2 THE COURT: Okay. Because that’s not how the portion that
3 you referred me to, that’s not what it says. Okay? It doesn’t
4 say that on so and so date, approximately $20,000 was missing
5 from the trust account funds that was required to be there.
6 Okay. That’s not in plain English, and that’s why I’m asking
7 you this.
8 All right? I want to make sure — you’re going to
9 cross-examine the witness and say, “So, you know there was
10 $20,000 missing from the trust fund,” I can point to someplace
11 that that was alleged, at least.
12 MS. LEE: I’m stating that —
13 THE COURT: That’s not what it says.
14 MS. LEE: Okay. What does it say?
15 THE COURT: It says she “permitted, allowed, and/or caused
16 the disbursement of trust funds from Account 1, where the
17 disbursements reduced the total amount of aggregate funds to the
18 amount of,” so it reduced — whatever those disbursements were,
19 it reduced the amount to $20,941, $19,317 and $24,812, less than
20 the existing aggregate trust fund liability. I don’t know what
21 the existing aggregate trust fund liability means. And I’m not
22 an accountant, I’m a layperson.
23 MS. LEE: Okay. May I refer to Exhibit 5, your Honor, the
24 actual audit?
25 THE COURT: Okay. What you are referring to is that this
0107
1 accountant, this auditor’s report says, according to her
2 recordkeeping, Bank 1, those three figures less in trust fund
3 that was needed to satisfy her obligation to the owners of those
4 funds. Okay. Less in trust fund than was needed. That’s not
5 what you asked this witness. You are going to have to ask
6 another question because that is not what you’re saying it is.
7 That does not say $20,000 missing that should be there, and that
8 is the question you are asking.
9 MS. LEE: This states there’s approximately a $20,000
10 shortage in trust funds.
11 THE COURT: Okay.
12 MS. LEE: This is exactly what it states. It states
13 approximately $20,000 in shortage, which means that she should
14 have had $20,00 more in her bank in trust funds that she had;
15 hence, $20,000 are missing. $20,000 of other people’s money are
16 missing from this account.
17 THE COURT: All right. Here’s what we’re going to do. You
18 were asked about her character.
19 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
20 THE COURT: Okay. Counsel wants to ask you if — we don’t
21 need to resolve this right now. Counsel wants to ask you if
22 money from the trust account was missing at one point or another
23 when it was part of Ms. Havener’s business, it would change your
24 opinion.
25 The first question, I believe, was that she wants you
0108
1 to assume that there would be $20,000 that should have been in
2 the trust account at one point, that was not. Is that right,
3 Ms. Lee?
4 MS. LEE: Yes.
5 THE COURT: All right. And the question was: Does that
6 change your opinion?
7 MS. LEE: Correct.
8 THE WITNESS: No, it does not.
9 THE COURT: Go ahead.
10 THE WITNESS: Can I qualify?
11 THE COURT: No. You get to qualify later perhaps, but that
12 would mean another attorney is asking you a question and I have
13 no idea whether that would happen. You have to answer yes or no
14 to a question like that.
15 THE WITNESS: No.
16 THE COURT: Go ahead, Counsel.
17 BY MS. LEE:
18 Q What do you want to qualify?
19 A I can only tell you that from the time that I have
20 worked with Stacey, I know that she’s done everything possible
21 to resolve these issues.
22 THE COURT: Here’s the problem, Counsel, before we move on.
23 This, in the audit report, does not translate to what is alleged
24 here. If you read the two statements, they’re not the same.
25 Okay. That’s the problem I was having with it. So something to
0109
1 think about.
2 MS. LEE: Okay.
3 THE COURT: Unfortunately, sometimes accountants don’t
4 always write in plain English. I don’t know if that was part of
5 the problem. But what’s in your subparagraph A of paragraph 8
6 is not clear on the point that you’re cross-examining the
7 witness on. It can be clarified but what’s in the audit report
8 transmittal but the two things say different things. Go ahead.
9 BY MS. LEE:
10 Q You’ve stated you read the Accusation; correct?
11 A Yes, ma’am.
12 Q Did you recognize any names in there besides
13 Ms. Havener’s name and Milton Hudson’s name?
14 A I do not believe I did.
15 Q Do you want me to read those names?
16 A Sure.
17 Q Karrie and Eugene De Mascio.
18 A I do not know them.
19 Q Ray Scott.
20 A No.
21 Q Terre Ashmore?
22 A No.
23 Q Romulas Garskis?
24 A I’m sorry?
25 Q Romulas, R-o-m-u-l-a-s, last name, G-a-r-s-k-i-s?
0110
1 A I don’t them. The name is familiar.
2 Q You don’t know how you know them?
3 A I don’t know how I know them. It’s a small town.
4 Romulas stands out.
5 MS. LEE: No further questions.
6 THE COURT: Any redirect?
7 MR. LEAR: Nothing further, your Honor.
8 THE COURT: Okay. Thank you, Ms. Ladin.
9 THE WITNESS: Okay. Thank you.
10 THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Lear, do you have another character
11 witness?
12 MR. LEAR: Respondent’s going to call Stacey Havener.
13 THE COURT: Is it Havener or Havener.
14 THE WITNESS: It’s Havener in my family.
15 THE COURT: Okay. They’re great at clarifying things, but
16 not everything. Go ahead. For the record, Ms. Havener is back
17 on the witness stand. You’re still under oath.
18
19 DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued)
20 BY MR. LEAR:
21 Q Ms. Havener, can you turn to your attention to the big
22 binder, specifically Exhibit 5, page 1.
23 A Yes.
24 Q Do you see that the first line there in the summary of
25 findings that indicates that according to your recordkeeping
0111
1 there was less in trust funds than was needed to satisfy your
2 obligations to the owners of those funds?
3 A Yes.
4 Q You don’t disagree with that; correct?
5 A No, I don’t.
6 Q And that is the problem?
7 A Exactly. That’s why I work seven days a week for
8 years.
9 Q Well, hang on. What did you do in order to resolve
10 that problem?
11 A I made a commitment to work every single day until I
12 was sure all of this was corrected and paid back, if necessary.
13 Q Did you pay it back?
14 A Yes.
15 Q So everything has been made whole?
16 A Yes.
17 MR. LEAR: Nothing further.
18 THE COURT: Any cross-examination?
19
20 CROSS-EXAMINATION
21 BY MS. LEE:
22 Q So do you have any documentation that you resolved the
23 approximately $20,000 shortage?
24 A Yes.
25 Q That you paid back $20,000 to people?
0112
1 A Yes.
2 Q How many people are we talking about with those
3 $20,000 that you paid back?
4 A It would be all of it.
5 Q How many people?
6 A I would say approximately — I would have to do some
7 simple math. The average security deposit is roughly $1,500, so
8 enough to make sure that every security deposit was paid back to
9 the owner or the tenant of anyone who would get it at the
10 closure of their file, depending on the deposit.
11 THE COURT: I hate to interject.
12 THE WITNESS: Yes.
13 THE COURT: Remember I asked you not to speculate, so what
14 I want to ask you is can you estimate for Ms. Lee your answer?
15 Because if you can estimate it, then we’re interested in hearing
16 it. If you are just guessing off the top of your head, you need
17 to let me know that too because I need to know how to treat your
18 testimony.
19 THE WITNESS: I would be guessing because I did them case
20 by case. Every property I closed, I make sure it was balanced.
21 THE COURT: Okay. Ms. Lee?
22 BY MS. LEE:
23 Q Where did you get the $20,000 from?
24 A From my work. From my income.
25 Q And the auditor, our auditor, the Bureau of Real
0113
1 Estate auditor, testified it was difficult to assess your
2 paperwork because of the state it was in. So how were you able
3 to rectify your paperwork?
4 A By taking each file case by case. Looking at the
5 contract, and seeing what was paid on behalf of security
6 deposit, balancing that out, and sending the amount to the
7 appropriate party.
8 Q You did that yourself?
9 A Yes.
10 Q And when Ray Scott testified last time — do you
11 remember him testifying?
12 A Yes.
13 Q He testified that he was complaining to Milton but
14 with you standing right there, do you recall that?
15 A Yes.
16 THE COURT: Okay. Counsel, this is getting outside of the
17 scope of the witness being recalled. Do you want to make an
18 offer of proof?
19 MS. LEE: Yes. She said she paid him back.
20 THE COURT: Okay. Go ahead.
21 BY MS. LEE:
22 Q So when you heard those complaints when he was
23 standing right before you, did you pay him back?
24 A Yes.
25 Q When? Because he testified that you didn’t.
0114
1 A No. He testified that everything was good on his
2 property.
3 Q So when did you pay him back?
4 A I don’t remember the exact date, but he testified that
5 he had gotten payment. I’m sure it was around the time that he
6 came into the office.
7 Q Okay. Let’s go to Exhibit 29, page no. 5. Are you
8 there?
9 A Yes.
10 Q His writing states that he met with you — with
11 Milton, with you listening, on May 13, 2014. Does that sound
12 about right to you?
13 A Yes.
14 Q Was it on or about that date that you heard his
15 complaints of lack of payments of bounced checks?
16 A Yes.
17 Q Let’s go to page 30 — I’m sorry. Exhibit 30.
18 THE COURT: Which page?
19 BY MS. LEE:
20 Q Let’s go to page no. 6, the last page. This is his
21 account of what was missing. Do you agree or disagree with
22 these balances, and why?
23 A I would agree with them if that’s his accounting, but
24 I would have to cross-reference into ours.
25 Q Are you are saying you paid back $5,040?
0115
1 A I’m not the renter. I wouldn’t owe him rents for
2 rents not received. So this would depend on whether — and I
3 know a security deposit would not be $5,000. So if he’s saying
4 that his tenant didn’t pay, that would be an eviction, that
5 would not be security deposits I’m required to hold in a trust
6 fund.
7 THE COURT: Ask another question, and keep it within the
8 scope of the witness being called. We’re not going retry the
9 case with her on the stand right now.
10 BY MS. LEE:
11 Q There were a number of bounced checks as well, but to
12 Mountainside Disposal as well; correct?
13 A Yes.
14 Q When did you find this out?
15 A During that meeting that I listened to him talking to
16 Milton.
17 Q Again, that was in 2014?
18 A Yes.
19 MS. LEE: No further questions.
20 THE COURT: Redirect?
21 MR. LEAR: Nothing further.
22 THE COURT: Okay. You are excused. Okay. Mr. Lear, you
23 still have the floor.
24 MR. LEAR: Thank you. Respondent calls Lucinda,
25 L-u-c-i-n-d-a, Shankle, S-h-a-n-k-l-e.
0116
1 THE COURT: Come on up. Hello. Please have a seat and get
2 comfortable and turn your attention to me. Please set your
3 things down. Please raise your right hand.
4
5 LUCINDA SHANKLE,
6 called as a witness, having been first duly sworn by the Court,
7 was examined and testified as follows:
8
9 THE WITNESS: I do.
10 THE COURT: Okay. Now, it seems like you speak in a rather
11 quiet voice. What I want you to do is to raise your voice as
12 high as you can as if you’re outdoors at a soccer game and
13 you’re cheering for somebody, or against somebody, as long as
14 it’s loud enough so we can all hear you.
15 Can you please state and spell your name, for
16 starters.
