In fact, the City formed such a community facilities district in 2002 for the Business Triangle and, in 2013, the City also issued refunding bonds for that district, as approved by Mayor Brien, Vice Mayor Mirisch, and Councilmembers Gold, Bosse and Brucker. As noted in the Official Statement for the 2013 Bonds issued by Community Facilities District No. 2002-A (Business Triangle) of the City of Beverly Hills:
The Bonds and interest thereon are not payable from the general fund of the City.
Except with respect to the Special Tax Revenues, neither the credit nor the taxing power of the City is pledged for the payment of the Bonds or interest thereon, and no Owner of the Bonds may compel the exercise of the taxing power by the City or the forfeiture of any of its property.
As indicated in the staff report and as presented to Council by Mr. Forbath at the July 15th meeting, the Bonds will be land secured special tax bonds secured solely by the Special Taxes and the underlying taxable property located in the CFD. We agree with this construct; the Mello-Roos Act explicitly permits this structure wherein the special tax bonds are secured solely by the Special Taxes and underlying property and NOT by any other property or revenues of the City or any other municipality. The Bonds are not a general obligation of the City or the CFD and will not be payable from City general fund revenues or other property or sources, other than the Special Taxes.
The Special Taxes will be levied solely on property in the CFD and the current owners of such property have voted in favor of such levy while future owners will be fully apprised of such Special Taxes prior to purchasing property within the CFD. The only remedy for any default in the payment of Special Taxes on any taxable property in the CFD is the institution of legal proceedings to enforce payment of such delinquent Special Taxes and/or eventual foreclosure on the underlying real property subject to such Special Taxes.
The staff report also notes the special tax bonds will be issued in order to finance various public improvements including but not limited to streets, sidewalks, utility upgrades, and other public improvements required of the One Beverly Hills development. These public improvements and infrastructure will benefit not only the users and/or future residents of One Beverly Hills but also the City and its residents more generally.
Lastly, we also agree with the City’s Bond Counsel that, while the City Council will act as the legislative body of the CFD – similar to your function with the Business Triangle CFD - any costs associated with the CFD, the Bonds or the ongoing administration and enforcement thereof, will be paid or reimbursed from the Special Tax revenues generated by the taxable property in the CFD. The City will have NO obligation to use other City funds to pay such costs.
Sincerely,
Anna Rienhardt
of Latham & Watkins LLP
LATHAM&WATKI NSLLP
August 4, 2025
cc: Larry Wiener
Brian Forbath
Ryan Gohlich
Jeff Muir
Larry Green
LATHAM&WATKI NSLLP
Mike Roos
Assembly Speaker Pro Tempore
(Ret)
August 4, 2025
Mayor Sharona Nazarian
Members of the City Council
City of Beverly Hills
Dear Mayor Nazarian and Councilmembers:
I understand that questions have been raised in Beverly Hills about the establishment of a Community Facilities District in your City. I have read the opinion pieces and letters to the editor, and I want to take this opportunity to provide you with facts.
I was a principal co-author of what is now commonly called the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982. It passed with overwhelming support in the State Legislature.
When Senator Henry Mello and I crafted this legislation, our goal was to provide California's local governments with a flexible and robust mechanism to finance public infrastructure and services in a postProposition 13 era, yet preserving a 2/3 vote by the landowners in the district. We envisioned a tool that could support growth and enhance quality of life without burdening existing taxpayers and cities.
The beauty of Mello-Roos, and its enduring relevance, lies in its broad applicability. It allows for the funding of a vast array of public improvements like parks, roads, water, and sewer systems and other important services whether built by cities or developers.
Crucially, and this is a point I cannot stress enough, the Mello-Roos mechanism is designed to be entirely risk-free to the city's general fund, its existing property owners, and its residents. When a Community Facilities District (CFD) is formed, the special tax is levied only on the properties within that newly designated district – in your case, only within the boundaries of the One Beverly Hills development. This means:
• No Impact on Existing Residents: Your current property owners will not see this special tax on their bills. The financial responsibility for the new infrastructure rests solely with the properties that are in the district.
• No Risk to the City's General Fund: The bonds are repaid directly by the special taxes collected within the CFD. They do not rely on the city's general revenue, nor do they create a liability for the broader city budget. This allows the city to maintain its fiscal health while still facilitating community improvements.
