BREAKING NEWS : NEW WITNESSES AND NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE OF CORRUPTION PRESENTED UNDER SEAL TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CALIFORNIA!
Whistleblower Revelations
The core of the controversy stems from whistleblower disclosures by the Homeowners.
October 15, 2025: AG Rob Bonta intervening in a federal antitrust case involving the HPE/Juniper merger, alleging political favoritism in a U.S. DOJ settlement (not related to sealed state-level corruption evidence).
Newly elected homeowners association Board members at the Marina City Club in Marina del Rey begin publishing the truth!
Parties: Essex Marina City Club, L.P., Marina City Club Condominium Owners Association. The City Club is a mixed use real-estate development built on land owned by the County of Los Angeles
and consists of: (a) three tower buildings containing 600 condominiums and various retail and commercial spaces wholly owned and operated by Defendant Essex Marina City Club, L.P.; (b) a three-story Promenade building containing 101 rental apartment units; ( c) 3 83 boat slips and related structures wholly owned and operated by Essex; and (d) several parking garages, tennis courts and recreational facilities owned by Essex but jointly managed by Essex and MCC COA.
Marina City Club, L.P. (“MCC L.P.”) (f/k/a J.H. Snyder Company) acquired the City Club in the late 1980s. The City Club property is governed by, among other pertinent documents, a Second Amended and Restated Lease dated as of November 1, 1987 (the “Master Lease”) between the County of Los Angeles and MCC L.P. The property subject to the Master Lease is improved with, among other things, three high-rise towers that include 600 residential units commonly known as the Marina City Club Condominiums (hereafter collectively, the “Tower Units”).
A major dispute occurred between Essex Property Trust and a homeowners association at the Marina City Club in Marina del Rey, focusing on who was responsible for a half-century of deferred maintenance. The situation escalated with a 2021 threat by Essex to “red-tag” the residential towers, which would have forced occupants to vacate.
The conflict highlighted the complex relationships between the different parties involved:
- Essex Property Trust (Essex): The apartment owner and master lessee of the Marina City Club property, which is on land leased from Los Angeles County.
- Condo Owners Association (COA): Represents the owners of the condominium units within the Marina City Club.
- Los Angeles County: The ground landlord for the property, leasing the land to Essex.
Key points of the dispute
- Maintenance responsibility: The primary point of contention was responsibility for significant repairs to the aging buildings. According to the lease with the County, Essex is responsible for maintenance and capital improvements, with certain costs for condo owners collected by the COA.
- Declining infrastructure: Reports from both 2018 and 2021 documented multiple issues due to the property’s age, including leaky pipes, failing roofing, and damaged concrete.
- “Red-tagging” threat: In February 2021, a lawyer for Essex sent a letter to the COA stating that if repairs were not made, the county would consider “red-tagging” the buildings. The letter put pressure on the COA to finance and implement major repairs.
- Engineering study: Following a high-profile condo collapse in Florida, LA County demanded that Essex perform an engineering study on the Marina City Club towers. Essex agreed to do so.
- Legal standing: An earlier, separate 1986 legal action involving the Marina Tenants Association claimed that landlords like Essex had charged excessive rents. However, a court ruled that tenants could not sue because the lease was between the landlords and the county, and only the county could enforce the contract.
Outcome
While the exact resolution is not public, the conflict highlights the financial and legal complexities of older, mixed-use leasehold developments in Marina del Rey. The key takeaway from news coverage is that the responsibility for millions of dollars in deferred maintenance was the central issue.
AI responses may include mistakes. For legal advice, consult a professional.
- Decay and disrepair mar life at aging Marina del Rey condo …Jul 21, 2021 — “If (the Condo Owners Association) does not move forward with genuine progress to finance and implement major repairs,
Orange County Register
- Damage surveyed at Marina Del Rey condo complexJul 1, 2021 — yes the Marina City Club is right behind me la County officials ordering the inspections. after meeting last week with …
YouTube·FOX 11 Los Angeles
2:38
- ADOPTED – Lacounty – COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Feb 27, 2024 — The Lease between the County and Essex (Lessee) places the sole responsibility for maintenance Page 3 and repair of Ma…
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES (.gov)
THE MARINA SCAM IS OVER!
From: Marjorie Murray <info@calhomelaw.org>
Subject: RSVP// HOMEOWNER ZOOM MEETING FRIDAY SEPT 5, 10 A.M. // Center for HOA Law
Date: September 2, 2025 at 7:45:32 AM PDT
To: Marjorie Murray <mmurray@calhomelaw.org>
The 2025 legislative session in Sacramento is winding down. It’s been a quiet year in Sacramento for HOA owners except for blockbuster AB130, the new law capping fines levied against homeowners at $100.
There’s been huge blowback by the HOA industry on AB130 and lots of press coverage including a San Francisco Chronicle article for which CCHAL President Marjorie Murray was interviewed at length. The article is posted on the website here. https://calhomelaw.org/2025-legislation/cap-on-hoa-fines/
The HOA industry has vowed to reverse AB130 next session, so let’s talk it over
1. Bring your own analysis of AB130 to Friday’s meeting.
· Who exactly sets the fine schedule in your HOA?
· Do owners have any input into setting fines? Should owners have a role?
· Do boards have the legal power (under state law) to levy fines?
· Does the HOA have to prove a violation occurred before levying a fine?
· If AB130 is wrong, then how should fines be set? (Or are they unnecessary?)REMEMBER HOW TO LOOK UP A LAW ON THE LEG COUNSEL WEBSITE?
2. Also on the AGENDA: a discussion of the no-cost Community Dispute Resolution Programs funded by the courts and operating in every California county. Have you ever used them? See https://www.dca.ca.gov/consumers/dispute_resolution_programs.shtml
3, If time allows, we’ll talk over Doskocz v ALS Lien Services (2024) an association foreclosure case recently decided in the California Appeals Court Division One. The court ruled in favor of the homeowner and awarded her $1,173,816 in court costs, attorney fees, and damages.
The source of the money to pay the $1.173,816 million is unclear. Defendants were not only the debt collection company itself – Association Lien Services – but also its owners, Sandra Gottlieb and David Swedelson, who were held personally liable in the case. Both are attorneys.
FRIDAY’S MEETING WILL BE BY ZOOM — REMEMBER TO RSVP
Center for California Homeowner Association Law
www.calhomelaw.org
3758 Grand Ave., Suite 56
Oakland, CA 94610
mmurray@calhomelaw.org
California recently enacted Assembly Bill 130, which took effect on July 1, 2025. This law significantly reforms HOA rules but does not ban them.
- $100 fine cap: AB 130 limits most HOA fines to $100 per violation. This prevents the daily, compounding fines that could previously accumulate to thousands of dollars for minor infractions.
- Bans late fees and interest: The law also prohibits HOAs from charging late fees and compounding interest on fines.
- Expanded rights: Homeowners now have more opportunities to contest alleged violations, including the right to request internal dispute resolution before fines escalate.