The HOA Board has sent a letter to all homeowners announcing threatened legal action by Morgan Creek LLC, the Golf course owners. Thy are contending that the gates interfere with free access to the golf course and should be removed or remain open. They also contend that the PFE gates and greeter cottage are on Golf course land and should be removed. The HOA and its legal team are apparently in discussions with the golf course owners and believe the gates were properly installed in conformance with the easements granted to the golf course. The board has not made us aware of the legal arguments on either side. Anyone with specific information concerning the issues is encouraged to share it here.
Stay tuned.
I read with interest the HOA notice of threatening letters from MC Golf Club. Since the crux of the letters dealt primarily with access to the Golf Club, I thought I would do a little research as I have a copy of the RECIPROCAL EASEMENT AGREEMENT dated December 4, 2002. While I am not an attorney, nor do I have a law background, a few things stood out to me as I perused the document. If you have an interest in seeing the document, contact me thru this blog and I will get a copy of the pages I cite to you.
In RECITAL D on page 1, I paraphrase: the Residential Developer plans to form an Association (HOA) to own and maintain the Common Area and common improvements located within the Project, which shall consist of, among other things, all roadways within the Project. Also, in RECITAL E on page 2, it addresses Access Easement Agreement (AEA) which mentions that “. . . in order that persons desiring entrance to the Golf Course may enter the Golf Course from Vineyard Road.” There is NO mention of access from any other roadway (i.e. PFE or Walerga). Golf Club had many opportunities to protest the installation of the gates, but it appears from my viewpoint that they did not. I have attended most of the HOA meetings and I noticed Golf Club was present at many of those meetings, and, in fact, the CG owner, Charlie Gibson, complimented me at one meeting after I stated my concern about Greeter coverage at the Vineyard Gate given the other gates would be unmanned.
An issue that Golf Club does not mention in their letters, is their responsibility and maintenance of the Putting Greens in the Golf Villas. In this document on page 2, ARTICLE 1. INSTALLATION, MAINTENANCE AND USE OF PUTTING GREENS, it reads: A. Golf Developer hereby agrees that it shall install and maintain the Putting Greens. The Putting Greens shall be of a type, and shall be installed and maintained in a condition consistent with that of the Golf Course. Clearly, the Villa putting greens are not on par with the Golf Club’s or the GC would have no golfers playing there. I, and many Villa residents, have been complaining for years about the extremely poor condition of the Villa putting greens. In fact, not that long ago, a meeting was held at Ed Deala’s home with Charlie Gibson to attempt to resolve this issue. I, as Chairman of the MC Landscape Committee, and John Carey, the BOD President, also attended this meeting. Again, no steps were ever taken to remedy the putting greens and they look just as bad today as they have for the last 10 years!
My contention is, if Golf Club is in a litigious mood, perhaps we should respond to them with litigation over their Breach of Contract and bad faith action! It’s about time.
I agree with the comments previously stated by Joe Sanfilippo. While no one wants or needs litigation, my past experience in the capital equipment business taught me you fight fire with fire. Then one hopes after a few skirmishes a settlement is reached.
But first let’s make sure all our pertinent arguments are truly factual.
Just curious, does the upkeep of the villa putting greens fall under your guidance/responsibility as Chairman of the Landscape Committee or have you been complaining for years as a resident? 10 years seems like an unreasonably long time to be complaining with no satisfactory remediation action or resolution.
Both – as a resident and on the LC. Yes, you are correct, 10 years is a long time to be complaining, but little action was taken by the Board against the golf club. Promises were made but never kept. Unfortunately, as an individual, I was powerless.
I find it so hard to believe that there is a case here. Charlie was a homeowner at the time of the vote, attended meetings regarding the gates & to my knowledge never brought objections up or tried to stop the gates from going in. No legal action from Charlie prior to the gates going in.
If I’m incorrect, please advise.
I agree. It’s time this association be proactive to save our community.
Mr. Sanfilippo, thank you so much for your helpful post.
