 |
Paul
Gumbinger was elected president of the RMA board at
the September meeting. |
RMA
elects new president and announces signing of development
and bridge documents
Updated
Monday, September 22, 2003 | First published Sunday,
September 21, 2003
The
September meeting of the Rancho Murieta Association quietly
marked some momentous events -- the election of a new president
to replace one who resigned after an unprecedented recall
effort, and news of the signing of two documents that will
shape the future of the community.
There
were issues that generated heat, but they had to do with
use of motorcycles in Murieta North and plans to build 64
homes on the Escuela Drive school site.
As Vice
President Paul Gumbinger opened the meeting, former board
president Michael Schieberl stepped to the microphone to
begin the public comments portion of the meeting. He read
a prepared statement outlining his reasons for resigning
from the board and his decision to run for a new three-year
term in the November election.
Schieberl's
comments included references to signatures on the recall
petition that was presented to the RMA and a warning to
directors that they, too, were at risk of being targeted
for recall if it could happen to him. (See his full statement
here.)
Because
of Schieberl's resignation, the recall effort was declared
a moot issue later in the meeting, after the board acknowledged
receipt of a recall petition with about 250 signatures.
The
five candidates for the two board seats up for election
-- Dick Cox, Mike Martel, Schieberl, incumbent Elliot Sevier
and Kevin Williams -- were present at the meeting.
Each
addressed the board at some point. Cox took the microphone
to characterize Schieberl's statement as a "campaign speech"
and tell the board, "I just hope I get elected, because
I'm going to be your worst nightmare."
Later in the
meeting, Gumbinger was elected president of the board and
Jack
Copeland was selected to replace him as vice president.
The board will
appoint a replacement for Schieberl to serve out his term.
Interested persons should contact the association by letter
before 5 p.m.
Wednesday. The term expires on Nov. 30, 2004.
Gumbinger,
a former mayor of San Mateo, was praised for the way he
ran the meeting.
After
the board responded to a resident's concerns about the traffic
impacts of new development on Highway 16, resident Ted Hart
noted, "This is the first time in a couple of years that
the board has actually talked back to someone (in the public
comments portion of the meeting). Thank you."
Highlights
of the meeting, which ran more than four hours:
Development
agreement signed by Pension Trust
More
than three years after negotiations began and eight months
after the RMA board voted to approve it, the board announced
the Mutual Benefit Agreement has been signed by the Pension
Trust Fund of the Operating Engineers. Gumbinger made the
brief announcement late in the meeting.
The MBA defines
the terms of new development on the North that will add
about
1,100 houses to the community.
Under the terms
of the MBA, residents of the new subdivisions will pay the
same
dues to the RMA as RMA members pay, although they will be
members of a separate homeowners association. The new developments
will not annex to the RMA.
RMA
General Manager Greg Vorster later said that Gumbinger and
Director Donna Newell are expected to sign the MBA early
this week in their respective official capacities as president
and secretary of the association.
PTF
and development officials could not be reached for comment.
The delay in signing the agreement has been attributed to
undisclosed legal issues on both sides.
Gumbinger offered
no information beyond the announcement.
Funding
agreement for bridge signed
The
signing of an agreement to fund a $1.5 million pedestrian
bridge connecting the North and South was also announced
at Tuesday meeting. The agreement involves South developer
Reynen & Bardis, the RMA and the county. It commits
developers to funding the bridge through an $850-per-lot
fee.
According to
the terms of the agreement, developer Reynen & Bardis
is
obligated to provide an up-front payment of $450,000 to
get the building
process started and a letter of credit guaranteeing the
remaining $1,084,000.
North developers
as well as South developers are obligated by the funding
agreement.
The Parks Committee discussed the bridge
project at its meeting Monday but did not approve the contract
to construct it. RMA General Manager Greg Vorster said the
contract is now under review by RMA counsel and will be
brought to the committee after the review is completed,
probably in the next few weeks.
A special meeting of the Parks Committee
may be called at that time.
When he was asked why the Parks Committee
is involved in the project, Vorster explained that the river
crossing is “a condition” of the committee.
CSD Director John Merchant, an alternate member of the committee,
suggested setting guidelines with Viking Construction, the
bridge contractor, to avoid spending funds for “a
full-blown engineering study” in the early stages
of a project he believes has “a 50-50 chance at best
of getting approved. … I don’t care whose money
it is -- that’s no reason to waste it.”
