CLEVELAND, OH – Basheer Jones did not live in Cleveland, Ohio’s Ward 7 when he campaigned for the council seat against Cleveland resident T.J.Dow and won by 13 votes in 2017. He lived in South Euclid at 1670 South Belvoir Road. Instead of relocating to Cleveland where he committed election fraud to campaign for a seat to join the city’s council, he relocated to 3936 Orchard Road in Cleveland Heights in 2018 where he now parks the Jaguar the money he’s stealing from Cleveland taxpayers bought him.
Jones’ 16 gutless Cleveland city council colleagues know he’s a non-Cleveland resident like they did Twinsburg resident Jeffrey Johnson. So does the mayor Jones criticizes as he tries on his dancing shoes as a “going nowhere” 2021 candidate for Cleveland mayor from his Cleveland Heights home. So does the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections whose officials are the most election-stealing anarchists in Ohio history. If they won’t protect the city from non-resident thieves in their own house, forget about them protecting any Clevelander from the city’s constitutionally abusive police and lawbreaking public workers.
But like no one challenged Johnson but me for this residency liar’s theft of Cleveland taxpayer funds that built his pension, I’m the only one still challenging lying-azzed “sellout” and anti-Christian Jones. Johnson didn’t return to the home where he was registered to vote as he lied to the elections board to remain on the Cleveland ballotin 2017 from his Twinsburg home with his family. They relocated to Shaker Heights in Carl Stokes’ old home. Johnson’s back on the Cleveland payroll again working as a bailiff for Housing Court Judge Mona Scott. This lazy lawyer loves the public tit.
The residency requirements for “public officials” are a “general state law.” Forfeiture is automatic and is imposed, as a state law, as a duty upon the individual holding the office to remove themselves as soon as they are no longer eligible to serve. Section 3.15 of Ohio’s Revised Code explains it.
3.15 Residency requirements for public officials. (A) Except as otherwise provided in division (B) of this section, at all times during one’s term of office: (1) Each member of the general assembly and each elected voting member of the state board of education shall be a resident of the district the member represents. (2) Each judge and each elected officer of a court shall be a resident of the territory of that court. (3) Each person holding an elective office of a political subdivision shall be a resident of that political subdivision. (4) Each member of a municipal legislative authority who represents a ward shall be a resident of the ward the member represents, and each member of a board of education of a city school district who represents a subdistrict shall be a resident of the subdistrict the member represents. (B) Any person who fails to meet any of the requirements of division (A) of this section that apply to the person shall forfeit the office. Division (A) of this section applies to persons who have been either elected or appointed to an elective office. Division (A) of this section does not apply to a member of the general assembly or the state board of education, to a member of a municipal legislative authority who represents a ward, or to a member of a board of education of a city school district who represents a subdistrict, during the remainder of the member’s existing term of office after there is a change in the member’s district’s, ward’s, or subdistrict’s boundaries that leaves the member’s permanent residence outside the district, ward, or subdistrict.”
Jones and Johnson, as well as Brandon King in East Cleveland, violated two sets of state general laws as they committed election fraud to campaign as candidates; and then to serve as public officials in cities where they were not residents. King lived in Richmond Heights as a candidate for East Cleveland city council and as mayor to replace Gary Norton when voters recalled him.
As “candidates” none were authorized by law to circulate petitions in cities where they didn’t live using falsified addresses. It’s like Albert Ratner’s uncles and father lying their way into the U.S. from Russia with fake names and forged credentials; and false places of origins in violation of federal immigration laws.
Jones, Johnson and King lied on oaths to receive documents from the elections board; and on the petitions and other documents they signed when they submitted their petitions. There were multiple opportunities for the liars to recognize they were falsifying information on official documents at different candidacy intervals that each ignored before affixing them with their signatures.
Johnson’s federal criminal records history seems out-of-place on Cleveland’s housing court since its last judge, the late Raymond Pianka, died of a heart attack within days after he was visited by federal agents. Scott seems to have picked up where the criminal enterprise that got Pianka the visit left off. With a known criminal on the housing court payroll who’s stolen from both state and Cleveland taxpayers, Scott’s inserted herself in the ongoing “multi-agency” federal investigation.
As an example, Jones recently purchased a home from Mansfield Frazier, allegedly for $40,000, that was taken by Pianka from Dave and Marva Patterson at 1898 E. 66th Street. Frazier got it for $1 from Pianka. The couple has identified fraud in the way criminally-minded banking, Cuyahog county and Cleveland government officials led by the likes of those described above violated laws to steal it from them. This is to be the home he uses to campaign for Cleveland mayor. Should Jones run then he will be a resident if he actually moves. That won’t dismiss the thief’s four years of lying and stealing.
The contractor remodeling Jones’ new Hough home, one that is not currently occupied, was just indicted along with his son by the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio for stealing over $800,000 in federal payroll protection funds. Deon Levy and Abdul-Azeem Levy. Each was involved in a Florida scam connected to ex-Philadelphia Bear Joshua Bellamy where they received help to submit a fraudulent application for the federal CoVid-19 money and gave a percentage to Philip Augustin. Augustin was the “percentage” man.