This is precisely how Mello-Roos was intended to function: as a responsible, self-funding pathway to progress. It empowers communities to invest in their future, enhance their amenities, and accommodate growth, all while safeguarding the financial interests of their long-standing residents.
I commend your City Council for considering this prudent and effective financial tool. Your approach is entirely consistent with the intent and protective nature of Mello-Roos and it reflects a commitment to smart growth and fiscal responsibility that will benefit your community for generations to come.
Sincerely,
Mike Roos
Assembly Speaker Pro Tempore Mike Roos (Ret)
Co-Author, Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982
---
From:
Sent: Wednesday, August 6, 2025 7:20 AM
To: Huma Ahmed <[email protected]>
Subject: Letter In Support of Mello Roos Bonds for One Beverly Hills Project I You don't often get email from . Leam why this is important I
/E. CAUTION: EXTERNAL SENDER &
Be cautious when clicking links or o~ g attachments. Verify the sender's email address and be on the lookout for phishing att~ ts.
August 6, 2025
The Honorable Huma Ahmed
City Clerk
City of Beverly Hills
455 N Rexford Drive
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
Dear Huma,
Lisa and I have lived in Beverly Hills for decades. We both attended and graduated from Hawthorne and Beverly Hills High School. We raised our children here, both of whom also graduated from Hawthorne and BHHS.
Lisa has chaired and served on the Health and Safety Commission and currently serves on the Traffic and Parking Commission. I recently stepped down from serving on the Charitable Community Foundation of B.H.
Professionally, I have been a CEO and CFO of both public and private companies, a founder of what has become the largest Hispanic retailer in the U.S. (El Super and acquired Smart & Final), and a former investment banker where I helped Starbucks Coffee raise several rounds of financing and served on its board of directors.
I reviewed the One Beverly Hills plan to establish a Mello-Roos district to reduce the financing cost of the public improvements portion of the project. This remarkable project near the City's entrance includes, among other community benefits, 4.5 acres of majestically designed public gardens. This financing plan makes imminent sense. Over more than 40 years, Mello Roos bonds have been used in more than 1,500 projects in California and not one dollar of taxpayer funds has ever been needed repay the bonds.
This funding source has no fiscal impact on the City's budget.
We strongly urge the City Council to move forward in establishing the One Beverly Hills Community Facilities District.
Respectfully submitted for your consideration,
Mark and Lisa Schwartz
Mark N. Schwartz
#
August 6, 2025
Beverly Hills City Council
455 N. Rexford Drive
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
[email protected]
Honorable City Council:
UNITE HERE Local 11 represents many workers here in Beverly Hills who contribute to the city’s exceptional reputation. Regionally we represent more than 30,000 hard working men and women.
We understand that One Beverly Hills has requested the City’s approval of a Community Facilities District (“CFD”) to help finance the public improvements for the Project funded solely by special taxes imposed on the One Beverly Hills Property.
We support One Beverly Hills’s request that the City Council approve the proposed Community Facilities District for the public infrastructure for the project.
The One Beverly Hills project will deliver considerable financial benefits for the City and the community, as will the public infrastructure. The project includes $100 million in public benefit fees to the city, additional surcharges for hotel stays and other fees, and acres of public open space available to our members and the public in the form of remarkable botanic gardens. The project – and therefore a CFD- is a win-win-win for the developer, the City, and its residents, which we hope will help the project be completed and opened on time.
If the City fails to approve the Community Facilities District, we understand the project may be delayed. That would mean a delay in all the benefits of the project, including City revenues and public open space. Our members and the community deserve these benefits without delay.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Kurt Petersen
Co-President, UNITE HERE Local 11
UNITE
HERE!
LOCAL 11
MAIN OFFICE
464 S. LUCAS AVE. #201
LOS ANGELES, CA 90017
213.481.8530 I FAX 213.481.0352
GARDEN GROVE OFFICE
13252 GARDEN GROVE BLVD. #200
GARDEN GROVE, CA 92843
714.750.4373 I FAX 714.750.5638
AIRPORT OFFICE
4634 W. IMPERIAL HWY.
INGLEWOOD, CA 90304
310.671.0720 I FAX 310.671.5021
PHOENIX OFFICE
801 N. 2nd AVE.
PHOENIX, AZ 85003
480.795.5330 I FAX 480.795.5326
Dear City Council Members,
What we decide today will shape the next generation of Beverly Hills. The CFD under consideration is a smart use of a tool created by the state to help cities grow without financial risk.