The engineering study will required for
environmental review during the
permitting process. CSD General Manager Ed Crouse suggested
that a reduced version of the study -- 40 to 50 percent
-- may be sufficient.
Vorster said a representative of Viking
Construction will attend the Parks
Committee meeting and the issue will be aired before the
contract is signed.
Reynen & Bardis representative Todd Chambers said the
county has received the developer’s letter of credit
and initial payment of $450,000 for the project.
Vorster said the RMA has not yet received
notification of that from the county. Chambers said Reynen
& Bardis had not yet received building permits from
the county to continue with construction on the South.
The Parks Committee
has five voting members -- two RMA directors, one Community
Services District director, and two developer representatives,
one from Reynen & Bardis and one PTF representative
from Murieta Holdings.
The committee
administers the Parks Fund that developers and RMA members
contribute to on a per-lot basis to finance parks and facilities
identified in
the parks' master plan. After the facilities are built,
the RMA assumes the
responsibility for maintaining them and reserving for them.
In the case of
the bridge, the committee will authorize the spending of
funds
that are being held by the county and the RMA will act as
project manager for
the project. The association will not make a monetary contribution
for the
bridge -- it's strictly a developer obligation.
At Tuesday's
meeting, residents asked why the association accepted a
single
bid of $1.5 million from Viking Construction, which is owned
by resident Randy
Jenco, instead of adhering to stated RMA policy to solicit
three bids for sizable
projects.
"It's
not our money," said Director Elliot Sevier.
Vorster commented
after the meeting that the RMA was satisfied with the single
bid because it came from "a qualified bidder personally
connected to the
community and the project."
The bid forms
the cost basis for an interim ordinance approved by the
county
Board of Supervisors last month. The interim ordinance replaces
an ordinance
requiring a river crossing to be in place before the 601st
building permit
could be issued on the South.
Some in the community
have expressed concern that the bid is too low to cover
the cost of a project that could face challenges in getting
permits because of
environmental issues. The board was asked Tuesday who ends
up paying if the amount is insufficient to get the job done.
Director
Michael Burnett said the matter would go back to the county
and "the fee would be adjusted if necessary. ... It's not
going to be your money."
Neither the interim
ordinance nor the funding agreement has a provision for
raising the fee if the $1.5 million falls short of what's
needed.
Ex-RMA
President Michael Schieberl, who was instrumental in developing
the bridge project, said, when asked about this last week,
"What this contract has included in it is a large contingency
for the permitting process. ... This $1.5 million is really
based on the worst-case scenario."
He has
defended the one-bid aspect by saying that he and other
members of the board, who have considerable professional
experience with contracts and construction projects, assessed
the proposal and found it satisfactory.
The
ordinance will be considered by the supervisors again on
Sept. 30 as part of the process of making it a permanent
ordinance instead of an interim one. The supervisors' approval
of the ordinance allows Reynen & Bardis to continue
construction on the South.
The
school site, at Escuela and Stonehouse, would become the
site of 64 homes under a development map that was submitted
to the county late last year.
Homes
proposed for school site
The county is
moving forward with a proposal from River West Investments
to
build 64 single-family homes on the 13.8-acre school site
at Escuela Drive and
Stonehouse Road.
River
West submitted the map to the county late last year. (See
coverage here.)
The
map accompanying the application shows two accesses to the
site from Stonehouse Road and none from within the community.
This
spring, a River West representative met with RMA officials
to discuss modifying the map by reducing the number of homes
to about 50 and adding a park site. The goal was to gain
access from Escuela Drive and avoid the costly improvements
to Stonehouse that the county is likely to require. (See
coverage here.)
When contacted
last week, Brian Vail, president of River West Investments,
said
the firm "decided to give up on the RMA about 45 days
ago and turned in the
information the county had requested of us" to move
forward with the processing
of the map submitted last year.
"It appears
that there is no immediate interest from the school district
to buy the site. That's why we've gone back
to its alternative land use," said Vail, who added
that he would still like to sell the site to the school
district.
The parcel has
been on the community's master plan since at least
1973 as a 4-acre park site and school site, according to the county
planning department.
While the parcel is zoned for single-family housing, River
West's proposal
would require an amendment to the master plan and approval
by the Sacramento
County Board of Supervisors to clear the way for housing
to replace the park
and school designated for the site.
The number of
homes River West proposes is consistent with the RD-5 zoning
on
the property, allowing five dwelling units per acre.
"If people
don't like what I'm doing, then people need
to get a little more active out there," said Vail.
