Legality opinion

Whitney and Glenn, We want to point out that in discussions about flat rate, there WERE more in favor of doing it this way, the Special Road Committee was all in attendance. WE were there and a few others were not in support. Most of those against the assessment did not join and speak up until much later. "WE" residents did not vote on it, the District Road Board did the voting. There have been several meetings where people say, we voted on this, we did not vote on the assessment plan, that is why, at a later date, the board asked for those who objected to the assessment to do so via email to the road board. We did that, Annie read it at the meeting, but it did not make it on this website with many others. The first mention of needing those to be officially submitted to the Deschutes County Courts came much more recently and then stated the board would extend the date for this, and made people wonder when it was discussed. MANY have looked through all of the meeting minutes and there was NEVER a mention of filing with the Courts until before the first of 2022, perhaps closer to December 01, 2021. We did not understand that process, yet four others did and served the attorney and filed them with the court. A couple were very impressive. We think even if you all still feel the validation process was the way to go, and Nyle is so positive it will pass, we would rather see our money spent that way. As we have expressed, in the survey that came out after the meeting, we have always said we 100% support the Otta seal surface, in fact, we went and looked at it in LaPine when initially discussed. I, Kerry spoke about it at a meeting. We do not mind our taxes going up, as because we do have a mortgage and other bills, we would have tax write-offs that may benefit us. That would be far less than the 9% suggested on this passing the hat issue. We do appreciate that both Whitney and Jim said at the meeting and on the recording, that they would not proceed with any plan that does not get cleared by the attorneys as legal. Someone at the last meeting asked if it had to be done NOW, and it is repeated by Nyle and two other residents that if we want the quoted costs, yes. Does anyone think that these prices will ever go down? The way recessions usually work? MUCH blame goes on Glenn at the meetings, very vocally which is uncomfortable and feels wrong. We do agree if went to a vote/ballot, it may very well pass. All of the surveys sent out never mentioned that as an option, talking about initially.

Tax laws are just that. We would think if we were renters, we would vote it down, not up as it would cost us more money as a renter. I know of two homes that are rentals in our area here. Ronni at the meeting thought there were many more. I believe Lee reported there were 10 households that were rentals. Also, PLEASE listen to the recording of the latest meeting. Mark (who is not a board member, and perhaps not an owner in Panoramic) and Nyle, repeatedly say it is legal to have it funded the way that was being discussed. Nyle even tells Whitney not to worry about it, as it is legal. We also believe that Nyle was to recuse himself from these discussions per an ethics board request that Lee and Nyle looked into, somewhere in the documents. Nyle has been the biggest proponent of the roads being resurfaced. If you listen to the last meeting, perhaps as a resident and not a Board Member, you will see where some introduction of the process you were about to present could have been done much better. We truly felt that Mark and Lee were running the meeting. I do recall at one point I thanked Lee and asked for a Board Member to speak up. Not to hurt feelings, but I do wonder why Nyle is the President. He allows Whitney (mainly) and Jim to do all of the speaking at the meetings. Even if not treasurer or Secretary related. One could say it was because he was to recuse himself, but he picks and chooses when that will take place. Both Whitney and Jim have said that no one said the process was indeed legal at the meeting. Nyle certainly did and went as far as telling his fellow Board Member to not worry about it, as it was legal. He states the attorney stated as much. We thought Mark was quite rude to Whitney when Whitney said there were many moving parts to these proposals and Mark asked him why he thought that because everyone else gets it, or something like that. We listened to both of the last two meetings and we both were there. Henry does not speak up much at all and has about had it with meetings. We lost respect with the board meeting at Ray's a long while back when three of you treated Gary Miller, who we have great respect for as a man and a Board Member, very poorly. I am sure I can find the notes, as I spoke up. The meeting in public was not the place to do that. It had to do with him still receiving the emails and seemingly knowing the Board's business. It was rude. Also, Nyle said that the law firm said that if you chose to go on a ballot, it would go on there as shared evenly amongst everyone. He almost argued with me (Kerry) about it as I asked who said that the attorneys, and he mumbles out a yes. I asked if that was the case, why we did not go to a ballot measure in the first place, his answer, it already failed twice. Yes, it has, twice over how long? When I was talking about many people moving into Panoramic, some new owners/builders, and others purchasing homes for sale. He lets out a sigh and tells me he does not know where I got my numbers. Maybe on one of your initial surveys, you could have asked how people felt about it going on a ballot measure and raising their taxes. Either way, people will have increased payments somewhere. When people asked due to the Pandemic if it could be put off for a while, they were told NO. We have had two families LOSE their homes without the road payment involved! Annie and Lee were looking at a way to not cause people to lose their homes and were shot down at times by Nyle. This has just not been a smooth process at all. The Board feels attacked and several residents feel the same. We both have stepped up in an attempt to help. Ronni and I were permitted to attempt to contact as many residents as possible, which was appreciated. Henry got the sandwich board and started advertising the ZOOM meetings, which happened once before we asked where the sandwich board was. Also, it seems Glenn Brown has been talking with the board for months, a couple of years even. Do you feel that with his legal voice bothering you, as seems to be insinuated, that he has "drug this out", you could have looked for alternatives or brought him in on the process? Maybe looked ahead at what might happen. What would the validation have done then, that it cannot do now!? Personally, we think Nyle may be as much to blame as Glenn if blame is going around. Just go for your validation. Were you thinking no one would file an objection to the assessment project? There would have been many more, as there are two or three that were online, that have not attended meetings. Obviously, you want everyone to think Glenn has caused this delay in your plans, but much boils down to the assessment, which you feel may have been addressed fairly and others do not agree. Glenn has always stated he agrees with the roads being done, he just wanted the assessments done as they have been done in other small road districts have done. Get this on a ballot measure and get it done. If it costs more, so be it. Henry & Kerry Zenich Green Ridge Loop Panoramic