17 THE WITNESS: Lucinda, L-u-c-i-n-d-a, Shankle,
18 S-h-a-n-k-l-e.
19 THE COURT: Okay. Ms. Shankle, this is a contested
20 proceeding, meaning you’ve got a lawyer for the Bureau of Real
21 Estate, that’s Ms. Lee over there; and Mr. Lear, who is
22 representing Ms. Havener. Okay? When a question is asked of
23 you by a lawyer, I want you to just let a little time go by, a
24 few seconds, before you give your answer because sometimes the
25 other lawyer may make an objection —
0117
1 THE WITNESS: Okay.
2 THE COURT: — to the question. Okay? And so I want to
3 give time for that so that two voices don’t clash, yours and the
4 lawyers. If you get asked a question and you don’t know what
5 the questions means, tell us and I’ll have the attorney rephrase
6 the question.
7 If you’re asked a question and you don’t know the
8 answer, I don’t want you to try to come up with your best
9 guesstimate answer anyway. That’s call speculation, and I can’t
10 consider that is evidence. So the correct answer if you don’t
11 know is “I don’t know.” All right. Are you comfortable?
12 THE WITNESS: Yes.
13 THE COURT: Mr. Lear, go ahead.
14 MR. LEAR: Thank you.
15
16 DIRECT EXAMINATION
17 BY MR. LEAR:
18 Q Ms. Shankle, what do you do for a living?
19 A I’m retired.
20 Q What did you do?
21 A I worked in accounting for an oil field company out of
22 Taft.
23 Q For how many years did you do that?
24 A That the was for seven years. Before, it was 15-year
25 job for Clean Harbors out of Taft.
0118
1 Q Where do you live?
2 A In Pine Mountain Club.
3 Q For how long have you lived there?
4 A Five years.
5 Q Now, are you involved in the community at all?
6 A Yes. I’m a member of the Equestrian Committee. And
7 we have started an Aging-In-Place task force and I’m a member of
8 also.
9 Q Do you know Stacey Havener?
10 A Yes.
11 Q How do you know her?
12 A She was my real estate agent when I bought the home.
13 Q When was that?
14 A Five years ago in May.
15 Q Have you kept in contact with her?
16 A Yes.
17 Q Do you know her well enough to have an opinion
18 regarding her honesty and character?
19 A I believe so.
20 Q Do you know that we’re here today because of
21 allegations brought by the Bureau of Real Estate against
22 Ms. Havener?
23 A Yes.
24 Q Have you had an opportunity to read and review those
25 allegations?
0119
1 A I’ve heard what they were.
2 Q Have you spoken to Ms. Havener about those?
3 A Not to my knowledge.
4 Q Okay. You’ve heard what they were from whom?
5 A From the newspaper.
6 Q Do you have any knowledge other than from the
7 newspaper about the allegations against Ms. Havener?
8 A Could you rephrase it?
9 Q Sure. Other than from the newspaper, do you have any
10 other understanding or knowledge about the charges against
11 Ms. Havener?
12 A Well, I know they’re not good. But — I don’t.
13 Q Do you have a general understanding that there were
14 problems with bookkeeping?
15 A Yes.
16 Q Do you have a general understanding that there were
17 monies that should have been in a trust account that were not in
18 a trust account?
19 A Yes.
20 Q Do you have a general understanding that those monies
21 were roughly in the amount of $20,000 a year?
22 A Yes.
23 Q Do you have a further understanding Ms. Havener has
24 paid those monies back?
25 MS. LEE: Objection. Leading.
0120
1 THE COURT: Sustained.
2 BY MR. LEAR:
3 Q Do you have any understanding as to whether those
4 monies have been paid back or not?
5 A They have.
6 Q Do you have an understanding that there were issues
7 that Ms. Havener’s property management brokerage had with
8 certain of its client?
9 MS. LEE: Objection. Leading.
10 THE COURT: What was the question again?
11 MR. LEAR: Do you have an understanding as a whether
12 Ms. Havener’s property management company had issues with
13 certain of its client?
14 THE COURT: I’m going overrule the objection. It’s a
15 general question. Do you know of any issue that she had with
16 clients of her company?
17 THE WITNESS: No.
18 BY MR. LEAR:
19 Q Okay. With respect to the money that was missing from
20 the account, that’s an important issue for somebody like you who
21 had an accounting background; correct?
22 A Yes.
23 Q Even in light of that, you drove all the way down here
24 to testify on behalf of Ms. Havener and support her character;
25 correct?
0121
1 A Correct.
2 Q Why did you do that?
3 A She treated me extremely honestly and fairly and very
4 professionally.
5 Q Okay. Would you recommend Ms. Havener as a real
6 estate broker to your friends?
7 A Absolutely.
8 Q Would you use her again?
9 A Yes.
10 Q You would do that even in light of what we just talked
11 about with respect to the monies that were not in the trust
12 account where they should have been?
13 A Yes.
14 Q Is that because you think she’s an honest person with
15 integrity?
16 A Yes.
17 MR. LEAR: I have nothing further.
18 THE COURT: Cross-examination?
19
20 CROSS-EXAMINATION
21 BY MS. LEE:
22 Q You’ve lived in Pine Mountain Club for five years?
23 A It will be five years this May.
24 Q Can you describe Pine Mountain Club?
25 A It’s a small mountain community. It’s beautiful.
0122
1 Q Is it a place where almost everyone knows everyone, or
2 someone that’s knows someone?
3 A Yes.
4 Q Do you know of a place called Base Camp?
5 A Yes.
6 Q Can you describe Base Camp? What is Base Camp?
7 A It’s a restaurant.
8 Q Okay. Is it somewhat of a community center as well?
9 A Somewhat, yes.
10 Q Do you do any activities that meet at or involve Base
11 Camp?
12 A My husband does, I go with him.
13 Q What is that activity?
14 A Yes, acting.
15 Q I see. Is it a theater group?
16 A No. It’s not a theater group. There are a lot of
17 theater people that go there.
18 Q What is the group that your husband and you attend?
19 A He’s belongs to MTA, the Mountain Theater Alliance,
20 and he’s done plays for them, so I go to the plays.
21 Q And as an accountant, you understand that missing —
22 you know what a trust fund is, basically?
23 A Yes.
24 Q And a trust fund means it is basically money you’re
25 holding for somebody else, entrusting it?
0123
1 A Yes.
2 Q And missing $20,000 is sort of a big deal?
3 A Yes.
4 Q And in your experience as an accountant, how does one
5 miss $20,000?
6 MR. LEAR: Objection. Incomplete hypothetical. Relevance.
7 THE COURT: Sustained. We’ve got an accountant on the
8 stand. She considers it to be significant. Okay. Ask another
9 question. We don’t need her to tell us what that means because
10 we all know what that means. And we have a witness who’s a
11 former accountant. It means $20,000 is missing that should be
12 there. That’s what I know from the case you put on so far.
13 BY MS. LEE:
14 Q Clarification on your testimony. You said “Taft.”
15 What is Taft? A city?
16 A Yes. It’s a small oil field town out of Bakersfield.
17 Q And you said you read it in the newspaper. What is
18 the newspaper’s name?
19 A The Mountain Enterprise.
20 MS. LEE: No further questions.
21 THE COURT: Any redirect?
22 MR. LEAR: Nothing further, your Honor.
23 THE COURT: Okay. Ms. Shankle. Thank you very much.
24 You’re excused. Okay. Mr. Lear?
25 MR. LEAR: Respondent rests, subject to making sure that my
0124
1 exhibits are in.
2 THE COURT: I extended that to the both parties. So I’ll
3 tell you what — is there rebuttal?
4 MS. LEE: No.
5 THE COURT: No rebuttal? Okay. Let me take a look at the
6 exhibits for both of you so that you are comfortable that you’ve
7 done what you needed to do with them. For the Bureau, I’ve got
8 Exhibits 1 through 23 are in evidence. Let’s see, 24 is a big
9 stack of E-mails, quite a few pages, and it has not been
10 received. It’s 65 pages of E-mails, and also there’s an
11 agreement, there’s a loose agreement, there’s an addendum. So
12 that has not been received.
13 MS. LEE: I have portions of it has been received, your
14 Honor.
15 THE COURT: Which ones?
16 MS. LEE: I have pages that have been received.
17 THE COURT: Let me take a look at my notes. That may be
18 why I didn’t write that in. You know, I have a note on that.
19 This is not the exhibit. All right. What pages do you have
20 that were received?
21 MS. LEE: I have 17. I have 19, 20 and 21. And then it
22 skips to 27, 28.
23 THE COURT: I think all the way up to 33?
24 MS. LEE: That’s what I have.
25 THE COURT: 27 to 33.
0125
1 MS. LEE: And 34.
2 THE COURT: All right.
3 MS. LEE: And then 38 to 41.
4 THE COURT: 38 to 41.
5 MS. LEE: And then 47.
6 THE COURT: I have that marked as well.
7 MS. LEE: 48 and 49. And then it skips to 57. And then it
8 skips again.
9 THE COURT: To 62?
10 MS. LEE: Correct.
11 THE COURT: Okay. So 62 is the last page. All right.
12 That’s what I have in my notes. Mr. Lear, I want to give you a
13 heads up. Is that your understanding?
14 MR. LEAR: Yes.
15 THE COURT: Okay. All right. Then those pages of
16 Exhibit 24 are received.
17 (Complainant’s Exhibit 24 was received
18 in evidence by the Court.)
19 THE COURT: And so I’m going to return the other ones to
20 you when we’re done with the hearing, so I don’t consider
21 anything that’s not part of the record. 25 is more E-mails.
22 Now, I did not mark 25. I didn’t see it in my notes this
23 morning either. You had gone from 24 to the Exhibit 34, and
24 then back to 24. So this isn’t something that I believe we
25 covered.
0126
1 MS. LEE: Yeah. That’s my notes as well.
2 THE COURT: Pardon me?
3 MS. LEE: That’s consistent with what I have.
4 THE COURT: Are you going to withdraw 25?
5 MS. LEE: Sure.
6 THE COURT: So 25 is withdrawn. Let’s see, you’ve got
7 Exhibit 26, as well. I haven’t marked 26. I didn’t describe
8 it. I didn’t see it in my notes.
9 MS. LEE: Yes. I’ll withdraw 26 as well.
10 THE COURT: Okay. 26 is withdrawn. Next is 27 —
11 MS. LEE: I’ll withdraw 27 as well.
12 THE COURT: — which is withdrawn. 28 was received. 29
13 was marked, and there was a decent amount of testimony on it,
14 several pages of it. These are the Mountainside Realty
15 agreement and other attached documents. Okay. What do you want
16 to do with 29?
17 MS. LEE: I believe some pages were admitted into evidence,
18 your Honor. Some pages.
19 THE COURT: Let me check. Give me the list of pages so I
20 can check against my notes.
21 MS. LEE: I have 8 through 20.
22 THE COURT: 8 through 20.
23 MS. LEE: I have 25 and 26.
24 THE COURT: 25 and 26.
25 MS. LEE: And I have 30 and 34.
0127
1 THE COURT: 30 and 34. Mr. Lear, any comment on
2 Exhibit 29?
3 MR. LEAR: No. Those are consistent with my notes.
4 THE COURT: Okay. Good. Thank you. All right. 29 is
5 received, unless there was an objection but I believe I received
6 those pages already.
7 (Complainant’s Exhibit 29 was
8 received in evidence by the Court.)
