:::
COMMUNITY NEWS
(November
19)
Thirty residents turned out for Tuesday night's
Rancho Murieta Association meeting to discuss the tentative
development agreement reached with the Murieta Holdings
developers. The session lasted 3 1/2 hours.
RMA
won't act immediately on development agreement, board says
|
Published
Wednesday, November 20, 2002
The
Rancho Murieta Association board will not vote on the
Mutual Benefit Agreement this month.
RMA
President Jack Copeland made the announcement at the
town hall meeting on the agreement Tuesday night. He
said additional input from the Community Services District,
residents and others had delayed the vote until December
at the earliest.
Some
of the 30 residents attending the forum suggested any
action on the MBA should be postponed for 60 to 90 days.
That would give the community and the three new board
members who will be elected Thursday an opportunity
to better understand the document, they suggested.
The
50-page-plus document was released last month. Exhibits
that were missing from the document and an outline of
the agreement were made available several days later.
Negotiations
on the agreement began two and a half years ago at the
request of the board, said Director Chuck Christian,
who was president of the board at the time.
The
board sought legal advice after learning of Murieta
Holdings developers Robert J. Cassano's and Gerry N.
Kamilos' interest in the undeveloped property owned
by the Pension Trust Fund of the Operating Engineers.
Christian said the board realized the issue of access
to the community over RMA roads could lead to litigation.
Citing
previous legal fees that totaled "thousands and
thousands of dollars," Christian said the board,
after being told by legal counsel that the developers
couldn't be kept out, decided to negotiate with the
developers rather than fight them.
The
agreement that has come out of those negotiations is
basically the same agreement that was presented to the
community in outline
form two years ago, said Copeland. The funding of
a new North Gate, payment of RMA dues by residents of
the new developments, and payment of Parks Fund contributions
for a community center and aquatic complex are some
of the provisions that have been public knowledge for
the last two years.
Copeland
said the latest version of the agreement calls for the
developers to provide $75,000 for a gate on Escuela
Drive, an escalation of parks fees payment, and a relocation
of parks sites that places the community center and
aquatic complex on property behind the RMA Building
where a high density development had been proposed.
But
for some of the nine residents who spoke at the meeting,
the proposed benefits could not compensate for the fact
that most of the new homes will be production houses
instead of custom homes.
"I
honestly believe that if you were to take the pulse
of this community, that's what's really hanging this
thing up," said Ted Hart.
Others
suggested the MBA wouldn't be necessary if a custom-home
development was planned and the properties could then
be annexed to the RMA.
Several
times Copeland asked the group for comments specifically
related to the MBA.
Wilbur
Haines was one of the few who commented on provisions
of the agreement.
For
Haines, the payment of RMA dues by the residents of
the new development raised serious questions. The residents
would be members of their own master association and
would owe dues there too. Eventually they would protest
paying dues to RMA and the RMA would have no way to
collect those dues from the individual Rancho North
landowners, Haines said.
|
| CSD
questions delay approval of agreement
The Rancho Murieta Association board said at Tuesday's
meeting that a letter from the Community Services
District was among the reasons to delay voting
on the Mutual Benefit Agreement.
The
six-page letter,
from CSD counsel Richard E. Brandt to lawyers
negotiating the deal, says the CSD was given little
time to review the agreement and that the copy
it received was missing exhibits. The letter offers
18 comments about the agreement's structure or
language and says the CSD may need to return with
additional comments.
Among
the letter's points, the CSD asks for reimbursement
language in the agreement to cover North Gate
construction. The CSD plans to build a new North
Gate and be repaid by the developers. On a new
Escuela gate, the letter says the agreement doesn't
address the potential expense of a staffed gate,
and the CSD wants the time frame for reimbursement
for the gate extended from three to five years.
The agreement involves long-fought land transfers
involving the CSD, and the letter asks for protections
surrounding the transfers.
|
|
Full
text of documents in web format
 |
Full
documents in PDF format |
(You
need to have the Adobe Acrobat reader installed
in your computer to do this. You can download
the Acrobat reader here
for free.)
Development
background
- Pop-up
window: Click for archive of development
coverage -- news, maps, photos and more
|
|
"We're
sitting ducks for litigation. … We're going to be litigating
for eternity with this new neighbor with which we have a complex,
unworkable business relationship," Haines said.
Director Elliot Sevier said the board would
look into the issue.
The meeting lasted three and a half hours.
The original plan to limit speakers to three minutes was abandoned
early on, after Director June Koefelda said, "This director
is willing to sit here tonight for as long as it takes."
Sitting at the front of the meeting room,
in addition to the RMA board, were developers Cassano and
Kamilos and the RMA's lawyers. Their presence prompted the
evening's first controversy.
"I'm not comfortable in a dialogue at
this meeting with representatives from what I consider to
be the other side," said Hart, referring to the developers.
Another resident also objected to the presence of the lawyers.
RMA General Manager Greg Vorster said the
developers were invited to help answer questions. "It
was just a source of additional information," he explained.
In the end, both the lawyers and the developers
stayed.
The RMA lawyers, Deon R. Stein of Stein Baydaline
and Curtis C. Sproul of Weintraub Genshlea Chediak Sproul,
addressed conflict of interest issues. Sproul has been directly
involved in the negotiations; Stein reviewed the MBA.
Sproul
said he worked with Cassano at Gold River, serving as the
lawyer for the homeowners association there. He's also producing
the CC&Rs for the proposed Murieta development. His relationship
with Rancho Murieta goes back to 1985. "I've been in,
as I say, every war out here," he said.
The Pension Trust Fund of the Operating Engineers,
the property owner, has its own legal counsel. Murieta Holdings
is acting as an agent for the PTF.
Sproul
said the PTF "has an army of lawyers, and they're not
very nice people." He said all the negotiated points
in the MBA are subjected to review by PTF legal representation.
Stein described the PTF legal representatives as "Doberman
pinscher lawyers."
Late in
the meeting, Terry Hanson, who opposes the proposed development,
came forward to tell the board, "This document you're
about to sign is fatally flawed." When Hanson said he
had documentation showing the developers did not have the
right to proceed with developing the property, the board and
lawyers invited him to produce the documents and let them
work with the information.
| Do
you have comments about this topic or story? Share them
at RanchoMurieta.com's Community
Views page. |
|
