… THE CITY OF WILDOMAR
Despite the theoretical “exposure” to a potentially massive refund totaling $358,000, according to the Californian article this morning, the actual exposure to Wildomar is less than $10,000.
Please click on the following link for context:
And this, to confirm that Riverside County paid 50 claims for refunds, totaling $5709:
Given the economic downturn, and the disruption to the property ownership in Wildomar, many of the residents who paid for the court-overturned park assessment no longer have an interest in the $56 refund they are due from the City of Wildomar. In addition, many of the other residents who are entitled to a $56 refund, have graciously “waived” the reimbursement right, further reducing the exposure to the City.
On the other hand, during the Public Comment portion of the recent Special Meeting of the Wildomar City Council, a well-spoken, senior gentleman addressed the City Council and objected to the proposed request for additional taxes, ” when the City of Wildomar still owed him $56,” a logical and simple idea from a considerate citizen. (My guess is that he will be a “no” vote, if the parcel tax measure is added to the November 2012 ballot, despite whatever the poll says).
What makes the city’s response to their refund dilemma so “hollow,” is that they ignored the economic impact of an adverse ruling, as the litigation worked its way through the Courts.
The City of Wildomar should have established a Park Assessment reserve, by cutting back on what they were spending on the parks, in anticipation of that eventual adverse ruling. Had they done so, they would not find themselves in their current embarrassing predicament.
According to the state Attorney General, the adolescent members of the Wildomar City Council are going to have to meet with the adult leadership in Riverside to find a resolution.
Comments can be made to email@example.com.
While the City of Wildomar may be “saving” some money with their hollow argument and defiant approach to refunds, they are frittering away any confidence that their citizens may have in their elected leaders.