DEER CREEK LANDOWNERS, INC.

Minutes of General Meeting     May 21, 2011

Scopazzi’s Restaurant, Boulder Creek, CA 95006

 

 

Meeting called to order at: 1:25 p.m. by President Joseph Sundrum.  All officers present at the meeting (Joseph, Tys, Tom, Manuela, Joy, Dave, Gary). Introductions all around.  Represented landowners (either in person or by proxy: Armanini/Ballestrase, Chandik, Digiorgio, Field/Wolf, Fitch, Freeman/Kay, Gutierrez, Isaksen, L Johnson, Kelly, Marshall, McClelland/Feldman, McGuire, Miller, Moustirats, Parnello, Tucker, Vachher-Gnanathurai, Navarette/Mundy, Pierce, Radzinsky Raquelle/Bird, Sniffen, Speck, Sundrum, O’Neal. Motion to approve minutes from November general membership meeting by Dave, 2nd by Arden, approved.

Secretary’s Report

While Manuela was speaking about the Red-Tag that she and Tom rec’d, John M asked why this was being discussed during the Secretary’s report and if it was part of the Secretary’s report; Manuela replied that it was part of the Secretary’s report.   Motion to approve Sec’ty report by John H (proxy for L Johnson), 2nd by Dave, approved.  Also posted on DCLI website.

Secretary’s report – DCLI – 5 21 11 –

In 2008 Jose Radzinsky, our President at the time, wisely urged DCLI to make sure that liens were placed on all parcels in arrears, not as punitive action, but simply to protect DCLI if a sale or refinance took place – a sale going thru escrow will not close if there is a lien.   Over the years we have collected thousands of dollars to use on the road system when the money from outstanding liens was collected.   The reason I bring this up is that we have heard remarks of anger at Board members for placing liens.  And I want the membership to know that it is not personal.  I would like everybody to know that I have much more interesting things to do with my time than prepare a lien, arrange for a notary to get 4 board member signatures notarized, get a check to pay the notary, get a check to pay recording costs, and either mail in or go down to the Recorder’s Office in Santa Cruz to record the lien. I’d love it never to have to place another lien.

An update about the Small Claims suit.  Some of you know already and some not, that Jose is suing DCLI. I went once already on May 5th  to Small Claims Court in Watsonville to request that the original suit be dismissed, because I was mistakenly listed as the Defendant.  That suit was dismissed, Jose refiled, and the new hearing is set for July 7th.    A copy of the suit has been posted on the Deer Creek Landowners website.   

Some of you know already that in February someone called the County to get Tom and my home red-tagged for not being permitted.  The update on that: the inspectors came to our house, checked all our wet-stamped documents, told us that we had built to code, and that the only violation we had is that we didn’t have a building permit.  They were very aware that nobody up here can get a permit because Cal-Fire won’t sign off on the road system.  There is presently a program in the works at the County called the Construction Legalization Program.  When it is sent down from Planning to the Board of Supervisors, and nobody seems to know when that will be, they will either accept or reject it.  In the meantime, nobody seems to know what it will consist of, and so until the Supervisors vote on it, no red-tags are being recorded against any parcels.  The inspectors that came to our house are well aware that whoever called the county to have us red-tagged did it out of anger at Tom or me.  And though the name of that person is kept confidential, if it turns out that the person has a history of calling the Planning Department on his neighbors, the County will be aware of it.  There are discussions by the County to amend the red-tag policy so that there has to be an actual impact on the environment or an actual impact on the person who calls to get someone red-tagged; that someone can’t just call the County because they’re seeking revenge on a neighbor.

Just for information: there are non-members who use Deer Creek Road and refuse to pay their fair share, and we cannot lien them because their parcels are not encumbered by our JMA; however, we have in the past been successful in getting Judgments against the landowners.

Please make sure you’ve signed in and that I have your correct address.  If I can send correspondence to you via email – the minutes and meeting announcements, etc. – it will save us postage and trees and make it a little easier for the Secretary.

