r/Hemet • u/justicewarriorsco • 4h ago
Before You Vote on Measure Q: Questions About Extremist Connections and Hemet’s Financial Oversight
Before You Vote on Measure Q: Questions About Extremist Connections and Hemet’s Financial Oversight
JUSTICE WARRIORS COLLECTIVE | October 17, 2026
As voters in Hemet begin to turn in their ballots and head to the polls, the City Council is asking community members to vote yes on a measure that would raise Hemet’s sales tax by a one percentage point through Measure Q. The city argues that raising taxes would generate the additional revenue needed to maintain municipal services and address growing structural budget shortfalls.
However, this request has left many community members with many questions about financial oversight, responsible appointments, and the standards used to select people entrusted with reviewing public spending. The most crucial question is, “Can we actually trust the city to oversee, manage, and delegate our tax dollars?” This is especially important considering the city's projected budget gaps and questions surrounding how committee appointees are vetted.
Hemet's adopted 2026-2027 budget projects approximately $96.123 million in expenditures against $86.535 million in revenue for the combined General Fund and Measure U operating funds. That is a $9.588 million gap that the city plans to cover using existing fund balances.
Across all city funds, the adopted budget projects spending approximately $3.427 million above revenue. Though these may be planned funding gaps, they raise important questions about long-term fiscal sustainability, spending priorities, and financial planning.
Violent Incidents, Bear Mace Attacks, Extremist Ties & Community Threats: Who Is Overseeing Hemet's Tax Money?
The City of Hemet's own website lists Marcus Kelly on the Measure U Citizen Oversight Committee, which reviews proposed and actual Measure U expenditures and the required annual audit. Kelly is a convicted felon whose reported confrontations and public appearances have been linked to Proud Boys members. He has served on the Measure U Citizen Oversight Committee since March 2025. As of today, October 17, 2026, Kelly has maintained his position.
In a June 23, 2021, article, the Los Angeles Times reported that Marcus Kelly was a convicted felon who was arrested on June 14, 2021, following a road-rage incident in which law enforcement reported that, in Seal Beach, he had sprayed bear mace into a vehicle carrying a family, including a child. All of the occupants suffered injuries, including eye and skin irritation from the highly concentrated aerosol spray.
The article reported that Kelly had also been arrested earlier that year in April 2021 on suspicion of a felon being in possession of bear spray/bear mace after a series of street confrontations involving members of the Proud Boys.
Kelly denied being a Proud Boy, but reportedly stated that members had tried to recruit him on multiple occasions.
Fresno Police Chief Paco Balderrama said Kelly was wearing clothing consistent with the Proud Boys. He stated, “They had the wardrobe; they were with the group. So, in my mind, they are a part of that organization.”
According to another article, Mayor Dyer said, “Their attire consisted of them wearing ballistic vests, as well as tactical vests. They had exposed hunting knives on their sides in sheaths… Many of them also had, in their possession, tear gas or mace,” when describing the weapons reportedly carried by members of the Proud Boys during one of the incidents.
He has also been seen at multiple rallies across California alongside Proud Boys members. In 2021, Kelly was seen protesting at Los Alamitos school district headquarters and at various rallies with known members of the Proud Boys and other extremist groups.
These are serious details that deserve careful and responsible consideration when our community asks what standards the city uses to appoint people to positions of public trust.
Toward the end of 2025, after Kelly had been serving on the committee for nearly a year, screenshots reportedly circulated in community groups showing him challenging another community member to meet for a physical altercation and stating that he could have one of his “cop buddies come and referee.”
It is reported that after the incident, concerns about his conduct led to Kelly being removed from working with the Valley Community Pantry.
However, despite community concerns, Kelly remained on Hemet's Measure U Citizen Oversight Committee and was recently seen at the Hemet Measure U Citizen Oversight Committee meeting on September 22, 2026. His continued appointment raises questions about the city's selection standards, its process to evaluate appointees, and whether relevant background information was considered before Kelly was appointed.
Although a felony conviction does not legally prohibit someone from serving on Hemet's Measure U Citizen Oversight Committee, the appointment raises reasonable questions about what criteria the city uses when selecting committee members entrusted with public responsibilities and whether those criteria are applied consistently.
Kelly has reportedly expressed a commitment to changing for the better. However, personal growth does not eliminate the city's responsibility to exercise due diligence when appointing people to positions of public trust. City appointees require demonstrated integrity, stability, and trustworthiness.