9 THE COURT: Sorry. I don’t mean to put you both through
10 this a second time. I just want to make sure I’m not looking at
11 something that wasn’t received in evidence. Go ahead, Ms. Lee.
12 MS. LEE: I would like to offer Page 1 of Exhibit 29, as
13 well as page 29.
14 THE COURT: Page 1 and page 29. Any objection to 1 and 29?
15 And.
16 MS. LEE: And, actually 37, 38, 39 and 40.
17 THE COURT: Do you want to deal with them one at a time?
18 MR. LEAR: No objection to page 1.
19 THE COURT: All right. Page 1 received then. Go ahead.
20 MR. LEAR: No objection to page 29.
21 THE COURT: All right. Page is received.
22 MR. LEAR: No objection to 37 through 40.
23 THE COURT: And 37 through 40. Okay. Does that cover your
24 Exhibit 29.
25 MS. LEE: Yes.
0128
1 THE COURT: And those additional pages 1, 29 and 37 to 40.
2 And those are all received as part of Exhibit 29. So I’m going
3 to return to you the other pages after the hearing. We’re done
4 today.
5 MS. LEE: Since we referred to it, I’ll put in page 5.
6 THE COURT: Page 5?
7 MS. LEE: Yes. Of Exhibit 29. Only because we referred to
8 it in testimony.
9 THE COURT: All right. That’s Ms. Havener’s card. Right?
10 Her business card. Is there any objection to that being
11 received?
12 MR. LEAR: No.
13 THE COURT: Okay. Page 5 then is added as part of
14 Exhibit 29 as well. Okay. So like an auctioneer I’m going to
15 say going, going, are we done with 29?
16 MS. LEE: Yes.
17 THE COURT: Okay. Exhibit 30 —
18 MS. LEE: I withdraw that, your Honor.
19 THE COURT: — is withdrawn.
20 MS. LEE: As well as —
21 THE COURT: 31 has not been marked as and as far I know
22 nobody touched on it during the hearing.
23 MR. LEAR: Your Honor, can Ms. Havener use the restroom?
24 THE COURT: Sure. Here is what we are going to do — do
25 you want to take a short recess? We are going to come back and
0129
1 do closing argument. We’re not going take a lunch recess. It’s
2 really important to me to get everybody out of here as soon as
3 we can because you all are going to need to drive really slowly
4 where you’re going. I’m serious.
5 Well, there’s just major hazards out there today. We
6 are going to take a really short break. 10 minutes, and then
7 we’ll be done. If the attorneys want to take a break — if you
8 want to talk about documents off the record. So we can do it
9 orderly, we’ll do that. Off the record for 10 minutes. We’ll
10 be back at 12:45.
11 (Recess)
12 THE COURT: Back on the record. We’re going to keep going
13 through the documents. First the Bureau, and just taking it
14 back to my list. Ms. Lee, I think we covered 26 and 27, those
15 were withdrawn. 28 and 29 were received. 30 has been
16 withdrawn. And then let’s take a look at Exhibit 31. That
17 is —
18 MS. LEE: Offered as administrative hearsay, your Honor.
19 THE COURT: — E-mails that’s from whom to whom?
20 MS. LEE: It’s from David and Jackie Ingram the Bureau and
21 it is their complaint —
22 THE COURT: To the Bureau?
23 MS. LEE: — that stated their complaint process.
24 THE COURT: I’m marking that as 31.
25 ///
0130
1 (Complainant’s Exhibit 31 was marked
2 for identification by the Court.)
3 THE COURT: Is there any objection as to 31 being received?
4 MR. LEAR: Hearsay.
5 THE COURT: Do you want to make an offer of proof?
6 MS. LEE: It is substantiated by the residential lease
7 agreement and some of Respondent’s testimony, and is offered as
8 administrative hearsay.
9 THE COURT: And some of the Respondent’s testimony.
10 MR. LEAR: Your Honor, I would argue that the requirement
11 here under Lake v Reed is that it’s substantiated by other
12 evidence, and it’s not.
13 THE COURT: That’s what I’m trying to make the link to. Is
14 other reliable evidence. And it’s a complaint that was made.
15 Apparently, it was a complaint that was made by two people, Dave
16 and Jackie Ingram, neither of whom testified about Exhibit 31.
17 So I’m going to sustain the objection.
18 MS. LEE: However, the Accusation itself stipulated some
19 paragraphs that are pertinent to this issue.
20 THE COURT: Well, that may be the case, but there’s no way
21 that I can go make those links for you. This is a document that
22 tends to speak for itself. And it’s coming from two people who
23 were not here to look at and consider the document. They
24 weren’t cross-examined by the Respondent’s counsel about what it
25 contains and so on.
0131
1 You are giving me an exceptionally high task to have
2 to go back and somehow link up what’s in this document that
3 hasn’t really been verified by the people who wrote the
4 information down and sent it to the Bureau. So I’m going to
5 sustain the objection. Okay. 32 is in evidence. 33 is
6 Mr. Ingram — I’m sorry. Jackie Ingram to somebody — let’s
7 see. Sorry. To Milton Hudson’s, the Respondent’s husband. And
8 I believe you wanted to withdraw that?
9 MS. LEE: Yes.
10 THE COURT: All right. 33 is withdrawn. 34 has not been
11 marked, and hasn’t been dealt with on the record yet. So what
12 do you want to do about 34? By the way, for the record, it’s a
13 declaration from somebody named David Ingram, I-n-g-r-a-m.
14 (Complainant’s Exhibit 34 was marked
15 for identification by the Court.)
16 MS. LEE: I prefer to ask Ms. Havener some questions about
17 this actually.
18 THE COURT: Excuse me?
19 MS. LEE: I prefer to ask Mr. Havener some question about
20 this.
21 THE COURT: I don’t understand what you mean. We’re
22 marking it and she’s testified twice now. You want to ask her
23 questions about it. Can you tell me about what you mean? You
24 want to cross-examine her on it?
25 MS. LEE: I want to ask her if these things occurred that
0132
1 were mentioned here.
2 THE COURT: Are you trying to lay foundation for it?
3 MS. LEE: Correct.
4 THE COURT: Go ahead, Mr. Lear.
5 MR. LEAR: That ship has sailed, your Honor. Evidence is
6 closed.
7 THE COURT: I gave you a lot of time. You took two days
8 of the two days you set this case for hearing. You took almost
9 all of the two days. We’re here today on a third day without a
10 lunch break at 12:50. You had a witness on the stand on
11 cross-examination longer than she gave direct examination. You
12 had a long time with her.
13 I gave you a lot of latitude when you questioned her
14 again after very brief testimony that she gave when she was
15 recalled. I let you ask a lot more questions. I don’t think
16 it’s appropriate or fair to now have a document that — really
17 all you are trying to do is lay foundation for it, and you want
18 to recall a witness to ask her a bunch of questions of what
19 might be contained in it. That doesn’t strike me as being fair
20 to the Defense.
21 They have made themselves fully available in this
22 whole process, but right now you have a declaration from
23 somebody else that you didn’t refer to in the entire hearing for
24 almost three days now. And I’m not going to allow you to lay
25 foundation by calling the witness to testify all over again. I
0133
1 don’t think that’s appropriate.
2 If you want to refer to her previous testimony, which
3 you had a lot of time to develop, you can do that right now in an
4 offer of proof. But I’m not going to let you take another whack
5 at her, so to speak, just to try to get this declaration, that
6 she didn’t write, into the evidence.
7 MS. LEE: Okay. Well, it states in here there was meetings
8 with Ms. Havener and the Ingrams, and that she was nonresponsive
9 in those meetings. She testified that she was —
10 THE COURT: Where’s that? Do you want to show me?
11 MS. LEE: Sure. It is little more than halfway down.
12 THE COURT: First page here.
13 MS. LEE: Yeah. First page.
14 THE COURT: And what does the sentence begin with?
15 MS. LEE: The line begins with “on or about January 21st,”
16 but continues on.
17 THE COURT: All right. I see it.
18 MS. LEE: “I returned to the office and talked to
19 Stacey Havener, she claimed it was her husband’s business and
20 didn’t know anything about me on the rental property.”
21 THE COURT: So what’s your offer of proof as to that?
22 MS. LEE: She testified that she dealt with everyone and
23 paid everyone back out of her good heart. And here, it shows
24 this person’s testimony that she did not.
25 THE COURT: Okay. That’s a relevancy issue. Do you have
0134
1 anything else for me? Because what you have right now is an
2 issue of authentication and foundation.
3 MS. LEE: At the very least, rebuttal evidence as to her
4 character.
5 THE COURT: That’s the relevance issue. You can’t just go
6 around the issue of where did it come from, who created it, and
7 how do I receive it in evidence as reliable. Nobody came in.
8 Nobody testified about it. It was untouched for nearly three
9 days of testimony and in evidence. So what you are dealing with
10 right now is a problem with authentication and foundation, not
11 relevance.
12 I want to give you an opportunity to respond to that.
13 I don’t mean to put you on the spot. I just want to give you a
14 chance since it’s your document. If you want to submit on that,
15 that’s fine.
16 MS. LEE: Well, it’s signed under penalty of perjury and
17 signed with information and it’s consist with — the comments
18 are consistent with other exhibits, as well as Respondent’s
19 testimony regarding their lease and their agreement.
20 THE COURT: Thank you. I’m going sustain the objection of
21 authentication and foundation grounds. So 34 is not received.
22 Let’s see, you’ve got 35 all the way down through 47, which have
23 been received. 48 is the next item. It’s a handwritten ledger.
24 MS. LEE: In my notes I have 48 as received. Nos. 48 and
25 49.
0135
1 THE COURT: 49 was received. Mr. Lear, on 48?
2 MR. LEAR: No objection.
3 THE COURT: Okay. 48 is received in evidence.
4 (Complainant’s Exhibit 49 was
5 received in evidence by the Court.)
6 THE COURT: Exhibit 50 is a transcription, handwritten.
7 And just to refresh my memory, who hand wrote this?
8 MS. LEE: It was the complainant who testified, Ms. Terre
9 Ashmore, T-e-r-r-e A-s-h-m-o-r-e.
10 THE COURT: Okay. I think there is an objection to that
11 and also a disk that says “voicemail.” So that’s the same one
12 that she transcribed by hand; is that right?
13 MS. LEE: Yes.
14 THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Lear?
15 MR. LEAR: Hearsay.
16 THE COURT: Okay. To both?
17 MR. LEAR: Yes. So these are out-of-court statements
18 offered for the truth of the matter asserted, and they purport,
19 in part, to be conversations that involved Milton Hudson, who is
20 not a witness here and not here to authenticate the authenticity
21 to the — the veracity rather, of the voice messages.
22 THE COURT: Ms. Lee, what is the context of the voicemail?
23 MS. LEE: These were messages left by Milton Hudson when he
24 called Terre Ashmore regarding the property. And then she
25 listened to her voicemail, and then transcribed them and copied
0136
1 to them onto CDs. So they are statements made to her,
2 essentially.
3 THE COURT: So she listened to them and copied them onto a
4 CD?
5 MS. LEE: They are voicemails to her, like, they are her
6 voicemails.
7 THE COURT: Okay. And the reason they’re not hearsay is
8 what? What’s your offer of proof?
9 MS. LEE: One is to her and she was here to testify that
10 this is to her and what she heard.
