**  A second window aside called by the
She-philosopher.com page, entitled
“To the lawmakers responsible for California Assembly Bill 1404,
the Good Neighbor Fence Act of 2013”  **

---

[ An HTML transcript of e-mail sent on 10 April 2016 follows, with recipient’s contact data removed to discourage spam. ]

---

Subject:  Re: Assembly Bill 1404
From:  Deborah Taylor-Pearce <dtp@she-philosopher.com>
Date:  4/10/2016 11:14 PM
To:  Smith-Davis, Alexandria <...>

On 4/7/2016 3:11 PM, Smith-Davis, Alexandria wrote:
> The Assembly Judiciary Committee was
> the author of this bill. We would like
> to call you and help answer your
> questions. Can we please have your
> telephone number and the best time
> to reach you?

I’m afraid there is no good time to reach me by phone (as friends, family, colleagues, clients, and even my doctors will all testify ;-).

I prefer to communicate by e-mail, not just because this medium better accommodates my peculiar schedule — like writing to you now, late on a Sunday night after I’ve finished work for the day — but because it also gives me time & space for a wrenching gestalt shift (I need to get my head out of my work, and then wrap my mind around complicated legal issues which, not being a lawyer, I don’t process easily). From my perspective, none of this is well-suited to casual conversation.

Moreover, I think it’s important to maintain a complete documentary record of all that passes between us, for those who are already following this case, and for all those who may wish to study it in the future. Depending on your answers to my four questions:

1. If Cal. Civ. Code § 841(a) does not apply to subdivision boundary fencing, to what does it apply?

2. What part of AB-1404 covers subdivision boundary fencing that was located by the developer 21 inches back from the subdivision boundary line?

3. Why are issues relating to enclosure, and unlawful enclosure, not addressed by AB-1404?

4. What protections from predatory neighbors do I, and others like me, have under the new law?

I may end up taking the Web page at

http://she-philosopher.org/RA/SCCcase/comments-on-AB1404.html

public (converting it into a stand-alone, single-issue website, accessible to the search engines and to anyone with an Internet connection).

But before announcing to the world that I, and other California property owners like me, have lost rights & security under the new law, I believe I have a responsibility to verify that this is, in fact, the truth. Hence, my two Open Letters and four questions for the author(s) of AB-1404.

If it turns out that you agree with the judge in my small claims court case, and that California state law no longer protects me against predatory neighbors, I shall shift course with the Web page ... start asking lawmakers where they stand on AB-1404 ... and vote accordingly.

I apologize in advance for the extra work that I know e-mail exchanges will require. FWIW, I neither expect nor provide instant responses (my work is intense, and when I am working to deadline, as is so often the case, I sometimes go a week or more without even checking e-mail).

I appreciate your willingness to engage with me about AB-1404, and I look forward to a thoughtful and interesting discussion of the law, and of my rights & obligations as a citizen of California.

Best wishes,
Deborah
_____
 
Deborah Taylor-Pearce
dtp@she-philosopher.com