Paying off Mello Roos

[earlyretirement]

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=SK in CV]. . . The problem seems not to be the design of the MR laws, but rather abuse of the process. Should be a warning to us all, pay attention to the political process and get people elected who will make wise financial decisions and vote those who haven’t out of office.[/quote]

Good advice, SK. I’ve been saying the same thing on this forum for years. There seem to be a LOT of disenchanted people (primarily with how all levels of gubment are run) who appear to be completely ignorant of the process and/or don’t want to take time to get involved.

The letters Pigg ER is writing and the (press and elected official?) contacts he has made appear to have been a positive start. Even though fairly new to SD county, he seems to be quite eloquent in his posts and so is likely the same in person 🙂

I was very active in local politics for years but I’ve long ago run out of energy for this sort of thing :=0[/quote]

BG,

Yes, that is me posting on the various blogs and comments section of KPBS and other websites. Thanks for the kind words. I’ve written letters and emails to various officials as well as asking some media to investigate the matter further. It’s good to see some taking an interest in the matter but I really think it will take more of a national spotlight to shine on this potential fraud and abuse of our tax dollars.

Just like the PUSD made national headlines for the Capital Appreciation Bond shenanigans, I firmly believe that we need a national spotlight to shine on these various districts about the use of CFD funds and also the oversight of such funds.

You know, San Diego is one of those wonderful cities from many aspects but it’s just a shame we get such poor publicly elected officials here. A big part of it is I think that locals just don’t care too much about these issues. As well, many people are coming and going all the time through San Diego and these people don’t seem to care either.

Also, there is such a mentality and acceptance for fraud and abuse that elected officials just believe they can get away with continuing down the same path. It’s both our OBLIGATION and responsibility to make them fully accountable.

Those officials that can’t follow the laws and do what’s proper, ethical and correct need to get their asses booted out of office and future officials need to see that WE taxpayers won’t stand for this nonsense.

We really need a “back to basics” sense of common sense oversight of our tax dollars and getting a better accounting of how they are used. In this day and age and power of the Internet, we really have the power to hold publicly elected officials to task for misusing our tax dollars.

It’s going to take more people getting outraged, more people wanting to take an active interest in not getting screwed (and their kids and their kid’s kids from getting screwed) and more cooperation from the media and press to shine a light on this fraud and abuse and misuse of OUR tax dollars.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=earlyretirement][quote=bearishgurl][quote=SK in CV]. . . The problem seems not to be the design of the MR laws, but rather abuse of the process. Should be a warning to us all, pay attention to the political process and get people elected who will make wise financial decisions and vote those who haven’t out of office.[/quote]

Good advice, SK. I’ve been saying the same thing on this forum for years. There seem to be a LOT of disenchanted people (primarily with how all levels of gubment are run) who appear to be completely ignorant of the process and/or don’t want to take time to get involved.

The letters Pigg ER is writing and the (press and elected official?) contacts he has made appear to have been a positive start. Even though fairly new to SD county, he seems to be quite eloquent in his posts and so is likely the same in person 🙂

I was very active in local politics for years but I’ve long ago run out of energy for this sort of thing :=0[/quote]

BG,

Yes, that is me posting on the various blogs and comments section of KPBS and other websites. Thanks for the kind words. I’ve written letters and emails to various officials as well as asking some media to investigate the matter further. It’s good to see some taking an interest in the matter but I really think it will take more of a national spotlight to shine on this potential fraud and abuse of our tax dollars . . . [/quote]

Oh, hey, ER, I haven’t seen you on any other blogs or websites as piggington is the only one I “make time” to pay attention to 🙂

My comment was directed at your prior posts where you stated you got a hold of KPBS and other investigative reporters and also wrote letters and spoke to your local rep’s office, etc, regarding PUSD’s misuse of MR bond income.