11 THE COURT: Here is what I want you to do. What I’m asking
12 you for — and I don’t want you to think that I’m putting you on
13 the spot and having to explain things in the broad sense. There
14 may be an exception to hearsay, okay, or it may be non-hearsay,
15 in some cases. I don’t mean this case.
16 I’m trying to give you an opportunity to let me know
17 if there’s an exception because you have a legal exception that
18 is hearsay — I’m sorry. You have a legal objection that it’s
19 hearsay. If there is an exception you want me to consider, you
20 need to let me know what that is.
21 MS. LEE: One, it’s not hearsay. We have the CD itself,
22 which Terre Ashmore authenticated.
23 THE COURT: A CD is hearsay as well. Okay. It’s hearsay.
24 Anything that’s an out-of-court statement offered for the truth
25 of the matter asserted is hearsay. This voicemail was created
0137
1 out of court. Okay. It’s being offered for the truth of what’s
2 on it. It’s hearsay. Really simple.
3 So her saying I know what that is, is not an exception
4 to hearsay. That’s why I want to give you an opportunity to let
5 me know if there is a legal exception that you are relying on
6 that I can consider.
7 MS. LEE: Well, she testified that she understood these
8 voicemails, she acted in reliance to these voicemails, so the
9 very least, they’re administrative hearsay.
10 THE COURT: Okay. I’m going to sustain the objection. 50
11 is not received. I can’t use administrative hearsay just
12 willy-nilly as a sort of a catchall to receive evidence. It
13 really doesn’t work that way. I have to tie it to other
14 reliable evidence. It sounds like all this is coming from
15 somebody named Milton who did not testify, who I have no idea
16 what the context of any of that was.
17 It’s an out-of-court statement. And, by the way, he
18 is somebody that you could have used the government subpoena
19 power to compel to testify if you had wanted. When people get a
20 love letter from the State, they tend to take notice. So just a
21 little insight for you, Counsel. You have a lot of powers as
22 the Agency counsel.
23 We’re onto No. 51, which is — that has not been
24 referred to yet, so I’m marking it now. It’s a transcript that
25 was handwritten, much like 50 was. And who created this?
0138
1 MS. LEE: Same, Ms. Ashmore.
2 THE COURT: Okay. Ms. Ashmore. And there’s a — let’s
3 see, three pages of handwritten notes then there’s something
4 else that is typed on page 4. I don’t what that means. Sorry.
5 Go ahead.
6 MS. LEE: It’s the same. It’s just one — the first three
7 pages are handwritten but the fourth page is typed, but it’s the
8 same.
9 THE COURT: And there’s another CD in a pouch. Actually,
10 there’s two CDs. And those are what?
11 MS. LEE: Those are —
12 THE COURT: Phone messages?
13 MS. LEE: Correct.
14 THE COURT: Those were the things that were transcribed by
15 hand?
16 MS. LEE: Yes. And one typed page.
17 THE COURT: Okay. That’s all been marked as 51.
18 (Complainant’s Exhibit 51 was marked
19 for identification by the Court.)
20 THE COURT: Mr. Lear.
21 MR. LEAR: Same objection. Hearsay.
22 THE COURT: Counsel?
23 MS. LEE: With respect to least a couple lines in the
24 transcript, I believe evidence code Section 1230 applies as an
25 exception to the hearsay rule.
0139
1 THE COURT: Which lines?
2 MS. LEE: It is on page no. 2. And Evidence Code
3 Section 1230 states that, basically, the hearsay rule is that if
4 someone, a declarant, makes a statement that’s contrary to
5 declarant’s of procuring party interest, that so would make it
6 believable or reasonable then it would be an exception to
7 hearsay rule.
8 THE COURT: So you are saying it’s an exception because it
9 was a statement contrary to the declarant’s interest and the
10 declarant is going to Milton, the Respondent’s ex-husband; is
11 that right?
12 MS. LEE: Correct.
13 THE COURT: Okay. And show me the statement.
14 MS. LEE: It’s on page no. 2.
15 THE COURT: Okay. There’s a lot of handwriting there.
16 MS. LEE: Approximately in the middle of the page. It’s a
17 run-on sentence. But essentially in the middle of the page.
18 THE COURT: Where does it start?
19 MS. LEE: It’s a run-on sentence. I apologize, your Honor.
20 THE COURT: It’s all right. You didn’t write it.
21 MS. LEE: But it says: “But I really would appreciate if
22 you could call them and withdraw the complaint because
23 inevitably it just goes back to me because you paid me and
24 that’s what the issue is going to be with real estate.
25 THE COURT: And so that’s a declaration against his
0140
1 interest?
2 MS. LEE: Correct.
3 THE COURT: How so?
4 MS. LEE: Because when it says “you paid me,” it clearly
5 shows he knows that Ms. Ashmore should not have been paying him,
6 that he could get in trouble.
7 THE COURT: I thought we had Ms. Havener in the hot seat,
8 so to speak, in this case?
9 MS. LEE: Right. He and she can get in trouble with him
10 getting paid every month from Ms. Ashmore.
11 THE COURT: But the question I have is what is the
12 relevance of Milton, the declarant, in terms of his interest?
13 Why do I care? He’s not being prosecuted.
14 MS. LEE: Correct. But it’s still a statement against his
15 interest that he would not make it if it weren’t true.
16 THE COURT: Okay. Let’s see: “But I really would
17 appreciate it if you could just call them and just, um, withdraw
18 the complaint because inevitably it’s just going back to me.”
19 In terms of the relevance, what is the point of him knowing that
20 the complaint goes back to him?
21 MS. LEE: No. It’s the next line that is the most
22 important, actually.
23 THE COURT: “Because you paid me and that’s what the issue
24 is going to be.”
25 MS. LEE: Correct. He’s admitting that he got paid rent.
0141
1 THE COURT: Here’s what I’m going to do. I am going to
2 sustain to hearsay. Is there anything else?
3 MS. LEE: No.
4 THE COURT: I’m going to sustain the objection as to
5 hearsay as to everything else but that snippet, which I will
6 grant you the 1230 exception. But I’m going to say it’s going
7 to be of limited — I want to let you know up front, it’s going
8 to be of limited weight to me as far as how I look at because I
9 don’t know that this is — this is really not all that relevant.
10 He’s not here.
11 I don’t know how reliable this is anyway, he didn’t
12 testify. You could have subpoenaed him. You could have had him
13 sit in the chair and take an oath, and you could have examined
14 him on all of this. I just want you to know, Ms. Lee, I’ll
15 receive that little statement from this witness who didn’t come
16 in and testify himself. I’m not sure how much that’s going to
17 help your case. But, technically, I’m going to accept your
18 hearsay exception to that.
19 I want you to show me what language it is on that page
20 so I can make sure and know. I think I’m starting with “But I
21 really would appreciate it if you could call,” and that would go
22 on to say “because you paid me.” Is that what you wanted?
23 MS. LEE: Up to “Department of Real Estate.”
24 THE COURT: Okay. “And that’s what the issue is going to
25 be with the Department of Real Estate.” Okay. All right. So
0142
1 Mr. Lear, everything else as to that Exhibit 51 is going to
2 be out.
3 MR. LEAR: Your Honor, may I be heard?
4 THE COURT: Yes. Go ahead.
5 MR. LEAR: Thank God for phones. I just looked up Evidence
6 Code Section 1230, which reads that “Evidence of the statement
7 by declarant having sufficient knowledge of the subject is not
8 made inadmissible by the hearsay rule if the declarant is
9 unavailable as a witness.” Mr. Hudson was not unavailable as a
10 witness.
11 THE COURT: “Unavailable” means they’re not around. They
12 can’t be brought in. So what do you have to say about that?
13 MS. LEE: We couldn’t find him.
14 THE COURT: You couldn’t find him?
15 MS. LEE: Correct.
16 THE COURT: Did you subpoena him?
17 MS. LEE: We attempted to.
18 MR. LEAR: There’s been no proof of that, your Honor.
19 THE COURT: I’m sorry. Usually, I have an Evidence Code
20 with me, but I have recently moved to the Sacramento Office of
21 OAH, so I didn’t bring my usual things with me. But I’m going
22 to look for it.
23 We are going to go off the record.
24 (Discussion off the record)
25 THE COURT: Back on the record. Okay. Mr. Lear, I had a
0143
1 chance to look at the Evidence Code Exception 1230, and you’re
2 right, it does only apply with the Declarant, the hearsay
3 Declarant, who, in this case, is Mr. Milton, is unavailable as a
4 witness. Go ahead, Ms. Lee, you want to tell me why he’s
5 unavailable.
6 MS. LEE: We attempted to subpoena him. We couldn’t find
7 him to subpoena him.
8 THE COURT: Okay.
9 MS. LEE: We attempted to locate him at his home. His car
10 was not in the driveway. Rumor has it, and I know it’s hearsay,
11 multiple times at this point, he was in Costa Rica during the
12 time period of the first hearing, essentially, and the days
13 prior to the hearing.
14 THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Lear, do you know anything about his
15 availability?
16 MR. LEAR: Well, I know that he was invited to a meeting by
17 the BRE with Ms. Havener in the very recent past. And he’s
18 agreed to sit down with the BRE. I know that he has no
19 knowledge that there was any effort to subpoena him. And I know
20 he was not in Costa Rica because he drove Ms. Havener to the
21 hearing. I know —
22 THE COURT: Okay. We’re not going to laugh, okay? If you
23 can’t control yourself, you are going to be outside. You’ve got
24 to maintain respect for everybody in this proceeding. This is a
25 serious matter. This involves this person’s life. We’re not
0144
1 here to laugh. This is not a joke. Okay?
2 I want you to treat both attorneys as if they’re doing
3 their job the best that they can, and they are. I’ve been
4 dealing with them for three days now. So don’t have an outburst
5 like that again, if you do, you are going to be in the hallway.
6 Okay. I need you to step outside. Thank you.
7 Okay. Just for the record, thank you both for being
8 professional attorneys and not turning around, but a witness was
9 still trying to stifle laughs after everything I just said to
10 her. We don’t need that kind of distraction. I don’t want any
11 disrespect like that going back and forth.
12 Ms. Lee has taken the case very seriously, obviously,
13 and she’s doing the best she can, that’s apparent. Okay.
14 Ms. Lee, that does not sound to me as you are dealing with an
15 unavailable witness.
16 MS. LEE: Your Honor, what Mr. Lear has presented is true;
17 however, he refused to meet with us prior to the hearing date,
18 which doesn’t show any kind of availability for this hearing.
19 THE COURT: Okay. I don’t think you’ve made your case that
20 he’s unavailable. I think that that requires more sufficient
21 evidence then what you’ve proffered. So I’m going to sustain
22 the objection, and 51 out, entirely.
23 All right. 52, the last page was received in
24 evidence. Let’s get to 53. Okay. 53, I think you mentioned
25 off the record, that you wanted in as background information.
0145
1 MS. LEE: Correct. Essentially, the only thing I want you
2 to take out of it, your Honor, to make your life easier, it’s a
3 small town, population of approximately 2,300 people, that’s
4 pretty much it.
5 THE COURT: All right. I’ve marked 53.
6 (Complainant’s Exhibit 53 was marked
7 for identification by the Court.)
8 THE COURT: Is there any objection to 53 being received?
9 MR. LEAR: No.
10 THE COURT: All right. There being no objection, 53 is
11 received.
12 (Complainant’s Exhibit 53 was received
13 in evidence by the Court.)