"Either work something out with the school district
so the
school district can acquire the site or (decide) if they're
willing to have
residential there. I am completely done with dealing with
the RMA."
The
RMA board said Tuesday it opposes the plan and will send
a letter to county planning with that message.
Driveway
parking, motorcycles and variances
Responding to
the issue raised by resident Wilbur Haines at previous meetings,
General Manager Greg Vorster said the association agreed
in a letter to Haines that if a resident has three vehicles
registered in the community, one may be parked in the driveway,
according to the CC&Rs.
Vorster said
the Compliance Committee did not agree with Haines about
eliminating the driveway parking permit system, whereby
residents can apply on a
yearly basis for permission to park additional vehicles
in their driveway.
Vorster said
the Compliance Committee feels there is value in the system.
Director
Elliot Sevier said he agreed with Haines about eliminating
the system and suggested that both driveway parking and
motorcycle use on the North could be handled under the CC&Rs.
See relevant passages here
and here.
According to
the CC&Rs, motorcycles are authorized vehicles that
can be driven
to a resident's home if the resident lives on the
South but they are not
allowed on the North, Sevier noted.
"There
is a variance tradition in our CC&Rs," he said.
The board's response to
residents who want to drive their motorcycles to their home
on the North or to
residents who want to park more than one car in their driveway
should be to
direct them to apply for a variance, he said.
Vorster said
motorcycle owners on the North who contact the RMA are being
told to write a letter to the association requesting a variance.
Variances require
the approval of the Architectural Review Committee and the
board, he said.
Sevier
said his assessment of the motorcycle issue did not mean
he approved of having motorcycles in the community or that
he would consider bringing his own motorcycle to his home
on the North. "The answer is absolutely no," he said
of his own motorcycle, which has an especially loud exhaust
system. "It's noisier than you know what and it shouldn't
be here."
Director
Michael Burnett, another motorcycle owner who lives on the
North, said he would like to be able to take his motorcycle
home.
Resident
Ted Hart told the board, "I think you've really opened a
can of worms here. I don't think this community has any
idea that you would be considering a variance for motorcycles
here. I would suggest to the board that you move very, very
cautiously with this. I think you need to go to the community
and find out what they really feel."
Vorster
recommended dialogue between the Compliance Committee and
the board about the driveway parking permits.
Vorster
explained that under the present system of enforcement for
driveway parking, the Community Services District checks
the cars to see if a permit has been issued for them. The
association pays the district for this service, which is
carried out during the night by patrol officers on their
rounds. Permits for parking a single car could be eliminated,
Vorster suggested, by having the CSD verify that the vehicle
is registered with the district and therefore meets the
CC&R requirement for parking one vehicle in the driveway.
Code
of conduct for committee members
The
board discussed and approved a code of conduct for committee
members developed by the Governing Documents Committee.
The code is now available for a 30-day public review period
before the board adopts it as policy. (See the document
here.)
The code addresses
such issues as how many committees a resident can belong
to
and whether multiple family members should be allowed on
the same committee.
The board directed
the committee to develop the policy after controversy
erupted this spring over representation on numerous committees
by the families
of two board members, Director Pamela Haines and then-President
Michael
Schieberl.
Schieberl
characterized the push for a policy as a personal attack
and an attack on his family. At the time, he and his family
held eight seats on seven committees.
Wilbur
Haines, Director Pamela Haines' husband, resigned from the
Communications and Maintenance committees to serve on the
Governing Documents Committee, which drew up the code of
conduct.
Tuesday's
board review of the Governing Documents Committee's suggested
policy lasted about 40 minutes. The two committee sessions
that produced the document lasted about seven hours as committee
members worked their way through disagreements to arrive
at a consensus.
Board
rejects sound wall liability
The
board voted to reject assuming responsibility for the 12-
to 15-foot sound wall for the Greens subdivision on the
South after it was included as an amendment to the annexation
document for the Greens.
General
Manager Greg Vorster said the sound wall and a retaining
wall erected in front of it for structural integrity are
located on the individual lots in the subdivision and not
on common area or on the Caltrans right of way for Highway
16.
Vorster
said the county required the wall and it is built to Caltrans
standards.
He recommended
approving the annexation document with an amendment stipulating
that the RMA would be responsible for keeping the exterior
wall clean and free of graffiti but would assume no responsibility
for replacing it or maintaining its structural integrity.
The board approved the annexation document with that amendment.