Keep up the good work! If anyone can eventually get some answers and possibly effect some head rolling down the road, you can 🙂

You seem to have a good enough understanding of the bond market and business, in general, and are eloquent enough to state your case to get the attention of folks who have the ability to get it out to the masses, using sound bytes in layman’s terms 🙂

Me, I understand how gubment works and the law governing state and local gubment operations and it’s not the way most people think (or would like to think) it should run. It doesn’t matter whether I agree with it or not because it is what it is. Over the years, I have learned to accept things for which I cannot change :=]

[earlyretirement]

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=earlyretirement][quote=bearishgurl][quote=SK in CV]. . . The problem seems not to be the design of the MR laws, but rather abuse of the process. Should be a warning to us all, pay attention to the political process and get people elected who will make wise financial decisions and vote those who haven’t out of office.[/quote]

Good advice, SK. I’ve been saying the same thing on this forum for years. There seem to be a LOT of disenchanted people (primarily with how all levels of gubment are run) who appear to be completely ignorant of the process and/or don’t want to take time to get involved.

The letters Pigg ER is writing and the (press and elected official?) contacts he has made appear to have been a positive start. Even though fairly new to SD county, he seems to be quite eloquent in his posts and so is likely the same in person 🙂

I was very active in local politics for years but I’ve long ago run out of energy for this sort of thing :=0[/quote]

BG,

Yes, that is me posting on the various blogs and comments section of KPBS and other websites. Thanks for the kind words. I’ve written letters and emails to various officials as well as asking some media to investigate the matter further. It’s good to see some taking an interest in the matter but I really think it will take more of a national spotlight to shine on this potential fraud and abuse of our tax dollars . . . [/quote]

Oh, hey, ER, I haven’t seen you on any other blogs or websites as piggington is the only one I “make time” to pay attention to 🙂

My comment was directed at your prior posts where you stated you got a hold of KPBS and other investigative reporters and also wrote letters and spoke to your local rep’s office, etc, regarding PUSD’s misuse of MR bond income.

Keep up the good work! If anyone can eventually get some answers and possibly effect some head rolling down the road, you can 🙂

You seem to have a good enough understanding of the bond market and business, in general, and are eloquent enough to state your case to get the attention of folks who have the ability to get it out to the masses, using sound bytes in layman’s terms 🙂

Me, I understand how gubment works and the law governing state and local gubment operations and it’s not the way most people think (or would like to think) it should run. It doesn’t matter whether I agree with it or not because it is what it is. Over the years, I have learned to accept things for which I cannot change :=][/quote]

Ah ok…got it. Yes, I have a fairly good understanding of taxes/bonds/business, etc.

I also have a very clear understanding of how government works. I understand it’s typically an uphill battle dealing with government and enacting change is NEVER easy…especially when there is as much corruption/mismanagement as it seems is going on here.

The thing of it is that I’ve lived in other countries and the level of corruption in THOSE places makes San Diego corrupt officials look like saints and angels. LOL. So it’s nothing I haven’t dealt with before. In other places where I’ve been heavily involved in real estate, real estate development and taxes makes San Diego seem very easy and almost a cake walk.

In those countries the corruption and fraud goes all the way up to the President of the Country type level. So this doesn’t seem to be anything too difficult. The problem is that you still have to have people care about this issue and WANT change.

People here in San Diego surprisingly have this totally lackadaisical attitude about getting ripped off with their tax dollars, voting for voter approved tax increases via bond assessments without even having a clear understanding of how the tax dollars will be used for their intended purposes or even worrying IF the tax dollars generated will be used for their intended purposes at all. And also if there will be any oversight of such funds.

That’s a big problem I see here in San Diego. Many people just don’t seem to care. And ultimately that is TRULY pathetic and sad.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=earlyretirement] . . . People here in San Diego surprisingly have this totally lackadaisical attitude about getting ripped off with their tax dollars, voting for voter approved tax increases via bond assessments without even having a clear understanding of how the tax dollars will be used for their intended purposes or even worrying IF the tax dollars generated will be used for their intended purposes at all. And also if there will be any oversight of such funds.

