I agree that if the School District
will give us permission to put the mailboxes on 25ft or more of
their property with room to pull-out and make U-turns it's a
better site than #3.
How long will it take for the School
District to make the decision? I think we should be simultaneously
sending the letter of intent to the owners of the property at site
#3?
I'll waiting on an ok from Jim for
authorization to send the letter regarding site #3 that I will pay
for. ? Sending the letter regarding site #3 is not a commitment to
installing at site #3. I just want to keep this moving forward.
Ken
On 3/25/2021 9:10 PM, Ken Cameron via
groups.io wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Jimmy, Does does the School District
know there is no easement?
Ken
On 3/25/2021 8:52 PM, James Ruby
wrote:
Everyone,?
I called the board of supervisors for Palominas School District.
They have submitted a request to their attorney to see if they
can simply give us authorization to use the easement. I would
like to see what the result is. Until then I am giving a thumbs
down.?
I just don't want to sacrifice a better option for a sooner
option.?
Jimmy
?
|
Re: Request to send letter to property owner of site #3
Not sure if Jim replied to this.?
However, after the meeting we discussed a few things. I can tell you his position is the same as mine.?
We think #1 is the best option for these reasons.?
1. The mailboxes would be located on the east side of the road which is convenient.?
2. The pull out is on private property. If we lose access to the pull out, where will we park??
We don't want to rush for a quick option when we could have a better option.?
However, we do agree that if option #1 is not feedable, option #3 is best.?
I have contacted Palominas Board and have requested permission to use the easement. They advised me they are currently running it by their attorney. I would like to at least see what they say.?
Second, the postmaster has the ultimate say in where mail boxes go. Once they are placed, it become extremely difficult to move them.?
|
Jimmy, Does does the School District
know there is no easement?
Ken
On 3/25/2021 8:52 PM, James Ruby wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Everyone,?
I called the board of supervisors for Palominas School District.
They have submitted a request to their attorney to see if they can
simply give us authorization to use the easement. I would like to
see what the result is. Until then I am giving a thumbs down.?
I just don't want to sacrifice a better option for a sooner
option.?
Jimmy
?
|
Everyone,?
I called the board of supervisors for Palominas School District. They have submitted a request to their attorney to see if they can simply give us authorization to use the easement. I would like to see what the result is. Until then I am giving a thumbs down.?
I just don't want to sacrifice a better option for a sooner option.?
Jimmy
?
|
School District and Vista del Oro Easements
Hi All,
To review, what is an easement? It is a right
for non-property
owners to do certain things on some specific area in someone
else’s property. Typically,
these rights are to enter and exit (ingress and egress) and
install utilities,
but these rights can be much broader in specific easement
agreements.
When I first went to the Assessors office some
months ago,
the woman at the counter told me that there was a 40’ easement
along the west side
of the Palominas School District and Vista Del Oro HOA properties.
She told ?me this based on
the Assessors map book (see
attached IMG_4981_web.jpg, IMG_4983_web.jpg). It’s taken me
sometime to realize
that the map is at least a decade out of date.
It turns out that those 40’ easements were sold
or deeded to
the Road District in 2011. Those former easements are now owned by
the
Road District, and is the land the road is on. Attached is the
document showing the land transfer that
the President of the Vista Del Oro HOA sent me last Sunday
(2011-01-20 Deed
(VDO to Fairfield).pdf).
The easement for the School District is a
little more
complicated, but the important documentation is attached (School
District
Docs001.pdf). I’ve been told that the 3 Canyons HOA gave the
property to the
School District, I suspect in 1996. The first document, 960511148,
in the pdf
is an easement agreement between the School District and 3 Canyons
defining the
easement as 40’. The second document, 981237679, is the last page
of the pdf,
and it is a quit-claim deed where the School District sold the 40’
easement to
3 Canyons in 1998 for $4,964. (I don’t know the reason for that
transaction.).
In 2011 the Road District obtained that land from 3 Canyons, but I
don’t have
the documentation for that.
On the attached Figures 20 and 21, notice that
the Road
District land actually consists of two parcels. Parcel 10417002Z
is the former School
District easement and parcel 10417049C is the former Vista Del Oro
easement.