Respectfully submitted,

Emmanuela Raquelle

Secretary, DCLI

 

Treasurer’s Report

This is the 1st year that hard copies were not passed out, but instead Tys projected the report onto the wall.  Tys told us that for the two years he’s been only the figurehead [Ed note: not true] and the digital person, and that Ron has done the hard work. The Treasurer’s report is triple checked by Arden, Ron, and Tys.  If we have any questions, we’re to ask Ron; if there are account questions, let Tys know.   Hearty round of applause for Tys – this is his last meeting as Treasurer of DCLI. 

Tys explained what the algorithm is based on and why we’re billed what we’re billed.  3 main factors:

·         what the members voting decide each fiscal year what projects they want done;

·         resident and non-resident categories - residents care more about the state of the road, i.e., if we are residents and the road falls apart, we can’t get home or get out; a non-resident can simply turn around and drive home; 

·         the distance of road that we drive from Bear Creek Road to our properties (that are on the maintained part of the road system).  A number of years ago Mac measured all properties from BCR. 

Discussion about discrepancy between what is billed and what is collected and what is spent.  30% of people don’t pay their dues (or in the case of 845s, their contribution); 5 people haven’t paid in more than 5 years; 12 people haven’t paid for 2 years; 23 people who are in arrears since last billing. Question and comment:  what about a ‘gardener’ who is a non-resident but uses the road more frequently that does a resident; gardeners need to take responsibility for giving more money.  Tys said that the system isn’t perfect, but save putting up a gate and having a key card to track people, this seems to be the best we can do.  Joseph asked that we hold off on questions about billing because there will be presentations on that subject later in the meeting. A thank you to Tys for all his work and a standing ovation – this is Tys’ last year as Treasurer.  Motion by Hilary to approve Treasurer’s report, 2nd by Rich, approved.  Hard copy enclosed and posted on website.

 

Road Managers’ report – FY 2010-2011 review

This is the first part of the report and the budget decisions will be made after the billing presentations by Joy and Jose.  Tom projected photo of projects that have been completed since the last meeting.  

 

Tom Bird, Road Manager

Sheriff’s Presentation:

Purpose:  To inform those engaged in the growing of legal horticultural medicinal products of the legal limits for such an enterprise.  The Sheriff has told us that they would rather spend their time chasing the real bad guys rather than rappelling into our back yards to determine if we are legal or not. So they are here to inform us about what’s legal and what’s not.  If you’re too shy or embarrassed to ask questions or wish to remain incognito, fill out these cards with your questions and we’ll be happy to have an innocent bystander read them for you.  

Slide Presentation:

CALFIRE Status:

They still want to complete the projects they promised however (as we have all heard) the State of CA is broke.  Chief Rich Sampson’s manpower staffing has been cut (including 4 heavy equipment operators), their equipment is being sold off (good deals if your looking for bulldozers, etc.), no overtime or materials funding is avail.

They are trying to slip in some work under a grant to continue the Kings Cr. Truck trail fire break and re-grade Skyview from the North end at the park boundary to the South end at the top of Two Bar Rd.  And they still want to do Lost Valley, They are scared to death there may have a fire in our area and they want be able to get up that road with fire equipment.

3rd Bridge Slide:

In the process of getting some quotes to do this project some questions came up from contractors so I have brought in some experts to evaluate the slide and help determine the best course of action.