14 THE COURT: That being said, I probably am not going to
15 spend lot of time with it because it’s just background
16 information coming from another source. All right. 54 looks
17 similar. It looks like information from the Base Camp Cafe’s
18 own website.
19 (Complainant’s Exhibit 54 was marked
20 for identification by the Court.)
21 THE COURT: And you are offering that as background
22 information as well?
23 MS. LEE: Correct. And the fact that it started in 2012.
24 THE COURT: Okay. I don’t think that was in dispute. All
25 right. Is there any objection 54 being received?
0146
1 MR. LEAR: Hearsay. Relevance.
2 THE COURT: Okay. Counsel?
3 MS. LEE: When you name your bank account the name of your
4 “trust fund,” the name of another company, I think that makes it
5 relevant. And the timing, I think, it makes it relevant as
6 well, which supports the fact that the finances were flowing to
7 and from these two enterprises.
8 THE COURT: Okay. My understanding is from — on that
9 point, from Ms. Havener’s testimony, Base Camp is a restaurant.
10 And for some people it’s an important meeting place because
11 they’re in a small town. And it depends on what you’re
12 interested is in that small town. But for some people, they
13 like to go there and they like to get together there. I don’t
14 think that’s in dispute, is it?
15 MS. LEE: No.
16 THE COURT: Okay. And I know you established the naming
17 of, with the Union Bank, the naming of that first account
18 involving Base Camp.
19 MS. LEE: The only account, your Honor.
20 THE COURT: Right. Okay. No. I mean, Ms. Havener’s
21 testimony was that there were several names there. They were
22 doing business as, et cetera, et cetera. The first name was
23 Base Camp. Okay. So what’s the relevance of this ?
24 MS. LEE: It’s for more information regarding Base Camp.
25 THE COURT: I really don’t need to know how much the
0147
1 beverages or bottled beers cost. I’ll tell you what, I’m going
2 to receive it as administrative hearsay only. And I’m going to
3 give it limited weight.
4 (Complainant’s Exhibit 54 was received
5 evidence by the Court.)
6 THE COURT: Okay. So that’s in as administrative hearsay.
7 55 was withdrawn. I’m sorry. You didn’t get to address it on
8 the record, but I believe you withdraw 55. You indicated you
9 wanted to do that.
10 MS. LEE: Yeah. That’s fine.
11 THE COURT: All right. So 56, page 9 is in evidence. 57
12 is an E-mail — no. It’s a “To whom it may concern” letter from
13 somebody named Rachel Unell. That was the second page of it;
14 right? Because the first page is unsigned.
15 (Complainant’s 57 was marked for
16 identification by the Court.)
17 MS. LEE: It’s basically the rebuttal evidence to her
18 letter in Exhibit G.
19 THE COURT: Rebuttal?
20 MS. LEE: Exhibit G is the same as page 2 of Exhibit 57.
21 THE COURT: Okay. So you attached the second page as a
22 reference —
23 MS. LEE: Correct.
24 THE COURT: — to the E-mail on the first page?
25 MS. LEE: Correct. It was an attachment, as you can see,
0148
1 to the E-mail. So leaving it out would make it incomplete.
2 THE COURT: Okay. What’s it rebutting?
3 MS. LEE: That there were complaints against Ms. Havener,
4 and not all was grand.
5 THE COURT: Mr. Lear, any objection?
6 MR. LEAR: Lacks foundation. Hearsay.
7 THE COURT: Okay. As to the lacking foundation, Ms. Lee,
8 you are not a witness, but this looks like it came to you. So
9 do you want to make me an offer of proof as to why this is
10 authentic.
11 MS. LEE: It was mailed to me by Ms. Unell, who sent me —
12 again, before, the attached letter was page 2. And she referred
13 me to the article on page 3, as well, that was in the newspaper
14 that she wrote.
15 THE COURT: She attached that?
16 MS. LEE: Honestly, I don’t recall if she attached it but
17 she definitely told me about it. I don’t recall if she attached
18 it, honestly, but she did refer to it. She did verify that she
19 wrote this.
20 THE COURT: That’s hearsay upon hearsay, so I’m going to
21 sustain the objection as to the page 3, at least, and review
22 this piece by piece. And page 2, we already discussed and it is
23 not disputed because that’s Exhibit G. All right. I’m going to
24 receive 57, page 1, which is the only really the original
25 document here, as administrative hearsay, only because this is
0149
1 not a witness who testified.
2 I don’t know how much weight I’m going to give it
3 because, once again, I have to link it to other reliable
4 evidence. If there were other complaints — I don’t know what,
5 necessarily, if the record has any evidence that is reliable
6 that there were other complaints. If I can’t find it, I’m not
7 going to rely on it so I can’t give it any weight. So I will
8 receive 57 but only that first page, and only as administrative
9 hearsay.
10 (Complainant’s Exhibit 57 was received
11 in evidence by the Court.)
12 THE COURT: Okay. Exhibit 58 is a declaration from
13 somebody named Maral Eskenian, M-a-r-a-l E-s-k-e-n-i-a-n.
14 (Complainant’s Exhibit 58 was marked
15 for identification by the Court.)
16 THE COURT: Any objection to 58 being received?
17 MR. LEAR: Hearsay.
18 THE COURT: Counsel?
19 MS. LEE: Just for completion, there is an E-mail from a
20 Ralph Wermli, W-e-r-m-l-i.
21 THE COURT: Okay. That’s right. That’s page 4 of this.
22 MS. LEE: The first part, let me address first. That was
23 sent to me after a lengthy conversation with Ms. Eskenian
24 regarding her complaint made on Yelp which she attached it as
25 page 3 of Exhibit 58.
0150
1 THE COURT: Okay. Did you give Mr. Lear notice that you
2 were going to use this declaration in today’s hearing in lieu of
3 having the witness testify?
4 MS. LEE: No. Not in the sense of direct evidence, no.
5 THE COURT: How about as far as the Administrative
6 Procedure Act?
7 MS. LEE: He had a copy of it, as this exhibit.
8 THE COURT: Okay. Did you send him notice? Isn’t that
9 what you are required to do? Saying that you are intending to
10 use this? Typically when these get submitted, they get
11 submitted with proof that you did that with opposing counsel.
12 MS. LEE: 11514?
13 THE COURT: Right.
14 MS. LEE: No. Not pursuant for 11514.
15 THE COURT: Okay. Any reason why not?
16 MS. LEE: The timing of it.
17 THE COURT: They’ve got a right to know whether you’re
18 going to call in someone to testify or whether you are going to
19 use a document instead because it puts them at a disadvantage,
20 obviously, because they can’t cross-examine.
21 MS. LEE: Well, this goes to rebuttal to her character
22 reference letters that she admitted as administrative hearsay.
23 THE COURT: All right. Okay. Mr. Lear, do you want to be
24 heard?
25 MR. LEAR: Objection under hearsay rule, under Evidence
0151
1 Code 352, more prejudicial than probative. Also, goes beyond
2 the scope of the Accusation.
3 THE COURT: Do you want to be heard on any of those
4 objections?
5 MS. LEE: Yes. Respondent has a number of letters, as far
6 as witnesses, stating very positive things about her. However,
7 to not allow evidence that presented a different light of people
8 that don’t know her directly through her community — that it
9 would be probative in the sense of providing a different light
10 on Respondent.
11 THE COURT: Okay. Give me a minute. Sorry. I’m trying to
12 find the section on declarations. I’m not going to make you
13 wait any longer. I’m going to go off the record. I’ll be right
14 back.
15 (Pause in the proceedings)
16 THE COURT: Back on the record. The section of the
17 Administrative Procedure Act 11514 regarding use of affidavits.
18 And, Counsel, you are supposed to follow that statute for me to
19 be able to rely on a declaration. So unless you were able to do
20 that, I’m not going to receive it.
21 MS. LEE: I did not do so. But I would like to state that,
22 essentially, it’s a letter and it should be taken as a letter
23 that Respondent has requested to admit into evidence.
24 THE COURT: Well, the only problem that I have with that is
25 it may not characterize this exactly the way I see it. Because
0152
1 58, it says “declaration.” And it says “I declare under penalty
2 of perjury,” etcetera, etcetera at the bottom of it. So I see
3 this as a declaration. So 58 is out.
4 MS. LEE: Can we address the last page of 58 then —
5 THE COURT: All right.
6 MS. LEE: — which is separate from the first few pages.
7 THE COURT: Why is the last page bunched in with this
8 declaration?
9 MS. LEE: It’s also a letter — or, it’s another —
10 THE COURT: Here’s the problem, I’m trying to make a record
11 as clearly as I can so if either of you appeal, whoever looks at
12 the transcript, is going to understand what the exhibits are.
13 58 is a declaration, that’s in and of itself. Okay.
14 Now you turn down through it and this declaration by
15 Maral Eskenian, M-a-r-a-l E-s-k-e-n-i-a-n. That looks
16 completely separate from this other copy of an E-mail, which is
17 page 4. Those are two different exhibits. So, not to give you
18 a hard time, Counsel, but it makes it really difficult for
19 everybody. You’ve got two different exhibits and they’re called
20 the same thing. Those are really separate exhibits.
21 MS. LEE: I can make it Exhibit 65 if you would like.
22 Would that be easier?
23 THE COURT: It’s not for me. It’s for everybody. I deal
24 with the case once. Someone else for the BRE may look at it;
25 they may look at the evidence. A Superior Court judge or a
0153
1 Court of Appeal judge or beyond may look at this. So if we’re
2 calling 58 one thing, there shouldn’t be something else attached
3 to it.
4 It’s not for my convenience; it’s for anyone who looks
5 at this record. So 58 is out. It’s not received. The
6 objections are sustained. Also, 11514 was not followed. So now
7 this last page is going to be called Exhibit 65. And I’ll mark
8 that.
9 (Complainant’s Exhibit 65 was marked
10 for identification by the Court.)
11 THE COURT: Go ahead. Do you want to make an offer of
12 proof? It looks like an E-mail from somebody to you.
13 MS. LEE: Correct.
14 THE COURT: Whose Ralph Wermli, W-e-r-m-l-i? The person
15 who wrote the E-mail.
16 MS. LEE: Basically, the person contacted me with concerns
17 regarding this case after he learned about it. He wanted to
18 state his opinion regarding her character based on his
19 experiences with her.
20 THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Lear, any objections to 65?
21 MR. LEAR: Objection. Hearsay. Lacks foundation.
22 THE COURT: Okay. You heard the objections. Do you want
23 to make an offer of proof, Ms. Lee?
24 MS. LEE: This E-mail was sent to me. We discussed it at
25 length on the phone, as well, before he sent it to me. And it
0154
1 goes to, basically, to rebut the character letters that she has
2 presented.
3 MR. LEAR: Your Honor, I’m also going to make a Government
4 Code Section 11514 objection because even though it’s not a
5 declaration per se, it’s essentially being offered as a
6 declaration. And as the Court can see from the title of the
7 E-mail, the date was November 16th. That was one day before we
8 started the hearing.
9 THE COURT: Right. So that was sent before the hearing
10 began and we’ve also had an additional day of testimony. And as
11 you know, Ms. Lee, I wanted to give you every opportunity to put
12 your case on. Even though you had rested, I would have let you
13 call another witness.