I am not a realtor, but I told my realtor friend about the threat of litigation. She said that most loan companies will not finance a home loan if the HOA is under litigation. Clearly, this could have serious implications for many of the properties for sale in Morgan Creek.
While I agree with the comments about being proactive, I hope we can come to an agreement without involving the HOA in a lawsuit.
Me too!
We need to elect board members who are willing to stand up to the golf course owner and direct our attorneys (neither of which they do today). Our current board President is very weak (fortunately, his house is on the market and he is leaving the community). The elections are coming up this fall and it’s time to elect a board that is accountable to Morgan Creek owners and our intrests. Let’s vote out the old guard and get a new, stronger board elected this October.
Amen McNeighbor! Weak and arrogant is a very strange and unusual combination. I said this a while back in another post that his legacy will be the Golf Course and the Gates. Sooner he sells and leaves his post the better.
Excellent – two strong candidates for the board “Phil” and “mcneighbor”. I look forward to seeing your candidacy and resumes in the upcoming elections.
I assume you will be standing for the position of President or one of the board positions in order to create a stronger board.
i know I have a stupid question: but what the heck is going on here? If the cottages and gates were put in place, didn’t they have to permits and confirm no easement issues, no property crossing, etc. Isn’t that what we pay for in our HOA dues? If cottages and gates are put in place, permits are pulled, property line are verified. My point is there should not be this battle if the HOA did due diligence, correct? Then what is exactly going on here? Rumor mill is the HOA has spent a lot of money going back and forth. Why are we going back and forth. The HOA either confirmed they were building the gates on community property and not golf party…. please someone provide me with documentation that explains things… better!
I have an idea and I don’t know what others will think of it but I will put it out there. These gates just don’t work for security despite best efforts. Two options would be 1. tire puncture system that engages after one car 2. (barrier arm mechanism, which I think would work well) http://gatesnfences.com/LiftMaster/LiftMaster-MegaArmTower-MADCBB3-Barrier-Gate-Openers-High-Traffic-Commercial-Operators.html
Until then….why don’t we just leave the gates open during the day while still recording those entering the neighborhood. Maybe a big sign “all entering vehicle information is being recorded”. That way we wouldn’t need any security during the day except maybe one who drives around. Close the gates at dark. Then at night have the one attendant as they do now. Once the system is improved with second entry control then close the gates again. This would get Charlie off our back in the meantime.
Again, this is my thought. Be nice…..
I want to add to my post that the barrier arm mechanism would be after entry through the gate so that only 1 car per opening is allowed. Also the ONLY thing that happens is the wood is broken is someone tries to run it.
First, the gates were never intended for security – they were added to give the community greater privacy, better controls and budget savings vs the greeters who were costing us $550,000 per year and rising. And, let’s not forget that the greeters who were our HOA’s most expensive budget item were also the source of the most frequent complaints.
Secondly, for the benefit those that did not go through the very extensive selection process for the type of system that would be installed in our community, the arm controls were ruled out by Placer County when they informed our gate committee back in 2012 – 2013 that they would not approve that type of gate control system for our community.
Finally, for the benefit of the many homeowners that were not living here at the time or were not engaged in the gate selection process, the vehicular gates for our community were approved in 2013. Budget considerations delayed their installation until 2017. The community vote that was held in 2017 regarding the vehicular gate installation was needed to authorize the 3 year loan to pay for the gates, not to approve the gates
Excellent points Jim. Thanks for sharing your insight and bringing clarity to this, apparently, misunderstood gate business.
Thanks very much for the details on this issue, much appreciated. It is true I was not involved in the process so am certainly accepting of the choice of the gate system. I think many of us truly believed the gates were for security. The idea that they are just providing us privacy is a total surprise for me. In that context though they are probably working.
I’ve noticed that the gates on PFE have remained opened. Do you think this is in response to the lawsuit?
Rumors are litigation is moving forward. Any news or facts to share? Lots of innuendo around this subject.
There is no litigation at this time – still in discussions with the attorneys.