We should welcome private investment that funds public benefit. Let’s not miss this opportunity to support a landmark project and the infrastructure that comes with it.
Thank you for your leadership.
Evan Nehmadi
N Alpine Dr, Beverly Hills, CA 90210
From: Monique Gibbons
Sent: Thursday, August 7, 2025 11:15 AM
To: Huma Ahmed <[email protected]>
Subject: One Beverly Hills
I You don't often get email from
>
. Leam why this is impo1t ant
I
/E. CAUTION: EXTERNAL SENDER &
Be cautious when clicking links or o~ g attachments. Verify the sender's email address and be on the lookout for phishing att~ ts.
Dear City Clerk Ahmed,
My family has lived in Beverly Hills for three generations. We have seen remarkable changes to the landscape of our City while still maintaining a quality of life that is the envy of most cities around the world.
From my youth, the coiner of Whittier and Wilshire has been a vibrant gateway into our city. Since the closure of the Robinsons-May store, I have followed and supp01ted the imagination and planning into the creation of what is now One Beverly Hills. It is exciting to see that construction is underway with an expected completion date prior to the Olympics.
The developer has asked the City to allow the property to become a Community Facilities District to help reduce the cost of financing the public p01tions of the project. Using the Mello-Roos Act, which has been on the books since 1982, would be the best decision. In fact, establishing such a district is standard for virtually every large development in California since the act was enacted. Beverly Hills has used this Act to establish such a district about 20 years ago.
I support the Council's establishment of a Mello-Roos District at the One Beverly Hills site.
Monique Maas Gibbons
Beverly Hills City Council,
I hope you are all well.
Please see my attached comments on the CFO.
Huma, please include as part of the public correspondence on this issue.
Thank you.
Stay well.
Julian A. Gold, M.D.
Mayor (Retired) . .
Honorable Members of the Beverly Hills City Council,
I must admit, speaking from the other side of the dais as a private citizen, feels strange. It is a privilege I take seriously. I've sat where you are and listened to constituents express their concerns and support. That dialogue is a critical and unique aspect of our democracy.
At the same time, it is important to distinguish testimony to the council which is factually true and pertinent. Sometimes it may be hard to separate the noise from the signal. As good councilmembers, I know you listen to everyone, reflect on their input and then decide based on the facts, your convictions and your knowledge.
We, the residents, the city and the developers of One Beverly are partners in the development and in the success of this project. A financially successful project serves us all well. One tool to create a successful project is the Mello-Roos Act. It is a very wellconceived piece of legislation. It enables cities to help developers finance the large costs associated with the public improvements and infrastructure required for a project. It is clearly written to insulate the city from liability. I think it important to reiterate that point.
The clear intent and language of the law, as well as years of experience by more than 1500 other cities, is to facilitate the creation of the CFO with no financial exposure to our city.
So, the question isn't, "Why should we help the developer?" It's just the opposite, "Why shouldn't we help t he developer?"
There are no credible reasons for us not to do this. We get the benefit of this new development. The developers save money which helps ensure the project is finished on time. The city has no liability.
I am sure after you to listen to all the public testimony, you will come to the same conclusion all t hese other cities have. A Community Facilities District is good for your constituents and the broader community.
I urge you to approve.
Honorable Members of the Beverly Hills City Council,
As many of you know, my family has deep roots in Beverly Hills, particularly in the southwest part of the city. I grew up on South Linden Drive, my wife Amy on Peck Drive, and today we live on South Camden. Amy and I both attended El Rodeo School and later Beverly Hills High School, so the 9900 site and the Beverly Hilton have been a part of our lives since childhood.
Many of you knew my father, Roger, and have honored my cousin, former Mayor Vicki Reynolds. Over the years, I’ve become familiar with the politics and spirited debates that shape our city. In my view, the creation of a Community Facilities District (CFD) for One Beverly Hills is not a controversial issue, it’s a sound policy decision. When the law enabling CFDs was written, its purpose was clear: to protect cities from financial liability while encouraging developers to invest in projects that enhance public infrastructure.
