| Filed under

The Pension Trust Fund, owners of the undeveloped land in Rancho Murieta North, has installed "NO TRESPASSING" signs at the entrance to their properties in the back area of the community.

This follows complaints about nighttime parties and bonfires in the back area near the east edge of the community's land. Security has reported past conversations with the PTF about addressing this with gates, fences, CC&Rs, rock barriers or signs. The signs are the PTF's response, according to Security Chief Greg Remson.

He said Wednesday that after-dark presence or campfires on PTF property will be treated as trespassing, and the sheriff's department may be called for assistance.


Candy Chand's picture
Joined: 08/15/2007
Posts: 304
Post rating: 811

Fine except

It depends on where the signs are placed. The Public Reports from the Dept of Real Estate (given to all North home owners and most subdivisions in the south) specifically give residents the right to cross PTF development land to access the rivers and lakes. Those rights can't be taken back in a bait and switch effort, after the fact. So, if there's blocked access, there's a huge legal problem. If not, so be it.

No burning signs should have been placed on the land all along. It's h orrible that anyone would start a bonfire. Just an accident waiting to happen.

Candy Chand  955 2027

Jim Danforth's picture
Joined: 04/20/2010
Posts: 1
Post rating: 0

:)

I have seen kids drinking down by the river when i was fishing and just told them to dispose of  the beer bottles properly.  I agree there should be no fires.  Kids are going to party somewhere, it is probably better down by the lake than some place in sacramento where there is going to be a gang shooting.

Wilbur Haines's picture
Joined: 08/07/2007
Posts: 474
Post rating: 470

Concur

Candy's right, we have use rights in that land, just as they insist upon ingress-egress rights across ours.

And yes, the kids are going to party somewhere.  Centuries of pontificating by adults has failed to change that fact of life.

Candy Chand's picture
Joined: 08/15/2007
Posts: 304
Post rating: 811

buyers of ptf land

Whoever buys that PTF land should receive those DRE offical Public Reports as disclosures. Residents' rights to cross that land, run with the land, (sale or not) no matter who ends up buying the property,.

Candy Chand

RM.com's picture
Joined: 06/19/2007
Posts: 27727
Post rating: 1387

If you haven't seen the sign...

If you haven't seen the sign, here's what you'll find at the end of Camino Del Lago going to Clementia. There already was a no-trespassing sign with park hours and other restrictions, and now there's a PTF sign.

Signs

Signs

Signs

Candy Chand's picture
Joined: 08/15/2007
Posts: 304
Post rating: 811

What?

I'm too lazy to drive down there, but is that sign indicating we can't travel the road to the lake? Seriously? Does PTF have any idea that the official state Public Reports (that THEY wrote and submitted to the Department of Real Estate in order to sell our community to US) states they can't do this? Honestly. Unbelievable.

Candy Chand.

Lisa Taylor's picture
Joined: 01/09/2008
Posts: 365
Post rating: 30

No Trespassing

I wonder if anyone has the wording handy that is included in those Public Reports?

Seems to me that this is something that the folks in charge of security would have carefully thought out, since they need to know what is considered trespassing or not - they need to know when to call SSD.  Perhaps Chief Remson or Ed Crouse can release this information to the community?

Candy Chand's picture
Joined: 08/15/2007
Posts: 304
Post rating: 811

Yes

Yes, Lisa. I have the public reports. I got them from DRE ages ago. They are public record and available to anyone. I even gave copies to RMA a few years ago. They should still be on file

Candy Chand

Lisa Taylor's picture
Joined: 01/09/2008
Posts: 365
Post rating: 30

Clarification from CSD

Thank you Candy.

It seems to me that CSD, being proactive on this topic, should be making this public, and clarifying the situation for the residents.  Or is this going to be another situation where RMA has to be proactive about protecting the rights of those in their association?

When the folks over at CSD didn't understand the authority of their own security officers, I had to go down to the court house and copy all the material and dig through it, and even provide some copies to their own lawyer.  I wonder if this is a similar situation?

Candy Chand's picture
Joined: 08/15/2007
Posts: 304
Post rating: 811

My guess

is the CSD security staff are merely trying to do their job, based on the landowner's claims of "no trespassing" rights. My other guess is, the PTF doesn't even remember what they wrote in those public reports so many years ago.  Our access rights can't be terminated after we buy our homes. I did send an email to the CA. Dept of Real Estate (the commissioner was quite helpful in the past) . We'll see...

Candy Chand

Doug Lewis's picture
Joined: 08/08/2007
Posts: 165
Post rating: 322

trespass

Im not that familiar with California law but under 602 PC there is a section J that applies to prohibiting the lighting of fires on someones property.  It seems that even though we have written permission to enter the property for certain activities or for access to certain areas within the property it doesnt give anyone permission to commit other acts upon the property such as burning, hunting, vandalism, cutting trees etc.  The way the law is written there are seems to be a variety of "actions" upon someones property that can be enforced.  When posting the signs could the PTF be referring to section J of the code?  The law also states at what distances the signs must be posted to be enforceable. 

If someone enters a store and has the right to do so legally it doesnt give them the right to set up camp, build a fire, go into the stores backrooms etc.  Arent they then there illegally as they are committing prohibited acts???

On the underage drinking aspect, even though it may be fighting the impossible I dont feel as a community we should just have the attitude of let um drink,  they're going to do it somewhere anyway.  If we take that attitude we may as well install some motel rooms out in the back 40 as teens are probably going to do that somewhere too.  I remember a death investigation I handled where a campfire at the beach ended up with a young man dead. I dont think those parents had the " just let them do it"  attitude the following morning.   

Doug Lewis

 

Doug Lewis

Your comments