14 It starts with “To whom it may concern,” that’s a
15 pretty formalized beginning. And it appears to contain a whole
16 lot of information. And then it’s signed — although it’s not
17 signed, it’s signed off on, quote,” Sincerely Ralph Wermli.”
18 And he gives a date. So it’s very formalized language.
19 This, it seems to me, that you’re using this as an
20 out-of-court declaration from a witness that, you know, you
21 could have called him to testify.
22 MS. LEE: Well, it goes to the same issues that the
23 character reference letters are from Respondent’s.
24 THE COURT: That’s a relevance point. And I wouldn’t argue
25 with you about it. The problem is you’ve got a Respondent over
0155
1 here who you’ve got pages and pages of allegations against her.
2 She should have a right to confront witnesses against her.
3 Especially witnesses who are saying I’m not happy with her or
4 how she did business.
5 When you got something here that comes into evidence
6 the last day of the hearing, and you have subpoena power, and it
7 reads like a declaration, I think there’s a due-process problem
8 with that. So, you know, if you wanted to use this as a
9 declaration, you also could have taken that tack under 11514.
10 You could have prepared an affidavit for him and had him sign it
11 and showed that she gave Mr. Lear notice.
12 By the way, that is what Agency counsel does whenever
13 they use declarations. That’s just a word to the wise. You
14 want to do that before every hearing whenever you intend to have
15 the ALJ rely on an out-of-court declaration instead of live
16 testimony. All right. So I’m going to sustain the objection.
17 65 is not received. Okay. We have No. 59.
18 MS. LEE: I’ll withdraw, your Honor.
19 THE COURT: Okay. 59 is withdrawn. Okay 60-64 have all
20 been received. So we’re done with your exhibits, Ms. Lee. You
21 can breathe a sigh of relief. Okay. Mr. Lear’s exhibit, I
22 don’t believe there’s anything outstanding except the Katy Cruse
23 letter and the other letters, Mr. Tako, T-a-k-o, Adams,
24 Summerland and Reese.
25 Those letters, Mr. Lear, I want to give you time to
0156
1 have your client go back to those people and ask them to sign
2 off of those since none of them have signatures. How much time
3 do you need?
4 MR. LEAR: 10 days.
5 THE COURT: 10 days. So today is the 17th. 10 days from
6 now will bring us up to the 27th, which is not a holiday. It’s
7 the beginning of Lent for some people, say it’s a sad day. But
8 it will do fine for us.
9 I’m going to leave the record open until the 27th of
10 February for the Respondent to resubmit those letters with
11 signatures. What you want to do, of course, Mr. Lear, is you
12 are going to give notice on the same day. You’ll send an
13 electronic copy over to Counsel so that she can see the signed
14 letters.
15 MR. LEAR: Yes.
16 THE COURT: And then the following — one more week after
17 that is Monday the 6th. So you will have until Monday the 6th,
18 Ms. Lee, to object, if you have any objections. And I’m going
19 to close the record on the 6th. I’ll either sustain the
20 objections or overrule them and receive the document. But that
21 will be written up in the — what I do with them will be written
22 up in the first full paragraph about the hearing. So you’ll
23 have an easy time seeing it. Okay. All right. So I think we
24 are on to closing argument now, aren’t we?
25 MR. LEAR: Yes.
0157
1 THE COURT: Anything else, Ms. Lee?
2 MS. LEE: No. But if I may have a second?
3 THE COURT: Sure.
4 MS. LEE: May I be heard?
5 THE COURT: Yes. Go ahead.
6 MS. LEE: This is undisputed that Respondent had violated a
7 number of real estate law provisions that they had been
8 stipulated to. I briefly mentioned code sections, but I think
9 it’s better for your Honor just to look through the Accusation
10 itself.
11 THE COURT: All right.
12 MS. LEE: Is that amenable to you?
13 THE COURT: That’s fine. However you want to do it.
14 MS. LEE: Obviously, the most concerning is the shortage of
15 approximately $20,000 that the Respondent had with respect to
16 trust funds, her failure to designate it as a trust fund
17 account. Basically, complete lack of supervision, as well as
18 maintenance of those trust account.
19 The auditor testified, and exhibits will show that
20 Stacey Havener was the one that opened the bank account in
21 question. In fact, she named in it in a way that co-mingles
22 directly her trust fund account with her other business, Base
23 Camp. There’s been testimony both ways Ms. Havener is great;
24 she’s not so great, but let’s look at the evidence. Let’s look
25 at the dates, in fact.
0158
1 If you look at the dates, it’s interesting because it
2 directly goes against what Respondent’s expert testimony —
3 expert witness had testified today. Given, one, his testimony
4 is based solely on whatever was relayed to him by Ms. Havener;
5 hence, if something was untrue that was relayed by her, his
6 assessment falls completely apart.
7 He testified that she would no longer a threat
8 because, essentially, one, she inherited the bank account from
9 her husband. We know that’s not true. She did not inherit this
10 bank account in some way or form because she’s the one that
11 opened up the bank account. Our Exhibit 63, the Union Bank
12 depositor agreement, shows that.
13 The auditor testified to that; Respondent testified to
14 that. She’s the one that created the problem here. And as I
15 stated, she created by co-mingling her funds with a trust fund.
16 Another premise had is that she now knows — she now knows she
17 can’t trust her husband with money. But now that she does,
18 she’s totally capable of and totally willing to make sure this
19 is not a problem.
20 Look at the timeline, she now knows. Okay. Well,
21 maybe she should have known earlier. And a few thing s that
22 could have given her notice of this, one, was when the original
23 Accusation was filed against her husband on November 20, 2012.
24 On November 20, 2012, the Accusation was filed against her
25 husband. The next year, she opens up the trust account in
0159
1 question here on the audit.
2 They were talking about the Base Camp LLC, DBA All
3 Seasons Property Management, DBA All Seasons Realty. She opens
4 that up on May 9, 2013, as a sole signatory. The auditor
5 testified that an ATM card was given to Milton, which was highly
6 unusual for a trust fund account to have an ATM card with it
7 because it’s hard to track the ins and outs of that trust fund
8 account.
9 THE COURT: I’ve got a question for you. I don’t like to
10 interrupt, by my question for you is: You made an issue of
11 whether or not this was a trust account. You just said that
12 it’s highly unusual that an ATM card would come with a trust
13 account. What’s the Bureau’s position on whether it’s a trust
14 account or not?
15 MS. LEE: It’s a bank account which trust funds were held
16 in.
17 THE COURT: I know. There’s no dispute that trust funds
18 were held in it. But, you know, are you leaving it for me to
19 try to decide if it was a trust account or not?
20 MS. LEE: No. It was not a trust account. It was a bank
21 account that trust funds were in. And it’s highly in usual for
22 an account that contains trusts to have an ATM card attached to
23 it because you cannot control the ins and outs of where the
24 trust funds are going.
25 THE COURT: All right. Thank you. Go ahead.
0160
1 MS. LEE: That’s May 9, 2013. A few months later,
2 Respondent’s husband, on November 14, 2013, voluntarily
3 surrenders his broker license. Subsequently, December 18, 2013,
4 her husband loses his broker license due to the voluntary
5 surrender; however, they continued business like usual, as if
6 his license is still intact, under Respondent’s license.
7 On or about March 29, 2013, Ms. De Mascio testified,
8 and Respondent concurred that they met. Ms. De Mascio met with
9 her and told her how she wanted to end the property contract.
10 How she was displeased because of the amount of money that they
11 were owed. She testified to Respondent’s apathetic response,
12 and how she essentially did not care about these amounts of
13 money that were missing. At this point, Ms. De Mascio should
14 have known that she cannot trust her husband with the account,
15 however, she continued.
16 THE COURT: Okay. Ms. De Mascio should have known?
17 MS. LEE: I’m sorry. The Respondent should have known.
18 THE COURT: I am listening closely.
19 MS. LEE: Thank you, your Honor. That Respondent should
20 have known on or about May 29, 2014, that she could not trust
21 her husband, that the Respondent cannot trust her husband with
22 the property management.
23 On or about April 1st, per Exhibit 24, pages 27 and
24 29, Respondent drafts and E-mail, a new Addendum 1 to
25 Respondent’s husband who forwards it to the De Mascios.
0161
1 Essentially, it states if you are going to end the property
2 management early, then you don’t have to pay one month’s rent.
3 That is directly inconsistent with Respondent’s testimony here
4 today that she was simply trying to what’s right and see how to
5 fix the problem.
6 Ms. De Mascio testified that she took this message and
7 this attempted Addendum 1 in Exhibit 24 pages 27 through 29, as
8 blackmail. On our about April 3rd, 2014, Respondent replies to
9 Ms. De Mascio’s E-mail, per Exhibit 24, page 38, that it is the
10 responsibility of the owner to pay the water bill of the
11 property. That’s directly contradicting the contract that they
12 had. And that is Exhibit 24, page 38.
13 On April 28, 2014, the De Mascios settle for the $840
14 instead of the $968.44. About that same time, also, in May, on
15 or about May 2014, Ray Scott goes in and complains to
16 Respondent’s husband with Respondent standing right there. He
17 clearly was not happy. He complained about the bounced checks.
18 He complained about the amounts due, and, again, Respondent
19 claims she did not know she could not trust her husband with the
20 accounts, as she was not aware of the problems with her bank
21 account.
22 Approximately a year later on March 2nd, 2015,
23 Respondent is interviewed by the Bureau of Real Estate auditor,
24 Diana Brewster, who testified here today, and investigator
25 Winston Horn. Respondent testified today she acknowledges this
0162
1 interview. Respondent produced bank statements on this account
2 but could not produce any files or documents on the properties.
3 The auditor testified that this first encounter on her
4 end of things was pointless and she had to come again.
5 Approximately two weeks later the auditor comes back and meets
6 with Respondent’s husband, Milton Hudson. He was able to pull
7 everything from the computer for the rental properties. Because
8 the first time Respondent was unable to pull out any documents,
9 except for the bank statements. And although she has access to
10 the bank statements, and by “she” I mean Respondent had access
11 to bank statements, she did not seem to catch the approximately
12 90 bounced checks that occurred in approximately 15 month’s time
13 from January 1st, 2014, to March 1st, 2015, which is an average
14 of about 1.5 checks per week.
15 After the auditor and the investigator meet with
16 Respondent and then orders the Respondent and auditor, again,
17 with her husband, after that time in March of 2015, in April
18 of 2015, a month later, Respondent instructs Ms. Ashmore to meet
19 with Respondent’s husband at the property. You would think that
20 the meeting with the auditor and the investigator informing her
21 that she knew she would now be reviewing all manual files, that
22 she would, now, a month later, not refer Ms. Ashmore to her
23 husband, but instead, take care of it herself.
24 But approximately one month later, after writing her
25 declaration to the Bureau of Real Estate stating, “The
0163
1 management activities were overseen by Milton Hudson.” I will
2 now be reviewing all management files that were active as of
3 December 1st, 2013 to correct any outstanding problems.
4 Approximately a month after making that statement,
5 that written statement to the Bureau of Real Estate, she
6 instructs Ms. Ashmore to meet with Respondent’s husband for the
7 property and negotiate the terms of the contract with him and
8 not take care of it herself. In fact, Respondent tells Ashmore
9 to not bother her and contact her husband.
10 A month later, approximately a month later, next
11 month, May 6, 2015, the auditor sat down with Respondent and
12 gave her the noncompliance summary, which basically tells the
13 Respondent all the auditor’s findings and all of the real estate
14 violations. This is May 6, 2015.