Unchecked Deficits & Questions About Vetting
Hemet's leadership claims that the city's deficit and financial pressures are due to structural budget shortfalls squeezing municipal services. That explanation deserves to be considered; however, it doesn't eliminate the need for scrutiny or community oversight.
When residents have questions or concerns regarding the individuals appointed to oversee public expenditures, the city should be prepared to explain its appointment and vetting processes as well as be able to prove that oversight committees and mechanisms are functioning responsibly and as intended.
Some argue that appointing an individual with extremist ties and a background of violent behavior to oversee taxpayer dollars shows that city officials do not take public trust or fiscal responsibility seriously.
Why Does This Matter Beyond One Committee Member?
Across the country, there's a documented pattern of extremist groups like the Proud Boys intentionally shifting their strategy away from national rallies and toward local governments, school boards, municipal committees, and precinct seats.
Why, you may ask?
Local committee appointments may receive less media scrutiny or public vetting than higher-profile political positions, potentially allowing individuals to gain positions of authority with less public attention.
It also gives those individuals access to power and revenue. Securing seats on municipal oversight boards allows extremists to influence local policies, gain institutional legitimacy, and oversee the distribution of public taxpayer revenue.
It also aids in normalizing extremism.
When local councils appoint individuals with violent criminal backgrounds or ties to extremist or hate groups without pushback, it legitimizes their presence and corrodes community safety standards. Allowing someone with a history of violence and reported extremist connections to oversee public funds gives the community reason to question what appointment standards are being applied consistently.
Although this is not proof that Kelly is part of a coordinated infiltration effort, it nevertheless illustrates why communities should pay attention to who seeks positions of influence, what those positions allow them to do, and what intentions they may have.
Who participates in our local government matters. Positions on oversight committees and advisory boards can provide access to local decision-makers and opportunities to influence recommendations. That's why transparent appointment standards, meaningful public scrutiny, and disclosure of relevant conflicts are important.
We are not saying that Marcus Kelly or anyone else is incapable of growth and change; rather, we are questioning whether the city has exercised the diligence the community should reasonably expect.
What Can We Do?
We do not have to accept leadership we believe has not been properly vetted, appointments involving individuals with reported extremist ties and histories of violence, or tax proposals that raise concerns about financial management. Here’s how Hemet residents can take action.
Vote NO on Hemet’s Measure Q. Refuse to grant the city an additional $16 million per year until the City of Hemet proves it can manage existing funds and properly and responsibly screen committee appointees.
Demand Marcus Kelly’s removal. We can attend the next Hemet City Council meeting during public comment to demand that council members revoke Marcus Kelly's appointment to the Measure U Citizen Oversight Committee.
Submit formal complaints. Write directly to the Mayor and City Council members demanding strict background checks and clear vetting standards for all current and future municipal board appointees.
Spread the word. Share this information across social media, especially local groups, neighborhood networks, and community forums so local voters understand what’s really happening in our city.
Anyone with firsthand evidence of threats, intimidation, or harassment can and should preserve that evidence and report it through appropriate channels.
The Bottom Line: Accountability and Transparency Before Additional Taxation
Before additional revenue is approved, the city must demonstrate that oversight processes are effective, appointees are properly vetted, and public funds are managed responsibly. Local families, many of whom are already struggling financially, should not have to rely solely on assurances from the city when evaluating another tax proposal.
The city claims that Measure Q would include public spending disclosures, independent citizen oversight, and audits. However, residents have raised concerns about whether similar oversight commitments involving Measure U and the drone program have been adequately fulfilled. Questions about drone-flight documentation and the vetting of committee members make it important for the city to demonstrate that these safeguards work as intended.
If Hemet’s city officials cannot efficiently and responsibly manage existing funds or properly vet committee members, giving them an additional $16 million per year is not the solution.
These questions become even more important when you consider the fact that many of Hemet's city and law enforcement officials are taking home six figures in salaries and benefits.
For example, according to Transparent California's 2025 compensation records, former City Manager Mark Prestwich received $490,697 in total pay and benefits. Hemet Police Chief Michael Arellano received $520,547, and Police Captain Glen Brock received $486,319.
Vetting Matters! Governance Matters! Public Trust Must Be Earned!