Clearly there is no longer an easement along
the west side
of the School District and Vista Del Oro properties, so we have no
rights on
their land. However, they could give us permission to install
mailboxes on their
property. The President of the Vista Del Oro HOA said, “I’m pretty
sure that
VDO would choose not to relinquish any additional property for
this project.”. I
believe that Jim is pursuing permission from the School District,
but I’ve heard
nothing.
Ken
|
Re: Request to send letter to property owner of site #3
Jim,
Honestly, I don’t understand all these
delays, but if you
can answer the following questions, perhaps it will explain the
delays.
(1) Why are you optimistic that the school
district will allow
installation of the mailboxes on their property? If their
situation is like
Vista Del Oro, what was the 40’ easement along the west side of
their property was
deeded or sold to the Road District. Most likely, there no
longer is an easement
for us to install the boxes on. But even if there is an
easement, we still need
their permission.
(2) If the school district will not allow
installation on
their property or easement, where would you propose the
mailboxes be installed?
(3) You seem to have some serious
reservations about site #3
west. What are they?
(4) You say, “I believe we can get what we
want without him
[Nathan Williams]”. What do we want and how are we going to get
it without an attorney
being involved? Some kind of legal agreement must be drawn up
and recorded in
the Recorder Office.
Your objection to Nathan sending a letter of
intent to the property owner
of site #3 appears to be financial. That’s not a problem. I
will be happy to pay all his charges for sending the letter. I
promise you, at
this point, nothing would make my happier! I am eager to pay!
If Nathan sends the letter in the next few
days, the school
district turns us down, and the surveyors come out, then perhaps
we could have
the mailboxes installed in about 45 days, say about May 1.
I will be happy to personally interact with
the surveyors.
We need very little information from them.
I don’t understand your comment about the
mailboxes. "16" refers to the number of tenant doors, not ft.
The mailboxes I
discussed are the standard ones exactly like they have at Vista
Del Oro, Covey
Run, and the main part of Wild Horse.
Ken
On 3/22/2021 10:44 AM, Jim Ruby wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Ken, read your email and because I didn’t fully
comprehend the conversation, I would like a little time to
digest this and seek my own council on this matter. ? I as
acting President of FRMID prefer not to make decisions by
myself.? I like your idea of shotgunning all the sites, but I
would like to wait on the surveyor to provide clarity before we
engage our attorney. Nathan’s fees are not cheep and also not
included in the budget.? I also believe we can get what we want
without him. I sincerely appreciate your hard work and
understand your deadline on this matter! It would also help if
we had something from the Postal Service in reference to
guidelines for cluster mailboxes, do we really need 16 ft or
would ?8 ft ?suffice? It might be easier to sell 8 rather than
16!?
Jim
Jim,
The email exchange with the President
of the Vista Del Oro was both informative and I think
predictable. The documents he sent shows that they did
transfer the 40’ easement along the west side of their
property to the Road District. Apparently, there is no
longer an easement there. To get the finally answer to
that may require both a lawyer and surveyor, but in any
case, the HOA doesn’t appear interested in giving up any
more land. ?
I took another look at copy of the
Quit-Claim Deed I have for property the road is on
adjacent to the school district land. It’s dated 1998 so
it’s probably been superseded by a document I don’t have
a copy of. But I suspect the situation is the same as
with Vista Del Oro. That is, what was a 40’ easement
along the west side of the school district property is
now the land owned by the Road District.
I request that Nathan be authorized
to send the letter ASAP to the property owner of site
#3. We won’t start installation of the mailboxes at site
#3 until we receive a reply from the school district and
have the surveyor define the property line. But let’s
not waste time waiting for reply from the school
district before sending the letter.