That’s a big problem I see here in San Diego. Many people just don’t seem to care. And ultimately that is TRULY pathetic and sad.[/quote]

I think if the press can get it out to the masses using sound bytes (in laymen’s terms), you can get local interested parties to come to school board meetings and complain and also complain to the right bureaucrats at the County Office of Education:

http://www.sdcoe.net/Pages/Home.aspx

and better yet, the CDE:

http://www.cde.ca.gov/

The problem with your elected officials is that they have no jurisdiction over public schools and therefore cannot enforce state public school law (K-12).

The best people to get riled up to write letters, testify before your school board and even lobby the CDE to take action are those like yourself who have or are paying into this sham and rightly so, demand accountability. Also residents who may suffer “damages” at the hands of the prior school board because of possible property value debasement in the future (due to the principle coming due on the Prop C subprime loan fiasco which will likely have the effect of raising their taxes (on a ~40 yr old home) through the roof!

I think a parent complaining to the Board about where the district decides to send their child(ren) to school for any given school year is the wrong approach and is also wasting time and testimony which could be far more persuasive discussing other damages sustained or to be sustained by the speaking taxpayer. It doesn’t matter how much MR parents are paying if their child(ren)’s home school is full. In CA, public school districts have the right to make this decision. They are only obligated to educate each child residing within their district and if a child’s “home school” is impacted or otherwise full, they have the right to transfer children who live within its boundaries to another district school with room for them (and pick up the tab for transportation). As you may already be aware, a single public school (brick-and-mortar location) actually does not legally exist. It is merely a branch of a school district and all employees of that school are employees of a public school district.

The best way to approach this, I think, is to rile up neighbors with biz experience, like yourself, to demand accountability for the 200 bank accts, etc. If you keep your discussions about the business and stay away from attendance areas and student-placement issues (legally, the District’s turf) and familarize yourself with school law as it applies to MR bond income accountability, you will go far.

If PUSD residents paying MR get in the Board’s faces about what a developer’s office told you at the time of your home purchase (who’s likely made all the profit they’re going to and left the county long ago) would be your child(ren)’s “new school” when it was built, you will come off like a bunch of whiners and be shunned. Developers aren’t supposed to be telling tales out of school like that to prospective buyers as they have zero control over the issue.

IMHO, the REASON why your local elementary school is already full (before or at the time of final buildout?) is because too many parents wanted the same thing, hence the “success” of your neighborhood (most of which was originally subdivided and built to appeal to “empty nesters,” acc to its website) :=0

You can’t have it both ways.

[bearishgurl]

ER, I just found this set of “Guidelines for Mello-Roos Financing” circa 1991, put out by then State Treasurer Kathleen Brown’s office.

http://www.treasurer.ca.gov/cdiac/reports/M-Roos/MR_guidelines.pdf

Perhaps you have already seen it. My understanding is that at least some of these guidelines were later legislated. I think you will need to cite the law and the PUSD’s own rules and guidelines (but better the law) to successfully argue to them their need for transparent accountability as to how these funds are being used, IMO.

Here is a good “layman’s guide” to CA Education Law” put out by the League of Women Voters.

http://www.guidetogov.org/ca/state/overview/school.html

And here is an excerpt of a 2005 book (link below) written on this subject (CA MR discussion begins at pg 245).

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~steiss/page63.html

Special Assessment Bonds

Special Assessment Bonds often are considered a special form of revenue bonds since the debt service is payable only from the proceeds derives from a special assessment levies against those who benefit from the facilities constructed (e.g., special assessments for curbs and gutters in certain residential areas). The burden of financing special assessment bonds falls on those individuals or properties receiving the greatest benefits from the improvements. In some cases, however, the property owners who must pay the assessments have had little or no say in the issuance of the bonds for which they must meet the debt service commitments Such is the case with the so-called Mello-Roos bonds in the State of California.