Rich Caselle from the U.S. Dept. of Agr. (hydrologist and erosion control specialist) came out and basically said yep its an active slide that could go tomorrow or 10 yrs from tomorrow but it will go some day depending on a whole host of events.  He recommended we talk to a Geologist.  I contacted Eric Zimm who came out and basically parroted what R. Casselle said but recommended we contact a GeoTec Eng.  I contacted Brian Bauldry who came out on an initial evaluation visit

Five Year Plan:

In Nov. 2005 we received this Deer Creek Watershed Road Erosion Assessment as a result of a $ 125K grant from SCCRCD and The CA Coastal Conservancy.  This report was “designed to identified and quantify all recognizable current and future sources of erosion and sediment delivery along approximately 15 miles of our private rural roads.”   This report provided us with “a prioritized plan-of-action for cost effective erosion prevention and control” and drainage improvements of our entire road system. Those improvements done in accordance with practices defined in this Handbook for Forest and Ranch Roads .

Beginning in 2006, the Board of Directors initiated a 5 year plan to use this report as our guideline for road projects to improve our infrastructure that would act as a our platform for future enhancements to our road system.

 This year (2010-11) marks the completion of that 5 yr. effort.

 We have completed all of the high priority projects and we now have an infrastructure in place (by infrastructure we mean 800’ new culverts, rolling dips, in/out slope, new bridge, New asphalt in front and thanks to logging project, drainage improvements on Ltl Buck) to build upon and it is now time to develop our next 5 yr. plan.  So as we select our project options for the coming year and subsequent years,  keep in mind we should be selecting and incorporating these projects as a part of a 5 yr. plan not just a series of independent 1 yr plans.

 

 

 

Proposed Changes to the Billing Algorithm

Jose’s proposal:  this is a proposal for an alternative way for us to be billed.  Jose projected his report.  This is posted on the web and was enclosed with Notice of Meeting  

 Jose addressed his suit against DCLI as a result of his trying to resolve his issues with the Board of Directors and being unsuccessful.  Jose stated that he didn’t want to pay for any part of the road system that he doesn’t use.  This comment elicited much emotion , and discussion. Some members became angry and left the room. Impassioned speech by Hillary about us being a community, and that we are capable of developing a community spirit and love.

Joy’s proposal:  Joy proposed 3 changes to make minor changes to the billing algorithm:

·         Create a separate pool for the front of the road to the yellow gate;

·         Change the language of the algorithm so that residents are charged 2x non-residents. This change would have a negligible on the bills created currently, but would keep bills relatively unchanged if there is a significant shift in membership towards (or away from) one of the resident/non-resident categories.

·         Explicitly declare how to charge for a special assessment, for example for a paving project.

Vote to Change the Billing Algorithm

Request to poll those present to see which method most appeals to them: the collective feeling, or the ‘pay only for what we drive’. Joseph gave us three choices: keep the billing system the way it is; adopt Jose’s; adopt Joy’s. Neither Joy’s nor Jose’s proposal had enough votes to pass, so our present billing algorithm stands. 

 

Road Managers’ report – FY 2011-12 recommended projects

Suggestions had been solicited from various members, and from that list the projects that are under discussion today were developed.  Five years ago, DCLI received a grant to have a road assessment done to determine what projects would be necessary to prevent erosion and promote drainage.  This assessment has been used as a guidepost.  Tom discussed the benefits of paving; our 5 year plan that was developed has paid off .  

Tom presented the Board-suggested projects, and the membership voted to do or not to do. The list of approved and non-approved projects follows immediately below.

Tom reported the results of his meeting with the Geotech people re the slide south of the 3rd Bridge; the conclusion was that it was a slide that could go at any time, and some holes would need to be drilled and soil samples taken to determine whether the slide was deep or shallow. 

Discussion about applying for a loan to allow us to pave the road system.  Suggestions were to apply for an SBA loan, or have a landowner or two front the money at a non-interest loan.  Joy listed the projects that were agreed upon - $22,190.10, which includes $4,000 in annual maintenance. Tys mentioned that last  year’s budget was $27 +, which means our bills will be lower, or at least not higher.   Motion to accept by Arden, 2nd by Amit, accepted.

Approved Projects for 2011-2012

First, the approved policy is to ensure that the emergency fund of $5,000 is fully funded at the beginning of each fiscal year.