Thanks,
Ken
|
Re: Request to send letter to property owner of site #3
Ken, read your email and because I didn’t fully comprehend the conversation, I would like a little time to digest this and seek my own council on this matter. ? I as acting President of FRMID prefer not to make decisions by myself.? I like your idea of shotgunning all the sites, but I would like to wait on the surveyor to provide clarity before we engage our attorney. Nathan’s fees are not cheep and also not included in the budget.? I also believe we can get what we want without him. I sincerely appreciate your hard work and understand your deadline on this matter! It would also help if we had something from the Postal Service in reference to guidelines for cluster mailboxes, do we really need 16 ft or would ?8 ft ?suffice? It might be easier to sell 8 rather than 16!? Jim
Jim,
The email exchange with the President of the
Vista Del Oro
was both informative and I think predictable. The documents he
sent shows that they
did transfer the 40’ easement along the west side of their
property to the Road
District. Apparently, there is no longer an easement there. To get
the finally
answer to that may require both a lawyer and surveyor, but in any
case, the HOA
doesn’t appear interested in giving up any more land. ?
I took another look at copy of the Quit-Claim
Deed I have for
property the road is on adjacent to the school district land. It’s
dated 1998
so it’s probably been superseded by a document I don’t have a copy
of. But I
suspect the situation is the same as with Vista Del Oro. That is,
what was a 40’
easement along the west side of the school district property is
now the land
owned by the Road District.
I request that Nathan be authorized to send the
letter ASAP to
the property owner of site #3. We won’t start installation of the
mailboxes at
site #3 until we receive a reply from the school district and have
the surveyor
define the property line. But let’s not waste time waiting for
reply from the
school district before sending the letter.
Thanks,
Ken
|
Request to send letter to property owner of site #3
Jim,
The email exchange with the President of the
Vista Del Oro
was both informative and I think predictable. The documents he
sent shows that they
did transfer the 40’ easement along the west side of their
property to the Road
District. Apparently, there is no longer an easement there. To get
the finally
answer to that may require both a lawyer and surveyor, but in any
case, the HOA
doesn’t appear interested in giving up any more land. ?
I took another look at copy of the Quit-Claim
Deed I have for
property the road is on adjacent to the school district land. It’s
dated 1998
so it’s probably been superseded by a document I don’t have a copy
of. But I
suspect the situation is the same as with Vista Del Oro. That is,
what was a 40’
easement along the west side of the school district property is
now the land
owned by the Road District.
I request that Nathan be authorized to send the
letter ASAP to
the property owner of site #3. We won’t start installation of the
mailboxes at
site #3 until we receive a reply from the school district and have
the surveyor
define the property line. But let’s not waste time waiting for
reply from the
school district before sending the letter.
Thanks,
Ken
|
Re: Cluster Mailboxes for Fairfield Estates (One more thing)
Lynn,
Thank you very much for the documents,
and I will certainly bring the agreement regarding chip sealing to
the Boards attention.? No, the road isn't centered on the 40'
easement. It runs closer to the east side than the west.
I greatly appreciate your time and
comments.
Ken
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Other thoughts after hitting ‘send’.
?
I assume that Fairfield road is centered on
the 40’ easement, but not positive, so you may have a
difficult time creating an area wide enough for mailboxes to
stay on RMID property and still clear the roadway.?
(I’m pretty sure that VDO would choose not
to relinquish any additional property for this project.)
?
BTW, the RMID failed to follow through on
the paved turnout condition for where S. Palisades Dr tees
into Fairfield Rd, although the county crew did dump some
stone there.?
When you next do some chip sealing, I
appreciate if you will lean on the committee to follow through
with that promise.?
?
?
?
Here you go.? John Langholff pulled the
wagon for this issue not long after I became president of VDO,
and we did a vote amongst the members and decided to deed over
the property.
Additionally, the original developer of 3
Canyons (Ernie Graves) deeded to the RMID his 40’ section
along Fairfield Rd where the 40 acres was set aside for a
future school site at that same time.?
?
?
?
Hi
Lynn,
Thanks
for getting back so quickly. That's very interesting. It's
not what the county has told me nor what is shown in the
county map book (see attached photo), but it may well be
true.? I do have a copy of the 2003 Special Warranty Deed
for the Vista Del Oro HOA that does describe the easements,
but perhaps there was a more recent change to the deed and
easement that I haven't seen.? Do you have a copy? If not,
there should be a record of that in the Recorder Office, and
I will see if I can find.
