 |
|
Mario Juarez PHOTO/Shane Bond
|
ELECTION ’12//OAKLAND CITY COUNCIL DIST 5 | Two former business associates of Oakland District 5 City Council candidate Mario Juarez claim he never paid back $240,000 in loans on two deals.
The story, reported by KPIX on Wednesday, feature two individuals who say Juarez, who owns a real estate business in the Fruitvale area of District 5, welshed on a deal for his biodiesel refinery project in West Oakland, including a $210,000 loan. Another partner says he gave Juarez $30,000 to help him open a sports bar in the area. Now both are complaining.
Although KPIX gave no supporting evidence into the claims made against Juarez, controversy surrounding his business dealings have surfaced before. During his run for District 5 in 2008 against incumbent Councilman Ignacio De La Fuente, spates of allegations were levied against Juarez for his questionable business dealings.
However, some of the charges were investigated at the time by the East Bay Express. One allegation involving a lawsuit by the City of Oakland against Juarez for nearly $32,000 in the unpaid percentage of money owed the city from his collection service, and referenced in the KPIX story, was somewhat debunked by the Express. According to court filings, the city mistakenly paid Juarez over $20,000 in what the paper called a “comedy of errors” by the city attorney’s office.
ebcitizen.com 
insurance for safety
more info…..
car insurance quotes
LikeLike
insurance for safety
more info….
car insurance quotes
LikeLike
I see that the Juarez' cronies are doing everything they can to make people believe that the CBS investigative report was all a lie. Reminds me of the Romney campaign after the “47%” video came out, they came out with lie after lie to minimize the impact of the political gaffe. Juarez is corrupt and that interview proves how he can't even answer questions that the community DESERVES to know. I really feel for the victims.
The fact is, the investigative report was not the doing of any of his political competitors for the District 5 seat. There's no mudslinging going on, this is people in the community taking action against a criminal who has destroyed their livelihood and don't want the rest of the community to be affected. There's plenty of more victims, and they will begin to step out and speak the truth about Juarez.
Open your eyes people! This is a “powerhouse real estate agent” running for public office. Do you really think he's in it for the community?!?! NO! He's in it for his own personal business gains. He's in it to eliminate political hurdles to the developments he has planned in the area. It doesn't take a scientist to know this, just reach out to your neighbors and seek the truth about Juarez, many have already been negatively affected by him. He's a devil within the community, and the least qualified candidate for District 5. Whatever you do, don't vote for Juarez!
LikeLike
Many latinos especially in the Fruitvale are immigrant and Spanish-speaking. They are not familiar with their rights in terms of real estate. Hence, they are ripe for types like Juarez.
Where there is smoke there is fire.
LikeLike
5:13 pm, Juarez is an active leader in the community and a great activist. You have no clue about the issues pending in litigation. That piece was nothing more than a pathetic attempt for sensationalism.
LikeLike
After doing some actual research found the following – Juarez has never been convicted or found guilty of any type of abuse, and this is a charge that the courts take very seriously. Also the real estate industry is very highly regulated and he has no record with the California Department of Real Estate of any actions or fines against him or his license.
Common sense would seem to say that if he has such a bad reputation in the Latino community which seems to be the primary source of his business, he would have been out of business a long time ago.
LikeLike
Juarez is very shady. And has been for years. He faced allegations of domestic abuse. Professionally he has a reputation in the Latino community of taking advantage of others in theory real estate dealings. He's bad news.
LikeLike
In instances like these the broadcast media has the power to edit a piece in any way they want to show the result they want. It would be interesting to know what was said and shared in those interviews that was edited out. No telling what happened or what was said before he “could not get out of the room fast enough”. I have seen the tricks that are sometimes played with this kind of interview and don't trust all that I see.
LikeLike
I almost called you last night when I saw it. Partly that is the problem with a half-hour newscast; not enough time to go that in-depth but she really did do a great job of pushing and pushing him. I hope there is a way the bosses at Channel 5 will give her the opportunity to go into the depth with the info she has. I really want to see more but that husband and wife were very believable and obviously in a great deal of pain over their old friend and he could not get out of the room fast enough. I loved his one comeback “this is inappropriate for you to ask” – pardon???
LikeLike