After the passage of the property tax-cutting Proposition 13 in 1978, funding for local infrastructure improvements in dried up. The State legislature adopted special legislation that permitted the creation of special taxing districts which empowered local governments to cooperate with developers to achieve more flexible funding options to finance streets, schools, sewer and water facilities and other specific improvements in primarily new residential areas. Billions of dollars of bonds were issues to finance these improvements with the homeowners served by these facilities obligated to pay off the bonds through annual assessments added to their property tax bills.

Until the residential development has been completed and all of the property has been transferred to individual owners, however, the burden of the assessment is shared by the developer and the homeowners that have moved into the area. When the California real estate market experienced some slow downs in the early 1990’s, some developers where forced to file for bankruptcy, prompting banks or other investors to begin fore-closure proceedings on the development. The bank then assumes financial responsibility for the special assessment bonds. In many cases, bond payments are delinquent and the banks must either assume this additional obligation or use any reserves in the bond offering to pay off the bond-holders.

In 1994, nearly 5 percent of all Mello-Roos bond issues were reported as experiencing some degree of financial difficulty primarily due to due to significant delinquencies. The value of the bonds in trouble was nearly $300 million. Examples include: (1) an $8.1 million bond issues by the County of Los Angeles in 1988 for a Mello-Roos district in which nearly 22 percent of the bond payments are delinquent by local real estate developers; (2) a $7.4 million Mello-Roos district in the northwest area of the City of San Bernardino which experienced a 77 percent delinquency rate; and (3) a 211-acre housing and commercial project in the City of Oxnard on which the developer stopped payment on the bonds in 1991 and the bonds went into default in October, 1993.

Several changes in the Mello-Roos enabling legislation were adopted in 1993 in an effort to prevent abuses and to reduce risks to municipalities and homeowners in the event of default caused by bankrupt developers. Tighter rules for policing the bonds were adopted, and city and county agencies are now required to limit fee increases to homeowners in the event of default. Developers are required to do a better job of disclosing to home buyers that they will be living in a Mello-Roos district and how much in special district taxes they will be required to pay.

Summary

Revenue bonds can play an important role in the long-range planning of capital facilities. It must be clearly established, however, that revenues generated by the proposed project are sufficient to: (1) cover the cost of operations, maintenance, and debt service; (2) provide a comfort-able margin of working capital; and (3) create a reserve fund for emergencies and to cover possible declines in income. In short, revenue bonding must be approached with the principles of sound management and debt administration firmly in mind.

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/strategic-facilities-planning-alan-walter-steiss/1101602742?ean=9780739111161

From this excerpt, it doesn’t appear that your issue of receiving agency/entity misuse of MR bond income was addressed in the 1993 legislation. However, I have not yet had a chance to research state law on this subject.

[earlyretirement]

Thanks BG. You sound like you’re well versed on these issues. Thanks for posting these links. I’ll try to check them out. I’m working on a new consulting gig which will keep me busy the next few months so not sure how active I can get but I’ll check these out.

It would be great if you could repost these on the KPBS comments section as the reporters DO read the comments section and follow up on them many times. It also gives them inspiration sometimes.

Thanks for posting those details.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=earlyretirement]Thanks BG. You sound like you’re well versed on these issues. Thanks for posting these links. I’ll try to check them out. I’m working on a new consulting gig which will keep me busy the next few months so not sure how active I can get but I’ll check these out.

It would be great if you could repost these on the KPBS comments section as the reporters DO read the comments section and follow up on them many times. It also gives them inspiration sometimes.

Thanks for posting those details.[/quote]

Sent you a pm.

[UCGal]

KPBS had a radio story this morning – following up on the articles ER posted.

Apparently PUSD was confused (nice term) when asked about the misused mello-roos funds. Different officials had different (conflicting) stories/explanations.