15 However, from at least May 5, 2015, through
16 December 2015, Respondent’s husband continues to collect rent
17 from Ms. Ashmore approximately 15 times, mostly in cash,
18 sometimes in checks. Respondent continues to allow her husband
19 to do property management despite all of these indications and
20 warnings that she should not allow him to do so. That’s per
21 exhibit 48.
22 The Ingram’s issue, the timing of it suspect as well.
23 The lease agreement was made in 2013, the checks that were
24 bounced were in 2014, the original Accusation was in 2016, of
25 this case, April 26, 2016, and then our hearing was set for
0164
1 November 17th and November 18th of 2016. Approximately two
2 weeks earlier on November 2nd, 2016, two years after the bounced
3 checks, Respondent E-mails Ingram asking about the deposit and
4 wanting to make things right because she is a “caring person.”
5 Respondent pays off the Ingrams approximately $400 on
6 November 7, 2016, just 10 days before our hearing, despite the
7 fact that the bounced checks occurred in 2014.
8 Respondent claims that she is simply trying to do
9 what’s right, and simply cares about the people in her business.
10 However, Respondent could not even open up a trust account,
11 despite all the warnings that are listed in the Accusation as
12 well as the testimony here today, the Accusations against
13 Respondent and the husband, the meetings with the Bureau of Real
14 Estate, the complaint from the De Mascios, the complaint from
15 Ray Scott, the complaint from Mr. Ashmore.
16 Despite all this, Respondent did not open up — even
17 open up a trust account. Respondent testified that she has paid
18 everyone back, that no one is owed to dime; however, even our
19 auditor said it was hard to figure out because of the way that
20 the bookkeeping was done. And so for Respondent to be able to
21 unequivocally state she has paid everyone back is disingenuous.
22 Also disingenuous is the fact that 90 bounced checks
23 in 13 months’ time, and Respondent had access to the bank
24 account. And in fact, that was the only thing she was able to
25 provide our auditor. And despite having access to her bank
0165
1 account statements, and despite that fact that she had 90
2 bounced checks from April 20, 2014, to March 1st, 2015, that
3 apparently did not indicate to Respondent that she needs to take
4 control, and stop what is happening to these people.
5 Respondent has a bunch of letters of rec, and it’s
6 interesting what one person testified to today, that she stated
7 that a number of people she recognized their names. Also
8 interesting is in a letter, which I know we didn’t admit into
9 evidence, but it was at least marked, was Exhibit AA from
10 Katy Cruse.
11 MR. LEAR: Objection.
12 THE COURT: Go ahead.
13 MS. LEE: From Katy Cruse. What’s interesting is in there,
14 she states basically the ratio of people that complain about
15 Stacey and don’t complain about Stacey is very small; however,
16 the Bureau of Real Estate does not state that you can do right
17 by 10 people and therefore, not do right by one person.
18 Respondent tends to, perhaps, to right the people in
19 her community; however, that does not matter. What matters is
20 that she does not bounce checks and does not take trust funds
21 from anyone regardless of whether they are a member of her
22 community, regardless of whether they live in Pine Mountain Club
23 or Frazier Park or Los Angeles, regardless of the bad credit or
24 good credit, or whether they are homeless or not homeless.
25 The Bureau of Real Estate does not allow anyone, any
0166
1 licensee to take trust funds from any person regardless if that
2 person is a friend or member of Respondent’s community. And so
3 I go back — I go back to Dr. Lareau’s statement that she’s no
4 longer a threat. And the question is: When is it now? When is
5 now that she knows she can’t trust her husband with money? And
6 is it really that she can’t trust her husband with money or is
7 this really now her doing? And the Bureau of Real Estate
8 contends this is now her doing because she knew about the
9 Accusations against her husband.
10 And the timing, right before he voluntarily surrenders
11 his license and let him continue the business, that’s her doing.
12 As well as ignoring Ms. De Mascio’s complaints, as well as
13 ignoring Ray Scott’s complaints, as well as ignoring the
14 Ingram’s complaint until 10 days before hearing — 15 days
15 before hearing, of our original hearings dates. That is not a
16 person who is “caring.”
17 A person who is caring does not allow 90 bounced
18 checks to go by. A person who is a licensee should not let 90
19 bounced checks go by and does not let $20,000 shortage in
20 accounts. Respondent has provided no evidence, other than her
21 word, that she has paid back the shortage. Respondent has
22 offered no evidence that she, herself, is an accountant. Our
23 auditor stated that it would be a hard time for her to do the
24 accounting.
25 It would be disingenuous for Respondent to testify
0167
1 that she has clearly and unequivocally paid everyone back. And
2 with that, the Bureau of Real Estate recommended revocation of
3 Ms. Havener’s license.
4 THE COURT: Revocation?
5 MS. LEE: Revocation.
6 THE COURT: Okay. All right. Mr. Lear, before you begin,
7 I’m going to give Ms. Lee something so that she can work on it
8 now. You were going to redact from your Exhibit 10 — there are
9 social security numbers and tax ID numbers and they are on the
10 right here, you are going to go from here forward.
11 MS. LEE: May I approach?
12 THE COURT: Sure. This is all stuff that’s yours, so you
13 take that and home with you. That’s all documents that were not
14 received. But if you take a look, let me show you, there are
15 tiny numbers written here, that’s the social security number.
16 We don’t want to have that sitting around in a government file.
17 I’m going to give you a pen and you can start
18 redactions while you give your attention to Mr. Lear who is
19 giving his closing argument now. Go ahead, Mr. Lear.
20 MR. LEAR: Thank you, your Honor.
21 THE COURT: Thank you.
22 MR. LEAR: In large part, this is a mitigation case.
23 Ms. Havener has stipulated to the bulk of the allegation against
24 her and makes no excuses. She is taking responsibility and
25 accountability for wrongdoing. She, as the broker of record,
0168
1 had the full responsibility for the actions of anybody and
2 everybody that worked under her license, including Milton
3 Hudson.
4 In that regard, you have heard over time from
5 Ms. Havener that, indeed, she excels in the arena of Real
6 Estate. And that, indeed, she does not excel or necessarily
7 care for the property management side. She was nevertheless
8 either wittingly or unwittingly a part of the property
9 management company where she had the sole responsibility, and
10 compliance in both the trust and accounting in the day-to-day
11 operation.
12 She admittedly did not do the supervision that she
13 needed to do pursuant to the BRE rules. She’s admitted that,
14 not just in this court, but in her meeting with Dr. Lareau. And
15 I would submit that there are two exhibits that the Court should
16 pay particular attention to in this matter. One is Exhibit U,
17 which is the report of Dr. Lareau. In the report, he cites,
18 amongst other things, that Ms. Havener stated that without a
19 license, he, meaning Hudson, should not have been doing
20 recordkeeping of the trust account in making up the checks in
21 Havener’s name.
22 Lareau states that Hudson kept doing all of that
23 accounting work, and Havener needed him to do it because she did
24 not have that information. She stated that she was not able to
25 physically do everything plus the accounting without losing a
0169
1 significant amount of business income for home sales. That
2 those two or three sentences are the essence of the entirety of
3 the case.
4 THE COURT: What page were those on?
5 MR. LEAR: That’s on page 9 of the Dr. Lareau’s report.
6 THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.
7 MR. LEAR: It encapsulates, essentially, the problem here.
8 That Ms. Havener was obligated to do more than she could do.
9 She knows that. That’s the problem. She didn’t supervise as
10 well as she should have. And I don’t mean to belittle it, it’s
11 a big deal. And it’s all her fault, and she’s had a learn from
12 that, and she’s had to suffer consequences.
13 We’re not asking this Court to dismiss the case. We
14 are fully expecting that there will be discipline against
15 Ms. Havener’s license. And I suggest to the Court that the
16 discipline should be one of two things, either a restricted
17 broker’s license or a restricted sales agent license.
18 We understand and appreciate that the default position
19 here would be stripping Ms. Havener of her broker’s license and
20 giving her a restricted sales agent license. We’re going to
21 suggest to you that in this circumstance that’s too extreme.
22 That in this circumstance a restricted broker’s license would be
23 an inappropriate result.
24 To wit, you’ve heard testimony, you’ve had an
25 opportunity to assess Ms. Havener’s character, her integrity and
0170
1 her honesty. She’s honest as the day is long. That’s not been
2 the problem here. The problem has been supervision and
3 compliance. And in that regard, she has learned the hard
4 lesson. She has, amongst other things, put into place
5 protocols. And while she’s testified that she has scant
6 interest in continuing with property management, she’s also told
7 the Court that, indeed, she is finishing out some of her
8 property management files and she has to do that. And in that
9 regard, she has a property management policies and procedures
10 manual now, or at least a summary, which is Exhibit W. We heard
11 testimony from Mr. Sheldon about that.
12 So at the end of the day, as the Court is assessing
13 whether we can trust Ms. Havener to continue operating as a real
14 estate broker. I think it’s incumbent upon the Court to
15 determine whether the Public is at risk. Can Ms. Havener
16 continue to work as a broker for the people of the State of
17 California and not in peril because of her license activities?
18 Answer, yes. Why it that?
19 One, she has insight as to her wrongdoing. Two, she
20 has put protocols into place where the wrongdoing will not
21 likely happen in the future. One would be by the trust fund
22 accounting summary that she has indicated in Exhibit W.
23 Two, she’s testified that Milton Hudson is no longer
24 associated with her in any professional context with respect to
25 her real estate practice, and there’s been no evidence to the
0171
1 contrary.
2 Three, she has testified here in a manner that’s been
3 unrefuted by the BRE that she has made good with respect to the
4 monies that were missing from the trust account. That’s a
5 serious violation. We all understand and appreciate that.
6 There were monies that needed to be held in trust and they
7 needed to be maintained in trust.
8 One, they were not in the appropriate account. That’s
9 a problem. Two, the monies were not in there like they should
10 have been. That’s a much bigger problem. And Ms. Havener has
11 testified here today and previously, indeed, she paid those
12 monies back. She testified today she worked seven days a week,
13 many hours a day, to get to the point where she could make the
14 people whole as best she could based on the accounting that she
15 had.
16 Accounting is not her strong suit, we all know that.
17 And that’s why she’s taking the measure of bringing in
18 Ms. Sheldon to do the accounting for her on a future basis so
19 she doesn’t get into this type of situation again. Certainly,
20 I’m sure the Court has noted that all of the allegations here
21 deal with Ms. Havener’s property management company and not with
22 the sales side, and that is significant. And that would be why
23 there have been no allegations of misconduct of Ms. Havener over
24 the very long career that she’s had as a real estate broker and
25 agent.
0172
1 So back to: Can the Court trust her on a future-going
2 basis? And I think the answer an emphatic “Yes.” She’s had
3 many years of no misconduct. There’s no evidence of her having
4 misconduct on the sales side history of the practice. She has
5 now limited the property management side to those remaining
6 files that she still has in order to make people whole and to
7 finish off that side of the business. And she’s put protocols
8 into place.
9 And finally, she’s gone to a reputed professional
10 psychiatrist to get an assessment for the benefit of this Court
11 that she is, indeed, not a danger to the Public on a
12 future-going basis. For that reason, we believe that the
13 appropriate discipline here is a restricted broker’s license.
