28 May 2015: Board of
Supervisors’ Meeting @ 5p
We have 2 subjects in our
presentation tonight.
I.
Election
Commission:
a.
In Feb 2015, I
ordered and received a voter roll for Beat 2.
b.
I examined the
roll and found there to be the following:
i. 31 Voters who have not voted since 2004 and needed to
be purged from the active voter rolls and placed in the inactive file.
ii. 17 Voters whose voter registration date is more recent
then the last time they voted. Note:
There could be a good reason for that in that these voters may have voted in
other MS elections and then moved to our area.
Later in this report, it will become obvious with the information we
have on a Beat 3 voter, why this might be concerning.
iii. 6 Voters whose address is showing as a P. O. Box.
c.
Armed with this
information, I attended the March Election Commission meeting and talked about
the above concerns.
i. After presenting the above information, I was told
these errors would be investigated and/or corrected.
ii. I was asked to return to the May meeting which I did.
iii. When I returned, the Beat 2 Election Commissioner had
a hand written list of his own examination of the Beat 2 Voter Rolls.
d.
If you take the
results of this examination from the Beat 2 Voter Rolls and extrapolate these
number to the other four Beats, our findings are pretty upsetting.
e.
We are including
with this information a copy of a subpoena for one Michael Shirley who was a
witness in the Democratic Executive Committee’s with Craig Jones.
i. I was present throughout this trial.
ii. Shirley testified that his Homestead Exemption, his
car, his driver’s license and other records were in Desoto County.
iii. Shirley went on to say he worked in Tunica and voted
in Tunica.
iv. The question now is, how many Tunica County voters think
they can vote in Tunica County and live somewhere else because they work in
Tunica County or are from Tunica County?
v. Again, Phillis, Michael Shirley is a registered voter
in Beat 3.
II.
This leads us to
our second subject tonight: Homestead Exemption.
a.
Realizing that
Homestead Exemption is not required to be taken by a homeowner, the following
scenario is also concerning.
b.
Back in the Fall
of 2009, former County Administrator, Clifton Johnson, advised the BOS that
money was tight and funds would not be allotted to the Housing line item until
after the first of the year.
c.
The line item
amount for Housing in the 2009-2010 fiscal year was shown to be $600,000.00.
d.
Due to budgeting constraints,
the former County Administrator, indicated in a BOS’s Meeting that the Housing
budget would be reduced to $300,000.00 and be available in Jan 2010.
e.
However, we found
a charge to Housing for $19,500 in Dec 2009.
i. Invoice: 11232009
ii. Invoice Date: 11/23/2009
iii. Post Date: 11/30/2009
iv. Check Date: 12/07/2009
v. Check Number: 92998
vi. Claim: 1270
vii. Invoice Amount: $19,500.00
viii. Status: P
f.
We found a charge
to Housing for $13,000 in Feb 2010.
i. Invoice: 0126210
ii. Invoice Date: 1/26/2010
iii. Post Date: 1/31/2010
iv. Check Date: 2/1/2010
v. Check Number: 93516
vi. Claim: 1903
vii. Invoice Amount: $13,000.00
viii. Status: P
g.
We found a charge
to Housing for $15,800.00
i. Invoice: 03242010
ii. Invoice Date: 3/24/2010
iii. Post Date: 3/31/2010
iv. Check Date: 4/05/2010
v. Check Number: 94135
vi. Claim: 2522
vii. Invoice Amount: $15,800.00
viii. Status: P
h.
The above three
charges equals $48,300.00.
i. This $48,300.00 is the same year-to-date expenditure
that appears on the 10 Sep 2010 Budget Worksheet.
ii. However, there is more: There are two other expenditures showing for
our 2009-2010 fiscal year.
1.
The first is for
$104,711.00.
a.
Invoice: 05252010
b.
Invoice Date:
5/25/2010
c.
Post Date:
5/31/2010
d.
Check Date:
6/7/2010
e.
Check Number:
95129
f.
Claim: 3472
g.
Invoice Amount:
$104,711.00
h.
Status: P
2.
The second is for
$223,357.00.
a.
Invoice: 08212010
b.
Invoice Date: 8/21/2010
c.
Post Date: 8/31/2010
d.
Check Date: 9/7/2010
e.
Check Number:
96478
f.
Claim: 5069
g.
Invoice Amount:
$223,357.00
h.
Status: P
3.
Tonight we are
submitting an Open Records’ Request for the above information. We want to know the end recipient of these
funds What we think will be the result
of all of this research is that these funds went to the Housing Authority in
Clarksdale and they will refuse to tell us how these funds were disbursed.
