Something is terribly wrong when the law allows a city to create bogus property owners — or mini-landowners, if you prefer a less loaded term — who outnumber actual taxpaying entities in a proposed development district and who control critical elections to create the district and issue debt.
But that’s the process that Glendale engineered before its council wisely stepped back this week and canceled a $200 million bond election next month in the face of a lawsuit and news coverage.
an earlier election on Aug. 4 creating a Downtown Development Authority turned on the votes of “five property owners, each with a single square foot of land in their possession.” All five were granted the parcels by the city from parkland, according to a lawsuit by Summit Hospitality LLC, a genuine landowner that opposed creation of the district.
The lawsuit maintains the five functioned as crucial votes for Glendale in the 7 to 3 August tally that authorized the district.
The lawsuit also argues, plausibly, that Glendale’s conduct turns the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights “on its head when it is allowed to ‘create voters’ to outnumber the taxpayers.”
To be sure, Glendale actually manufactured these mini-landowners not for the August election but three years ago to create metro districts, and at least one credible expert says the city followed the law. That may be, since such a practice might facilitate, for example, the ability of developers in unincorporated areas to create special districts for an unpopulated subdivision to supply basic amenities.
But for a city to use such an approach, especially when the mini-property owners eventually outvote actual landowners, simply doesn’t meet a basic fairness test; in fact, it appears very much like government pulling a fast one.
State lawmakers should examine this issue next year with an eye to preventing any re-occurrence.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit or check out our for how to submit by e-mail or mail.