 

Where

What

Cost estimate

Comments

All

General Maintenance, including ditching

        4,000

DCR: Slide at 3rd bridge

Testing the site

        4,000

Testing only, not fixing it

Upper Ramble, the S-curve above Deer Creek Heights

Grade, rock, water, and roll. 

        4,200

This section is almost as bad in summer as in winter, very soft road surface.

Upper Ramble, the last few turns before Skyview

Base rock

        1,050

This is a sloppy turn when it’s wet; bumpy when it’s dry.

Jack’s Road

New culvert

        1,200

Very high priority. Need a backhoe to do the work.

DCR, 3rd bridge upstream side

Swale/ditch to dump water into creek at the bottom of the Willis driveway

            430

Improve drainage

DCR, 3rd bridge, downstream side-

Regrade with drain rock (one load), improve ditching, full xfer

        1,250

Improve drainage

DCR: BCR to first bridge

Ditching

              60

Option C: DCR: 3rd bridge to Ramble

2 culverts plus ditching

        4,000

Must do before any other improvement to this section

DCR: Ron’s Road / yellow gate to 3rd bridge

Repair drainage and add culvert

        2,000

Double-ditching, get water from ditch #2 into the culvert. The source of the problem is on Ron’s Rd, not DCLI roads.

DCR, new culvert installed by Shanti before the 2nd bridge

Add downspout

               -  

Work party

Total

 

$22,190

 

 

Projects Not Approved for 2011-2012

Where

What

Cost estimate

Comments

DCR, 3rd bridge, downstream side

Add a gutter with drain across the road at the edge of the asphalt

$2K

Drain spring on East side of road -basically install a French drain system

 

DCR, 3rd bridge, downstream side

Asphalt the approach to the bridge

$5,000

See paving options below

 

DCR: Slide at 3rd bridge

Slide stabilization. Project details TBD.

$20K **

A $13k project was approved for 2010-11, but work has not been done.

 

Hartman Creek

One xfer rock, grade, water and roll

$1,530

May be covered by Heavy Vehicle Fees

 

DCR from Judy to pavement

Baserock, grading

$1,500

The road is very sloppy right there.

 

DCR: 3rd bridge to Ramble

Rip, grade, ditch, rock, roll, water

$5,200

*1

 

All paved sections

Fill potholes and seal

$15,500

Seal with Reed & Graham ‘Overcoat’ ($.10 per sq ft.

 

DCR, 1st bridge to Yellow gate

General maintenance, i.e., fill potholes & clear ditches

$370 for rock

Work party

 

Paved sections

Cheapo-sealing option

        1,000

Emergency spot fix

 

 

Paving Projects, Not Approved for 2011-2012

Where

What

Cost estimate

Comments

 

DCR: 1st bridge to Palm

Pave with 2” asphalt and 3” on all bridge approaches

$50,450

Section 1

DCR: Just below Judy’s to the yellow gate

Pave with 2” asphalt

$24,400

Section 3

DCR: 3rd bridge to Ramble Rd.

Pave with 2” asphalt and 3” on all bridge approaches

$27,900

Section 6

Ramble Rd from DCR to Little Buck

Pave with 2” asphalt

$18,600

Section 7a

Ramble Rd. from Little Buck to blk gate

Pave with 2” asphalt

$23,900

Section 7b

 

Elections

President: Joseph nominated Joy Mundy, Jose nominated John Miller; vote made Joy President.   Treasurer: Arden nominated Gary who said a little about himself – small business owner, new resident, money doesn’t scare him.  Gary voted in by acclamation.  

At large board members (2): Tys nominated Amit; small business owner, wants to join and help community, will be available, lives in Aptos, property near Castle Rock, bought Schiff’s property; Amit voted in by acclamation.  Simon with his terrific British accent voted by acclamation, and Jose withdrew his nomination of John. 

 

                Motion to adjourn by Kris, 2nd by Dave, adjourned 4:10 p.m.