Amy, our children, and our neighbors are genuinely excited about the One Beverly Hills project. We’ve seen the positive impact the Waldorf Astoria has had on our community, and I believe One Beverly Hills will be an even greater addition—one that will bring lasting value to residents, visitors, and our city as a whole.
I respectfully urge you to approve the CFD for One Beverly Hills so we can keep this longdormant site moving toward the world-class development our city deserves.
Thank you for your time and dedication to Beverly Hills.
Sincerely,
Joey Behrstock
Dear Mayor Nazarian and Councimembers
This is in response to the letter of Dr. Julian Gold dated August 10, 2025 advocating that the City issue NTE $550 Million in Mello-Roos bonds to reimburse the developers of the One Beverly Hills project (OBH) for the cost of certain infrastructure.
I note that it took great courage for Dr. Gold to embrace so enthusiastically the arguments of OBH given that this request is strongly opposed by so many Beverly Hills residents.
I disagree with Dr. Gold for a number of reasons including the following:
The City and OBH are not partners. Partners share in the profits and losses of their venture.
Here, OBH will retain all of the profits if this venture is successful. If the project fails and the bonds cannot be repaid timely and in full, the City will be exposed to unquantifiable claims and potential liability.
While Dr. Gold’s experience with Mello-Roos bonds during his many years as a Beverly Hills official is likely very limited, it is surprising that he should adopt almost verbatim OBH’s assertions about them. OBH consistently ignores and, by necessity, Dr. Gold ignores the fact that these proposed bonds are different from the “more than 1500 other cities” who have reportedly used them. Here, uniquely I believe, the proposal is to use the public funds raised by the sale of the bonds to reimburse OBH for infrastructure costs that OBH committed to provide at its own expense. This commitment by OBH was in exchange for the unprecedented entitlements (including two condominium towers more than twice as high as any other building in the City) which the City granted three years ago. In the other cases, the request for Mello-Roos assistance was made and agreed to as part of the entitlement process. This difference is critical because the City faces enormous potential liability and serious fines for what appears to be an unlawful gift of public funds because the City would be paying twice for the same thing.
Dr. Gold argues that the “developers save money which helps ensure the project is finished on time.” This information about “finishing on time” (whatever that means) could only have come from the developer. It exemplifies the type of information that the City must have before it considers providing the requested financial assistance.
The City does not know anything about the financial condition of the project or how much has been borrowed with what strictures or what more is needed for completion or how valuable are the bond funds to OBG or when, if ever, it will be completed. Perhaps, Dr. Gold can assist in getting more transparency.
Dr. Gold states that there is “no financial exposure to our City” and the “city has no liability”. The developer has been requested to provide written assurances from experienced counsel that by issuance of the bonds and payment of the bond funds to the developer, the City has not made an unlawful gift of public funds under these circumstances and faces no other risk of loss, injury, liability or damage. This has not happened. All that OBH has offered is the entirely circular argument that the City doesn’t need these assurances or information because the City is not liable.
While Dr. Gold’s expressions of his opinion are undoubtedly well-meaning, they fall far short of what is needed because he knows nothing more about this than what the developer has decided to tell him.
I respectfully suggest that Dr. Gold’s entreaties are misdirected. If he has a sincere desire to help, and I have no doubt that he does, he should urge the developer to provide the requested assurances of counsel and the basic financial information that any responsible prospective lender would insist on.
Then and only then, if and when these are provided, should the City confront the questions of how, if at all, this benefits the City and, if so, what is fair consideration to the City commensurate with the benefit to the developer.
Sincerely,
Peter Ostroff
There is nothing out there remotely comparable to this in size (relative to the small size of BH) and their ask is coming AFTER the developer agreed to construct these improvements in all negotiations prior to the approval of the project and the city participating in financing was never mentioned.
At this point the public knows nothing about the financial arrangements that OBH has made, what they need to complete the project, and how much this is worth to OBH. We have also not had a comprehensive legal opinion that says there is no risk or qualifying the risks that exist. Additionally we need answers to ensure that this is not a giveaway of public funds. At the very least, we need more information and this decision should be delayed.
Sincerely,
Myra Demeter, Ph.D.
29 year resident of Beverly Hills
--
Myra Demeter, Ph.D.