John "Skippy" Amato and The Becket Woods Road District Prudential Committee Commit Perjury - Get Trapped with "Big Lie" Tactic


We have breaking news as a result of the10-21-08 hearing at Berkshire Superior Court of the lawsuit of the Taxpayer's Association against John Amato and his Prudential Committee to invalidate the election of 8-31-08.

John Amato and the Prudential Committee with the assistance of the law firm, Aronson & Sherr, (the law firm we the owners pay for via our District Road taxes) answered the lawsuit and in doing so committed Perjury. See also the Affidavit   of Chairman John Amato in Support of the Answer with Exhibits A thru G. John Amato is telling more lies. It was also discovered Amato voted 7 times at the election of 8-31-0-8 although District records reflect he owns only one lot in the District. As per the first two proxies, each voting 3 lots/3 votes as signed and voted by your Prudential Committee Chairman John "Skippy" Amato.

John Amato and the Prudential Committee are all defendants in the case to invalidate the election of 8-31-08 and its resultant latest tax hike in 2010 to a one time $200.00 Special Assessment". 

The major issue in that lawsuit used to invalidate the District election of 8-31-08 is that because the vote issue was changed due to a motion from the meeting room floor then proper 14 day notification as required by District law was not given to the owners/voters of the District. Therefore the election is illegal and must be invalidated. Also per lawsuit/complaint there was no Quorum, see the lawsuit.

John Amato and the Prudential Committee are claiming that the issue voted on at the 8-31-08 was not changed, but that it was the same issue contained in the Warrant that was sent to District Owners. John Amato and the Prudential Committee were caught in the Big Lie in order to fight against a lawsuit that should be an automatic win. John could not tell the truth and admit that the issue that was to be voted on per the Warrant (a permanent $200.00 increase in Road District Taxes to $1,000.00) was discarded and never voted on. John Amato and the Prudential Committee refused to admit that 1 1/2 hours into the meeting of 8-31-08 an unidentified man raised his hand after listening to all the dissention by the owners about the latest tax hikes and that man proposed that the District vote on an entirely new issue. That new issue that was voted on at the 8-31-08 meeting was a "One Time Special Assessment of  $200.00 for f/y 2010".

As you remember the original voting issue as per warrant, (a  permanent $200.00 road tax increase) was debated repeatedly during the 8-31-08 meeting. Amato acknowedged during the 8-31-08 meeting that that vote issue, as per the Warrant, was a $200.00 increase in Road Taxes to a  permanent yearly Road District Tax of $1,000.00 starting f/y/e 2010.

If you don't believe it - here is the Answer to the Lawsuit as per John Amato and his Prudential Committee. See paragraph #34, 35, 36, 47 of the answer. John Amato is clear via paragraph #36 - He and the Prudential Committee defendants claim that what was on the warrant was the issue that was voted on.


You are All Witnesses

How many of you were present at the 8-31-08 District meeting? That meeting room in the cellar of the Becket Town Hall was full - not one seat available. You all witnessed what happened at that meeting. You all witnessed, as above, that a man raised his hand and proposed that the District not vote on a permanent $200.00 increase in District taxes as per the warrant, but that instead the vote should be on a "One Time Special Assessment of $200.00 in f/y 2010".

It should not surprise you that Amato and his Prudential Committee would lie, or better termed Perjury, via their answer to the Complaint/lawsuit because of the disclosures on this Web Site A Habit. These people have learned that they can do anything they want, including election illegalities, and that they will get away with it. District Attorney Capeless supports them in their illegalities.


Amato gets Trapped with his "Big Lie"

But Amato's problem came at an unexpected turn of the case at the 10-21-08 hearing at Berkshire Superior Court - The Judge gave a CONTINUANCE of the case until 11-20-08 because amongst other legal complications - Amato created a Dispute of Fact. Elbery and fellow plaintiff's as well as the taxpayer's association never imagined that Amato and the Prudential Committee would lie about the voting issue being changed because there were to many WITNESSES!!!

WITNESSES - that means you folks. You were at the meeting - you witnessed the man raise his hand and motion for the new and different voting issue. You the owners of the District that were at the meeting voted on that issue. But the Proxy voters did not vote on that issue - they had no way to know it existed.

An issue of Fact exists for a Trier of Fact because Amato and the Prudential Committee claim, contrary to the plaintiffs, that the voting issue was not changed at the meeting.

Now the judge has to decide whether Elbery and his plaintiff's are telling the truth or is Amato and his Prudential Committee telling the truth. We'll you all know the truth. Some of you will not come forward with the truth and some of you will support Amato in his lies/perjury, but you all witnessed what happened. Where is that man who proposed a new voting issue at the meeting? He did nothing wrong, but he should step forward, or at least submit an affidavit detailing the truth in order that there be justice.


Your Affidavit is Needed - Your physical presence and testimony at the 11-20-08 hearing even Better!

If you were at the District meeting of 8-31-08 please send an affidavit stating that you were present and that you witnessed the vote change. This Web Site will provide a sample affidavit for you to follow - no Notary Public is necessary. We need that affidavit before 11-20-08. Send it to Becket Woods Tax Payers Ass., 105 Laurel St. Apt. 8B, Lee, Mass. 01238. Thank you - we are fighting hard for your rights in the District of Becket Woods.


More lies told by Amato and the Prudential Committee via their Answer to the lawsuit (the # refers to the paragraph of the complaint & Answer)

They are now claiming that Nancy Svirida never said the Proxy vote for the 8-31-08 election was 25 to 2 in Favor of the latest tax hike. #30

They are denying that John Amato said at the end of the meeting the election result was 64-24 in Favor of the 8-31-08 tax hike. #40

They deny that they have denied access to the District Owners of the voting records and financial Records. #21

They state that all owners were sent timely notice of the Warrant for the 8-31-08 District meeting by U.S. mail and that if there was a problem it was the U.S. Post Office's error. They even got a Postal worker to sign a letter stating that the Post Office was responsible. #26 and Amato aff #8 and Exhibit C of that Aff.

They deny that they refused to allow the owners of the District to review the Proxies that were returned for the 8-31-08 election. #32

They claim that the Warrant that was sent out to District owners regarding the 8-31-08 election was precise and not vague or deficient. #25

They deny that there was no "check-off" at the meeting. #38

They claim that the Proxy voters were notified of the issue that was voted on at the 8-31-08 meeting even though the issue was raised from the floor 1 1/2 hours into the meeting. #34

They deny that the Mass. Procurement Act (requires District get low bids for contract work)  has been deliberately and knowingly violated by the Prudential Committee. #43 & #55 & #56


    In short the Prudential committee denies they are doing everything wrong and as a result are committing perjury. But the Berkshire Superior Court does not care - all they are interested in is making sure Michael Elbery and the District owners don't get the voting records (proxies and voting cards copies that are in the manila envelope, Marked Exhibit G,  in the Clerk's Office of the Berkshire Superior Court).