Even the house Jones lives in at 3936 Orchard Road has its own curious history as to how it was transferred to U.S. Bank from The A.C.T. Living Trust for $30,000 on June 26, 2017; and then sold to the CLE Real Estate Group for $31,000 on January 24, 2018 about six months later. County recorder records show the CLE Group filing a $70,000 mortgage on the property on January 23, 2018.
The city where Jones is currently qualified to vote and seek elected office is Cleveland Heights. It’s where his family lives. When he campaigned for Cleveland city council lin 2017, he should have been campaigning in South Euclid where his campaign finance records show him purchasing gas from the Getgo at the corner of Mayfield Road and South Belvoir where he lived.
What’s hilarious to me is he picks one of my old neighborhoods and cities to live in, next door to where I served as mayor and lived, and moves to a street where I have “family.” I’ve known of his presence on the street since he moved there over a year ago. All I could do was shake my head. Ain’t nothing right in him.
The residency requirement for “public officials” comes with two laws that shows voters who are residents how to remove them from office without dealing with the anarchist election-stealing criminals at the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections. You have to hope you don’t get a judge like John O’Donnell who the anarchists over there let serve without ever filing campaign finance reports for three elections … within 38 days. That’s what the law required. The board’s record for filing deadlines is 4065 days beyond the 38 day requirement. O’Donnell holds that title.
At the top of Ohio’s Revised Code are its “General Provisions.” There are two laws under the General Provisions heading that provide remedies for non-resident public officials and those that engage in misconduct everywhere and anywhere in Ohio; and for every office and type of office.
R.C. 3.07 identifies the type of, Misconduct in office” that would lead to “forfeiture.” R.C. 3.08 sets forth the process for the “removal of public officers” who engage in misconduct that concludes with the forfeiture.
The bottom line is that 15 percent of Ward 7 voters who voted “in the ward” during last campaign for governor gets Jones in front of a judge of the court of common pleas whose duty is to examine the law and the evidence to determine guilt. The law lets you remove the judge. One person’s signature on a complaint filed pursuant to R.C. 309.05 initiates a process for removing a prosecutor.
3.07 Misconduct in office – forfeiture. Any person holding office in this state, or in any municipal corporation, county, or subdivision thereof, coming within the official classification in Section 38 of Article II, Ohio Constitution, who willfully and flagrantly exercises authority or power not authorized by law, refuses or willfully neglects to enforce the law or to perform any official duty imposed upon him by law, or is guilty of gross neglect of duty, gross immorality, drunkenness, misfeasance, malfeasance, or nonfeasance is guilty of misconduct in office. Upon complaint and hearing in the manner provided for in sections 3.07 to 3.10, inclusive, of the Revised Code, such person shall have judgment of forfeiture of said office with all its emoluments entered thereon against him, creating thereby in said office a vacancy to be filled as prescribed by law. The proceedings provided for in such sections are in addition to impeachment and other methods of removal authorized by law, and such sections do not divest the governor or any other authority of the jurisdiction given in removal proceedings. Effective Date: 10-01-1953 .
3.08 Removal of public officers. Proceedings for the removal of public officers on any of the grounds enumerated in section 3.07 of the Revised Code shall be commenced by the filing of a written or printed complaint specifically setting forth the charge and signed by qualified electors of the state or political subdivision whose officer it is sought to remove, not less in number than fifteen per cent of the total vote cast for governor at the most recent election for the office of governor in the state or political subdivision whose officer it is sought to remove, or, if the officer sought to be removed is the sheriff or prosecuting attorney of a county or the mayor of a municipal corporation, the governor may sign and file such written or printed complaint without the signatures of qualified electors. Such complaint shall be filed with the court of common pleas of the county where the officer against whom the complaint is filed resides, except that when the officer against whom the complaint is filed is a judge of the court of common pleas, such complaint shall be filed in the court of appeals of the district where such judge resides, and all complaints against state officers shall be filed with the court of appeals of the district where the officer against whom the complaint is filed resides. The judge or clerk of the court shall cause a copy of such complaint to be served upon the officer, against whom the complaint has been filed, at least ten days before the hearing upon such complaint. Such hearing shall be had within thirty days from the date of the filing of the complaint by said electors, or by the governor. The court may suspend the officer pending the hearing.
The removal proceedings filed in the court of common pleas shall be tried by a judge unless a jury trial is demanded in writing by the officer against whom the complaint has been filed. If a jury is demanded, it shall be composed of twelve persons who satisfy the qualifications of a juror specified in section 2313.17 of the Revised Code. If nine or more persons of that jury find one or more of the charges in the complaint are true, such jury shall return a finding for the removal of the officer, which finding shall be filed with the clerk of the court and be made a matter of public record. If less than nine persons of that jury find that the charges on the complaint are true, the jury shall return a finding that the complaint be dismissed. The proceedings had by a judge upon such removal shall be matters of public record and a full detailed statement of the reasons for such removal shall be filed with the clerk of the court and shall be made a matter of public record. Amended by 129th General AssemblyFile No.81, HB 268, §1, eff. 5/22/2012. Effective Date: 08-22-1995 .