14 Thank you.
15 THE COURT: All right. Thank you. I’m going to give
16 Ms. Lee an opportunity to rebut, if you want to make one. But
17 before I forget this, the Sheldon CV, the witness, she spent a
18 decent amount of time looking at it and verifying it was true
19 and correct. Do you want to move to have it received?
20 MR. LEAR: Yes
21 THE COURT: All right. So Exhibit X is received.
22 (Respondent’s Exhibit X was
23 received in evidence by the Court.)
24 THE COURT: Go ahead.
25 MS. LEE: Before we get to — I do want to do rebuttal but
0173
1 before I get to that, can I discuss the exhibit that you gave
2 me?
3 THE COURT: I gave you 10. And I gave you 10 to just cross
4 out the tiny social security number. And that’s all I gave you.
5 Everything else was discarded.
6 MS. LEE: I believe 63 and 64 which were admitted into
7 evidence, your Honor.
8 THE COURT: I’m sorry. Did that come up along with it?
9 That’s my mistake. Okay. Come on up. That would have been
10 bad. That’s why I wanted to get rid of that pile that was up
11 here.
12 MS. LEE: And I’m returning Exhibit 10 to you.
13 THE COURT: I had asked Ms. Lee earlier a couple of moments
14 ago at hearing if she could do the redaction. So she’s redacted
15 the social security numbers and tax ID numbers from those. We
16 don’t need that in the file from those former tenants and
17 owners. Okay. Thank you. Ms. Lee. Go ahead.
18 MS. LEE: But for the record, 63 and 64 are admitted?
19 THE COURT: They’re in. That was my mistake. They got
20 handed to you inadvertently. Thank you very much.
21 MS. LEE: Two points. One is interesting in the sense that
22 the Respondent is trying to parse out property management and
23 sales. A real estate licensee can either be trusted or can’t be
24 trusted. It’s not simply whether you can trust one aspect of it
25 or another aspect of it. Just like our law degree; you can’t
0174
1 parse out what is transactional law or litigation.
2 You’re either trusted with a license or you are not
3 trusted with a license. There’s no way for the Bureau of Real
4 Estate to parse those two things out, just like there’s no way
5 for the Bar to parse out litigation or transactional.
6 THE COURT: Couldn’t she be restricted to do or not do
7 certain practices?
8 MS. LEE: If you can trust someone with a license, you can
9 trust them with a license.
10 THE COURT: I’m not asking you to trust. I understand your
11 philosophical point. I am asking if the Bureau can restrict
12 her — in an order, if they can restrict her for a certain
13 amount of time as part of a disciplinary order from engaging in
14 certain types of practices. I know other boards can do that.
15 MS. LEE: I have not seen that, your Honor.
16 THE COURT: Okay. All right. Go ahead.
17 MS. LEE: Second thing is what’s interesting is
18 Respondent’s attempt to characterize this as simply lack of
19 supervision. The Bureau of Real Estate argues that it’s not
20 just simply lack of supervision. It’s a lot more. It’s her
21 direct involvement with, basically, the missing of $20,000 in
22 trust fund, as well as the complaints of the complainants
23 herein.
24 She’s had plenty of notice of all their complaints.
25 She had the bank statement to know about the bounced checks.
0175
1 And she allowed that to happen and benefited financially from
2 these missing monies. Respondent, again, has provided no
3 evidence, other than her testimony, that she supposedly made
4 good on the $20,000 shortage. She’s provided no audit. She
5 provided no documentation to that effect. Despite the fact our
6 auditor stated she, herself, had trouble discerning where and to
7 the money were going as a professional.
8 And so the Bureau of Real Estate recommends that
9 revocation completely is in order here today. The Respondent
10 cannot be trusted with a real estate license. She is the brains
11 of the operation as stated by Ms. Ashmore, in so money words.
12 There was a document that was drafted where that was handed to
13 her given to her by Milton Hudson and it came from Mr. Ashmore.
14 And Ms. Ashmore is the one who runs the show. She is the
15 broker. She is the one in charge. She is the one that opened
16 up the bank account.
17 Just a few months after — about a year after her
18 husband’s Accusation was filed, and just a few months before her
19 husband gave up his license, knowing full well that he was going
20 to continue, that she was going to continue, they were going to
21 continue the enterprise together without any regard to the
22 Bureau of Real Estate regulations and laws.
23 With the timing of it all, I would, again, try to
24 impress upon your Honor, as far as in timing of all this, as far
25 as Respondent’s testimony that now she will be good. Well, she
0176
1 had plenty of times to now be good. Was it when her husband’s
2 Accusation was filed? Was it when she opened up her bank
3 account, not trust account? Was it when the De Mascios talked
4 to her and complained to her? Was it when Ray Scott talked and
5 complained in her presence? Was it when the Ingrams demanded
6 their money back?
7 Was it when our investigator and auditor went to talk
8 to her? Was it when the auditor came back to do the documents,
9 to review the document because she didn’t have all the document?
10 Was it when our auditor went back again to give her a final
11 review of her audit assessment of what all the violations she
12 found? Was it when Ms. Ashmore collected or took — gave them
13 all the monies.
14 There’s all these times when she said, “Yes, now I’ll
15 be good. Now I’ll be good. Now I’ll be good. Now I’ll do
16 what’s right” in the statement to the Bureau of Real Estate,
17 only to be found a month later to be accepting money from
18 Ms. Ashmore, and for several months thereafter.
19 And with that kind of record, your Honor, she cannot
20 be trusted with a licence. Whether with respect to sales or
21 with respect to property management because it shows a disregard
22 of the real estate law in its entirety. And one cannot be
23 trustworthy on one end and not trustworthy on another end.
24 The Bureau of Real Estate regulations and laws don’t
25 state to your neighbors you can be not good, or violate real
0177
1 estate law with respect to the people that don’t live in your
2 community. And with that, the Bureau recommends revocation.
3 THE COURT: All right. Thank you. I’ve got a question for
4 you on your closing remarks. Are you suggesting that when a
5 licensee makes a mistake, there’s nothing they can do to correct
6 it? That the Bureau would accept as an attempt to mitigate the
7 damage or the harm that was done?
8 MS. LEE: No. I’m saying that, as the evidence has shown,
9 Respondent has time and time again stated that she will
10 mitigate, which shows she’s not genuine in her statement that
11 she’s going to mitigate those damages.
12 THE COURT: Okay. I want to ask you another question. I
13 heard your point about her not paying back the money, but I
14 didn’t see any rebuttal evidence coming back that would suggest
15 that out of that $20,000, X amount is still outstanding. I
16 mean, am I incorrect?
17 MS. LEE: No.
18 THE COURT: Okay. So as far as I know, her statements that
19 she’s paid everybody back as diligently as she could, those are
20 not being refuted by the Bureau necessarily as far as the facts
21 are concerned?
22 MS. LEE: I think the weight of it should be taken into
23 account.
24 THE COURT: And I’m taking it, and I’m listening to your
25 comment. The only thing is, I want to make sure I understood
0178
1 what you are saying. I know you’re making argument, and it’s
2 appropriate that you do that. I just wanted to know what your
3 position was to as to the facts of that.
4 The testimony was that she paid people back to the
5 best of her ability. And that as far as she knew, she paid them
6 back everything. So right now, there’s no factual dispute about
7 that; right? I’m not saying that you are in total agreement,
8 but I didn’t hear any rebuttal evidence that, “Oh, no. You are
9 owed X amount of dollars that’s still outstanding.”
10 That’s untrue that she did not pay her obligations.
11 Because as Mr. Lear said, they’ve focused on mitigation. On her
12 showing that she, or attempting to show that she’s learned from
13 her mistakes and that she’s tried to do right be people. And I
14 just want to make sure that you haven’t offered any evidence to
15 dispute her contentions that she’s paid people back as best she
16 could.
17 MS. LEE: My contention is the auditor testified to the
18 $20,000 shortage; and that she, herself, an auditor, trained
19 professionally, found it difficult to try to report where the
20 monies are coming from.
21 THE COURT: Right. I heard that. What I hear is you got
22 somebody who doesn’t really do this kind of practice. Her
23 ex-husband did all the on-the-ground part of it. She’s a
24 broker, she sells and buys homes and properties.
25 MS. LEE: She’s also the broker who does property
0179
1 management.
2 THE COURT: Right. But this was his part of the business.
3 What I heard is that she had made certain efforts to repay
4 people to the best of her ability. I know you heard, I also
5 heard, that she has kept those files active for the purpose of
6 trying to — basically having them available in the event that
7 further issues come up. Was that your understanding? That was
8 my understanding on the evidence. And that she’s still doing.
9 She’s still got those files. She’s not file finding properties
10 for people, she’s not handling people’s rent. But she’s still
11 got those files as a part of her practice so that as issues come
12 up, she can keep dealing with them keep “right by people.”
13 My question for you is: Is this something that you’re
14 saying the Bureau absolutely rejects? Any attempts that she’s
15 made to repay people and to be responsible going forward?
16 Because some of these allegations, they go back way in time.
17 MS. LEE: The Bureau rejects it in the sense that
18 Respondent has made these assertions before, to the Bureau of
19 Real Estate even, that she will not continue the behavior, but
20 she continued to violate real estate law. And, thereafter, we
21 have evidence that she has, indeed, violated real estate law
22 even thereafter making the assertions she would not violate the
23 law to the Bureau of Real Estate.
24 THE COURT: I understand. Thank you. Thank you for
25 clarifying that. All right. So I’m going to keep the record
0180
1 open as I mentioned so that Mr. Lear has the opportunity to get
2 those letters signed. And then an extra week, that’s going to
3 be — he’ll have until February 27th to resubmit those letters
4 with signatures, and he’s sending copies over the same day that
5 he does it.
6 Then, Ms. Lee, you will have until March 6th. You
7 don’t have to send a letter to OAH saying you do this or don’t
8 do that. If you have objections, then you can certainly lodge
9 them. If you don’t choose to lodge them, you don’t have to
10 write something or produce something. I’ll just know by the 6th
11 if it hasn’t come in, you are not objecting.
12 In other words, I’m not giving you something extra to
13 do, necessarily. But I’m going to keep the record open until
14 the 6th of March. Anything else?
15 MR. LEAR: Nothing else, your Honor.
16 THE COURT: Okay. Thank you very much to the both of you.
17 I appreciate your preparation.
18 We’re off the record.
19 (Hearing adjourned at 2:20 p. m.)
20
21
22
23
24
25
0181
1 REPORTER’S CERTIFICATION
2
3 I, the undersigned, a Certified Shorthand
4 Reporter of the State of California, do hereby certify:
5 That the foregoing proceedings were taken before
6 me at the time and place herein set forth; that any
7 witnesses in the foregoing proceedings, prior to
8 testifying, were duly sworn; that a record of the
9 proceedings was made by me using machine shorthand, which
10 was thereafter transcribed under my direction; that the
11 foregoing transcript is a true record of the testimony
12 given.
13 Further, that if the foregoing pertains to the
14 original transcript of a deposition in a federal case,
15 before completion of the proceedings, review of the
16 transcript [] was [X] was not requested.
17 I further certify I am neither financially
18 interested in the action nor a relative or employee of any
19 attorney or party to this action.
20 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have this date subscribed
21 my name.
22 Dated: February 17, 2016
23
24
25

This is part of the September 29, 2017 online edition of The Mountain Enterprise.

Have an opinion on this matter? We'd like to hear from you.