In a related story on the website – there’s been so much bru-ha-ha over the overpayment of mello roos by folks in Del Sur, they have posted a website to verify your mello roos amounts.

http://www.kpbs.org/news/2013/sep/17/poway-district-responds-inewsource-probe-mello-roo/

[CA renter]

[quote=UCGal]KPBS had a radio story this morning – following up on the articles ER posted.

Apparently PUSD was confused (nice term) when asked about the misused mello-roos funds. Different officials had different (conflicting) stories/explanations.

In a related story on the website – there’s been so much bru-ha-ha over the overpayment of mello roos by folks in Del Sur, they have posted a website to verify your mello roos amounts.

http://www.kpbs.org/news/2013/sep/17/poway-district-responds-inewsource-probe-mello-roo/%5B/quote%5D

From the linked article:

“Property owners who have been overcharged are eligible for a refund going back one year.”

—-

That’s total BS. Those homeowners should be able to get back every single dollar that they’ve overpaid over the years.

Glad to see they are following up on this. Thanks for sharing, UCGal.

[earlyretirement]

[quote=CA renter][quote=UCGal]KPBS had a radio story this morning – following up on the articles ER posted.

Apparently PUSD was confused (nice term) when asked about the misused mello-roos funds. Different officials had different (conflicting) stories/explanations.

In a related story on the website – there’s been so much bru-ha-ha over the overpayment of mello roos by folks in Del Sur, they have posted a website to verify your mello roos amounts.

http://www.kpbs.org/news/2013/sep/17/poway-district-responds-inewsource-probe-mello-roo/%5B/quote%5D

From the linked article:

“Property owners who have been overcharged are eligible for a refund going back one year.”

—-

That’s total BS. Those homeowners should be able to get back every single dollar that they’ve overpaid over the years.

Glad to see they are following up on this. Thanks for sharing, UCGal.[/quote]

I totally agree. You can bet if they overcharged me, I’d make sure I got back every single penny WITH interest. One year? Ha!

[quote=UCGal]KPBS had a radio story this morning – following up on the articles ER posted.

Apparently PUSD was confused (nice term) when asked about the misused mello-roos funds. Different officials had different (conflicting) stories/explanations.

In a related story on the website – there’s been so much bru-ha-ha over the overpayment of mello roos by folks in Del Sur, they have posted a website to verify your mello roos amounts.

http://www.kpbs.org/news/2013/sep/17/poway-district-responds-inewsource-probe-mello-roo/%5B/quote%5D

Thanks for posting this. I’ll have to go check it out. Actually I’m not so worried about the “accidental over charges” as I do think they were accidents. What I’m MORE worried about is the potential fraud and abuse of the CFD funds and not being used for their stated/original goals. Or at the very least what they are legally allowable to be used for.

I’m DARN glad to see on my most recent property tax bill that came out this weekend that ALL CFD’s are forever OFF my bill and I’m not liable for them any more. It’s a great feeling especially after reading shenanigan after shenanigan and clear examples of PUSD getting busted for NOT using CFD taxes as they are legally allowed.

Some of this is like pure comedy! Only it’s OUR tax dollars so it’s not funny.

http://inewsource.org/poway-school-officials-front-costs-mello-roos-taxes-vow-pay-back/

[CA renter]

From ER’s inewsource link:

“inewsource took a close look at contracts and invoices that document the district’s relationship with real estate consultant Joe Taylor. He was hired in 2010 to review the condition of four of the district’s vacant properties, develop a plan for the best use of the land, and identify potential buyers or partners, among other things.

Since then, Taylor has billed the district about $150,000 for meetings with dozens of people and groups, including several churches, a lobbying and public relations firm, the grandson of Chargers owner Alex Spanos, a company that builds assisted living facilities and officials in the San Diego mayor’s office, according to a review of his invoices.

Three of the properties Taylor is working on are in Mello-Roos districts. The one in Rancho Bernardo, known as the water tower property, is not.