Call Mr. Dennison with any questions. He issued his opinion, no response required unless you wanted to appeal. The question is why the Board did not do get this opinion a year or more ago. Oh yeah, the County already told the Board their plan would not be approved by the County. They told Lee and another at the outset that the District could do a bond measure initiative, form an LID, or pass the hat. What you are trying to do now is simply passing the hat, no binding effect on anyone.

Why has the Board refused to submit a ballot measure initiative like every other special district Jim?

One answer I have received is that the then board members did not want renters voting. Well, only answer to that is too bad. Get the legislature or voters to amend the Oregon Constitution.

Another answer - the Board wants to pay a lump sum. That's a red herring and I believe the Board knows it; any of us can pay our assessment as a lump sum any time we choose, including on a ballot measure assessment. Just call the County tax collector and ask for a balance, all done. So no problem there with the ballot measure initiative is there?

What's left? The Board members don't want to pay their fair share of the per thousand assessment required in a special district assessment. Too bad, that's the way Oregon property tax assessments work as I'm sure your 3 law firms have told you.

Here's the real rub which I was told by a board member and which I believe - the Board and some other high-end homeowners/speculators want the lower-value property owners to subsidize them by paying part of the Board members' assessments. There's a word for an official refusing to do their job unless they are first paid extra to do it. How about it Board members? Let's see your response here in public on renters voting, lump sum payments, and the lower properties subsidizing the higher end property owners' assessments?

Nyle, you have complained to me that I am causing increased costs because I oppose your plan. I'd be careful with those statements, the Board members could have moved this forward a year and a half ago but have refused to because you want a different funding plan. Instead of trying a ballot measure you are instead causing the district to incur additional costs and higher interest rates. All because you can't have your way. "Waah Waah Waaah. We can't have our way so no paving for Panoramic."

Any increased costs are all on you and the other Board members for your refusal to move forward when it would have been less expensive. And in the meantime we've accrued or paid a bunch of legal bills on your wild goose chase over funding. BTW, I've asked several times now for the Treasurer to post on here for all of us to see the total $$$ the Board has spent on the three law firms it is using on this "plan." I haven't seen it posted, did I miss it Jim? How much total? Law firms, property owner surveys and elections? Total - how much of OUR MONEY have you spent on it as of the last Treasurer's report? Certainly you know and you wouldn't try to keep it from us would you? HOW MUCH,? Please.

Also, where in the rules and laws are you as a special district commissioner allowed to spend my and our tax money trying to change the state property assessment laws while refusing to pursue a ballot measure initiative? It's a real question. As you no doubt know, if as a Commissioner you spend money you are not authorized to spend you can be held personally liable for it. It's a real question folks, where do you think you get that authority? It's my view you are improperly and without authority misappropriating Panoramic tax funds. Do you have a legal opinion on that issue? If so would you publish it for us please?

In the meantime there's an old song that you might think about.

you can't always get what you want,

but if you try sometime

you just might find

you get what you need. (m. jagger/k. richards)

If you get on it we can make the September special election date and be paved this fall. There is no legitimate reason not to move forward and get the paving done.

Get off your high horses and do your job or resign.

Glenn Brown

Steve Dennison

Look it up Lee, any elector can file for an advisory opinion, and the clerk runs our County elections including special district elections.

Anyone could appeal to the local court and argue that it would be legal,