4.
All of this leads
back to the question of Homestead Exemption that was brought to our attention
during the Craig Jones trial on 14 May 2015.
5.
The question is,
why would someone invest in a home, maintain this is his residence and not
claim Homestead Exemption Tax Benefits?
6.
As you know, the
Transparency Committee has been compiling information about the residence at
1370 Beat Line Road.
7.
This is what we
have:
a.
Picture taken by
me of a construction dumpster of the 1370 Beat Line Road. This picture was taken on 1 Jan 2010.
b.
Picture taken by
me of construction debris at 1370 Beat Line Road. This picture was taken on 18 Mar 2010.
c.
Picture taken by
me of construction site at 1370 Beat Line Road.
This picture was taken on 18 Mar 2010.
d.
Picture taken by
me of construction site at 1370 Beat Line Road.
This picture was taken on 31 Mar 2010.
e.
Picture taken by
me of a contractor’s TN license plate parked at the 1370 Beat Line Road. This picture was taken on 31 Mar 2010.
f.
Picture taken by
me of the construction site at 1370 Beat Line Road. This picture was taken on 31 Mar 2010.
g.
A copy of the
stop work order issued by Tunica County because there was not a building permit
issued for 1370 Beat Line Road. This
stop work order was issued on 15 Apr 2010.
h.
A copy of the
Residential Building Application (RBA) dated 15 Apr 2010 showing the owner as
Cedric Burnett. Note: This is not
true. This house was not transferred to
Burnett until 30 Jun 2010.
i. Other information on the RBA states the cost of
renovations to be $30,000.00.
ii. Question: Doesn’t this Supervisors know he too must
obtain a building permit for renovations?
i.
A copy of the
Cover Sheet to Warranty Deed from Dulaney Law Firm.
i. The Grantor is listed as Clara Burnett. (mother)
ii. The Grantee is listed as Cedric Burnett. (son)
iii. The property being transferred is 1370 Beat Line Road.
iv. The date of the transfer is 29 Jan 2010. Note: Remember, Cedric Burnett said he owned
the property on 15 Apr 2010.
v. Copy of the Property Record Card dated 24 Feb 2011 for
1370 Beat Line Road. This copy shows
Clara Burnett to be the owner of this property.
vi. Copy of the Property Record Card dated 3 Nov 2014 for
1370 Beat Line Road. This copy shows
Clara Burnett is still the owner of this property.
vii. At this point, we let it be known in the community
that the tax records for this property were still in the name of Clara Burnett.
viii. On 15 May 2015, Bob and I visited the Tax
Assessor/Collector’s office and spoke with Norma Anderson. We learned that the property tax records were
now in Cedric Burnett’s name and he had paid the taxes in Apr 2015. Hmmm.
j.
So what does all
of this get us?
i. If you lay the dates of this renovation of the 1370
Beat Line Road property on top of the Invoices from the Housing Authority, you
get more questions.
ii. If you question the $30,000.00 renovation investment,
you would wonder why a bank would make a construction loan on a property that
was not in the borrower’s name.
iii. A light bulb moment came to me during the trials of
the three candidates that were rejected by the DEC. It was all of this talk about Homestead
Exemption.
iv. Another question we asked Norma Anderson on 15 May
2015 was who had filed for the Homestead Exemption at 1370 Beat Line Road? The answer was no one had filed for Homestead
Exemption at this address.
v. So now the question is, who would put $30,000.00 in a
house and not live in it or rent it out?
vi. Further, if you are claiming this is your residence and
you have invested $30,000.00 of your own money in this property, why wouldn’t you
file for Homestead? This doesn’t seem
like a sound decision to me.
vii. And there is one more piece of information we found in
the documents of the Craig Harris file.
1.
On 11 May 2015,
there was a subpoena issued for Cedric Burnett to be a witness in this trial.
2.
As of 13 May
2015, the process server, Louis Harris, could not find Burnett anywhere in the
County.
3.
That would
include, not at his house and not at his place of business.
4.
The question is,
was he just out-of-town or was he avoiding being served?
These above problems with our
Election Commission and people trying to get on the ballot without meeting the
residency requirements is heartbreaking and just no longer acceptable. Citizens of Tunica County are being hurt by
both of these problems. We are asking you to consider speaking with your Board Attorney about
what you can do to eliminate these ongoing problems. We have a right to live in a community that
is honest and not being manipulated by those who want to benefit personally
rather than serve this Community. I
encourage you to stand up with you constituents as we fight to make Tunica
County a better place to live for all of our citizens and not just the few who
are attempting to take advantage of the citizens of Tunica County.