The district’s contract with Taylor raises two questions: Is it appropriate for him to be paid with Mello-Roos taxes? Did his work sidestep the public process for selling land?

In order to sell land, districts must follow a legal process to determine whether it is needed.
Mello-Roos

Catch up on all our Mello-Roos coverage from the past year.

It must form an advisory committee, hold public meetings, and eventually make recommendations to the school board about whether the land will be needed for new schools or other district uses.

Taylor helped to form the Real Property Advisory Committee which held two public meetings in March 2012, in which no one showed up.

The committee’s final report to the school board recommended all four sites be declared surplus.

But by the time the committee released that report, Taylor had already spent months meeting with developers and reviewing bids and letters of intent to purchase the properties.

A year before the report, according to invoices, Taylor met with “Monger Group on taking sites to vote” and to “go over campaign plan.” The Monger Company is a Coronado-based lobbying and public relations firm. Among its clients is Santaluz LLC, a firm Taylor is helping with an assisted living project.

Years of state cutbacks have left districts short on cash, many laying off teachers and increasing class size.

Selling property could help close that gap thanks to a new state law that allows a school district to put the profits from surplus property sales into its operational budget, until next year.

Beatty worries if the district doesn’t follow the rules it could sell valuable land to balance its budget rather than do what’s best for students in the long term, which could be retain the land for future use.

“The procedure could be tainted and then you wonder if the conclusion was formed before the process actually took its course,” she said.”

– See more at: http://inewsource.org/poway-school-officials-front-costs-mello-roos-taxes-vow-pay-back/#sthash.4TJsj6y0.dpuf

————

Disgusting. One thing I’ve seen more often than I’d care to admit is how real estate/development and related deals are full of conflicts of interests and back-room agreements. I’m willing to bet that the district had people on staff who were every bit as capable of determining the value of this land and even meeting with potential buyers. There is no need to hire outside consultants in most of the cases, but that never stops well-connected folks from greasing each other’s palms.

You are so fortunate to be out from under these MR fees. That was a very good decision on your part, IMHO.

[earlyretirement]

DISGUSTING is right! Yes, I’ve done a lot of development and you are right it is plagued with conflicts of interests, fraud and abuse. “Consultants” aren’t needed in many cases and surprisingly in many cases the “consultant” is buddies with someone or related to someone in the process.

Funny they mention that assisted living project. I’m going to that meeting next week to discuss the project. Maybe I should ask them about this. LOL.

Yep, CAR as soon as I moved to San Diego and started doing some due diligence I could read the writing on the wall it would be a good idea to end my obligation forever while I can.

Who knows later if they ban pre-paying off your Mello Roos. I wouldn’t doubt it.

[UCGal]

Thanks for linking that article ER – that’s the story I heard on the news yesterday.

I’ve been telling friends about your decision to pay off mello roos. Most look at me like it’s crazy because who could ever afford that… but I hit them with politics and math and have convinced one friend to consider it.

[CA renter]

ER,

Were you planning on attending the meeting before discovering this? Please let us know what transpires. I commend you for being so active in following up on it! 🙂

[earlyretirement]

[quote=CA renter]ER,

Were you planning on attending the meeting before discovering this? Please let us know what transpires. I commend you for being so active in following up on it! :)[/quote]

Hi CAR. Yes, I already had that on my agenda. It was just coincidence that I read about that in the article. I stay pretty active locally and started getting more involved. And probably plan to get even more involved.

FYI. Anyone that lives in the area and wants to attend the meeting, let me know. It’s Tuesday, September 24 at 6:30 PM at Santaluz. PM me and I can get you on the list to attend as it’s open to the public. Santaluz is guard gated but I can get you on the list if you want to attend this meeting about the Assisted Living Center.

This way the guard will let you in. There is a special form you need to give to the security guard but I can get you this.

[quote=UCGal]Thanks for linking that article ER – that’s the story I heard on the news yesterday.

