By: Libi Uremovic| Original Article at Patch.com
Mello Roos laws are very clear that the Property Owners have the right to vote on Mello Roos bonds because it taxes their property.
California Govt Code 53322.4 The clerk of the legislative body may also give notice of the hearing by first-class mail to each registered voter and to each landowner within the proposed district. This notice shall contain the same information as is required to be contained in the notice published pursuant to Section 53322.
It was revealed at the December 2, 2014 Beaumont City Council Meeting that the Area 7A1 Ballot was only sent to the Registered Voters in Area 7A1, and not the Property Owners as required by State Law for Mello Roos.
City Attorney and Authority Counsel Wysocki Stated: “I’m not the CFD Attorney and I don’t have that expertise, but I understand, in speaking with him, that his opinion is YES.”
The Law Firm of Aklufi Wysocki has been the City Attorney and Authority Counsel since 1994. Wysocki is aware or should be aware of the Mello Roos Voting Laws.
The City also implied that the Election was ‘confirmed by the County Registrar or Voters’. This fraudulent Election and it’s results were not verified by the County Registrar of Voters; only a list of registered voters.
Four Seasons Areas 7A1 is a Senior Citizen Community. Beaumont City Staff targeted Senior Citizens with and created a phony Election for the sole purpose of attaching liens on their properties.
Below is the Transcript from the December 2, 2014 Beaumont City Council Meeting:
Kapanicas: The Staff actually ran the election and when we did we actually had some time at the; spent a week there so they could actually come in and directly vote and the rest of them were mailed in ballots. We’ve seen those breakdowns, so.
119:40 Jamie Brower: I have two homes in Four Seasons. One has the Mello Roos paid off, that I live in. And the other one is my rental that has Mello Roos on it. My rental is in this area we’re discussing. There’s a large amount of rentals in that area. In fact the street behind where my rental is; the whole street was rentals originally. And there was only two full-time residences on that road. The ballots for this election were sent out to the Registered Voters, not the Owner – Me – That’s paying the property tax. I kind of think that’s taxation without representation. Your paperwork here from Kapanicas says on the 1st page, paragraph 1,2,3.4: “As always by the state constitution, any changes that increase the time or changes the amounts to be paid requires a vote of the then current qualified voters. That’s Me, not my tenant. A tenant would of course vote for the Mello Roos because they don’t want their rent to go up as the Mello Roos goes up every year. As a property owners of a rental, I would vote NO because when I would sell the property there would be less years left on the Mello Roos and easier to sell their home, their investment property, at a lower price. I also object that our City Manager, Alan Kapancias, was the ‘Election Official’ of this election. That’s kind of like having the fox watching the chicken coop. In my opinion; this Mello Roos vote is totally illegal and i ask the Council Members to vote no and abandon this process. The other thing I object to is; when we originally bought those houses we had a $25 million bond because it’s the statue – the maximum. We’ll now they’re going to do another $25 million on top of what is already there. I don’t think it’s right. I think it’s illegal and I hope you vote no.
122:30 Jackie Smiden: And that is one reason why when it went out to the voters and yes it did go to the Registered Voters. We asked the question; why? And that’s because the State Statute requires that is is who would be eligible to vote on this particular information. We thought it was rather odd because we thought yes, each homeowner should have that vote, but that wasn’t the way the State Statute is written, so we had to go with what was available to us. So through the County of Riverside was the Registrar, they took care of the vote and counted the votes for us and it came back 85% of the those that voted wanted to see this change that would allow another option to pay off their Mello Roos.
124:45 Knight: Now the deal with the Registrar of Voters and how they voted; I thought that was rather odd, we all thought it was odd, but that’s the way it was. There was nothing we could do. I would like our City Manager to address this more.
128:00 White: I have researched this extensively. And the Mello Roos laws, and I will bring it back to the next Council Meeting, state that it is the home owners, the current homeowners of the properties, that get to make the vote. To put that issue officially at rest; Mr. Wysocki, would you say the Election was valid?
Wysocki: I’m not the CFD Attorney and I don’t have that expertise, but I understand, in speaking with him, that his opinion is YES.
141:00 Kapanicas: One comment on the comment the lady made. I do appreciate that it’s State Law says it is taxation without representation. It has to be, if there’s 12 voters or more it has to be the Registered Voters that reside at that location. And if they happen to own a unit that’s better, but the State Law says that it’s the Registered Voters. In fact some people got, some owners got two votes if they and their spouse both registered to vote. They didn’t get one vote, they got two votes. If they were smart they would have had 10 people living there as residences, but that’s State Law, that’s Prop 13. The CFD is based on that and CFD Law says 12 or more registered voters residing within an area. It goes to the registered voters as registered at the date of the public hearing. We have one story; she’s a Property Owner, but she’s an English National. She could not vote. It’s a shame, but that’s the way the law’s set. So the people that were renters suggested that they talked to their tenants to make sure they voted how they wanted to vote or they would up their rent.