I’ve been telling fri[quote=UCGal]Thanks for linking that article ER – that’s the story I heard on the news yesterday.

I’ve been telling friends about your decision to pay off mello roos. Most look at me like it’s crazy because who could ever afford that… but I hit them with politics and math and have convinced one friend to consider it.[/quote]
[quote=UCGal]Thanks for linking that article ER – that’s the story I heard on the news yesterday.

I’ve been telling friends about your decision to pay off mello roos. Most look at me like it’s crazy because who could ever afford that… but I hit them with politics and math and have convinced one friend to consider it.[/quote]
ends about your decision to pay off mello roos. Most look at me like it’s crazy because who could ever afford that… but I hit them with politics and math and have convinced one friend to consider it.[/quote]

Hi UCGal,

Yeah, most friends or people that I know in the area when I tell them I paid off my Mello Roos obligation FOREVER they look at me with a puzzled look. Then I explain it and I always get the same reaction. NO ONE knew this was possible. Heck, I’ve met with high level wealth advisors, investment managers, realtors that have been in the business 15+ years, developers and no one knew you could even do this.

But even when I lay out the rationale and logic behind it, I can see that even rational people seem to dismiss it. In many instances I think it’s because they would rather spend the money on their fancy car leases, their fancy vacations, their lifestyle. They are ONLY thinking about today. They do NOT want to think about tomorrow, or next year or next decade.

I know it’s not for everyone to pay it off. But I know several people where I know they will stay in their property for the long haul and don’t plan on selling their properties. For these people this is a NO BRAINER to pay it off and FOREVER end their tax obligation. (Especially in today’s LOW interest rate environment!!).

As well, several CFD’s have been refinanced so the rate won’t go any lower than right now. And you can bet they will keep raising the maximum % by law each year until it’s paid off.

My thinking is they can’t afford NOT to pay it off and FOREVER end their tax obligation. When the government gives you the opportunity to FOREVER end a tax obligation my philosophy is you take it! LOL.

The entities do NOT like the idea of people pre-paying these CFD taxes off and FOREVER ending their obligations. That’s why they don’t advertise it and even try to make it cumbersome and expensive to get quotes to pay it off. I mean $400 to get a quote to pay it off? Come on! They do that to dissuade people from even starting the process, IMHO.

My biggest motivation for paying it off now was that I really don’t trust the powers that be. I don’t trust the people in charge of OUR CFD funds. I don’t trust that they say these CFD obligations will end when they originally were slated to be paid off.

Heck, when I asked the administrator in charge of the CFD if these taxes could be extended in the future and he said “YES, it’s possible in the future these CFD taxes could get extended”. So, UCGal, ask your friends to consider how they will feel if they have been paying CFD #4 (PUSD) until 2041 and then in 2041 they are told they will have to pay for several more years!

There is NO accountability what these funds are being spent on, who is able to spend it, or in what exact circumstances these CFD’s can be extended later on. Also, I don’t trust my fellow homeowners that in many cases seem to be bone heads and will approve any bond approval measure even if they understand it or not or know what the funds will be used for! Not sure in the future if they put something up for a vote and voters agreed to extend their own CFD obligations!

Who knows. Not many locally seem to take an active interest in limiting their tax obligations, knowing what their tax dollars go towards (relating to CFD), or interested in ANY oversight regarding these things.

It’s strange..it’s almost like people have this lackadaisical attitude of, “another gorgeous day in Paradise and who cares about anything else”. Don’t get me wrong…. I LOVE San Diego and never have plans to leave it. But I’ve never in my life lived in a City where people seem to care less about Civics/politics, taxes, etc. Heck, before this big Filner mess, I’d venture to guess than many locals didn’t even know who the Mayor was!

So I’m VERY content in FOREVER ending my Mello Roos obligations. I still say in the future maybe they don’t allow it but those that already paid it off will be forever “off the hook”. 🙂

[Author]

Posts