Thanks
again,
Ken
On 3/21/2021
10:40 AM, Lynn Mattingly wrote:
VDO deeded all or part of the
easement to the RMID back in 2007 or 08 so the district
could be created & the road could be improved. As
far as I recall, you should own property all the way to
3 Canyons Rd.?
Does
this jive with your records?
Regards,
Lynn Mattingly, Pres.
Cochise Vista Del Oro HOA
POB 1535, Hereford, Az 85615
vdohoapresident@...
?
On Sun, Mar 21, 2021, 8:48 AM Ken
Cameron <rocks@...>
wrote:
To:
Vista Del Oro HOA Board
From:
Ken Cameron, Fairfield Estates Road Maintenance
and Improvement District
Re:
Installation of Cluster Mailboxes
Hi
Neighbors. We are exploring potential sites for
cluster mailboxes for Fairfield Estates. There is
a 40 ft wide easement along the west side of the
Vista Del Oro property adjacent to Fairfield Cir
road, and we would like to discuss the possibility
of installing mailboxes on this easement with you.
The site would probably have to be about 16 ft
deep to allow room for the mailboxes and parking,
but we don’t have any specific location along the
easement in mind. Thank you for considering this
request.
Ken
?
|
Cluster Mailboxes for Fairfield Estates
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Here you go.? John Langholff pulled the
wagon for this issue not long after I became president of VDO,
and we did a vote amongst the members and decided to deed over
the property.
Additionally, the original developer of 3
Canyons (Ernie Graves) deeded to the RMID his 40’ section
along Fairfield Rd where the 40 acres was set aside for a
future school site at that same time.?
?
?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: Ken Cameron
<rocks@...>
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2021 11:36 AM
To: Lynn Mattingly
<vdohoapresident@...>;
[email protected]
Subject: Re: Cluster Mailboxes for Fairfield
Estates
?
Hi
Lynn,
Thanks
for getting back so quickly. That's very interesting. It's
not what the county has told me nor what is shown in the
county map book (see attached photo), but it may well be
true.? I do have a copy of the 2003 Special Warranty Deed
for the Vista Del Oro HOA that does describe the easements,
but perhaps there was a more recent change to the deed and
easement that I haven't seen.? Do you have a copy? If not,
there should be a record of that in the Recorder Office, and
I will see if I can find.
Thanks
again,
Ken
On 3/21/2021 10:40 AM, Lynn Mattingly
wrote:
VDO deeded all or part of the
easement to the RMID back in 2007 or 08 so the district
could be created & the road could be improved. As
far as I recall, you should own property all the way to
3 Canyons Rd.?
Does
this jive with your records?
Regards,
Lynn Mattingly, Pres.
Cochise Vista Del Oro HOA
POB 1535, Hereford, Az 85615
vdohoapresident@...
?
On Sun, Mar 21, 2021, 8:48 AM Ken
Cameron <rocks@...>
wrote:
To:
Vista Del Oro HOA Board
From:
Ken Cameron, Fairfield Estates Road Maintenance
and Improvement District
Re:
Installation of Cluster Mailboxes
Hi
Neighbors. We are exploring potential sites for
cluster mailboxes for Fairfield Estates. There is
a 40 ft wide easement along the west side of the
Vista Del Oro property adjacent to Fairfield Cir
road, and we would like to discuss the possibility
of installing mailboxes on this easement with you.
The site would probably have to be about 16 ft
deep to allow room for the mailboxes and parking,
but we don’t have any specific location along the
easement in mind. Thank you for considering this
request.
Ken
?
|
Re: Cluster Mailboxes for Fairfield Estates
Hi Lynn,
Thanks for getting
back so quickly. That's very interesting. It's not what the
county has told me nor what is shown in the county map book
(see attached photo), but it may well be true.? I do have a
copy of the 2003 Special Warranty Deed for the Vista Del Oro
HOA that does describe the easements, but perhaps there was a
more recent change to the deed and easement that I haven't
seen.? Do you have a copy? If not, there should be a record of
that in the Recorder Office, and I will see if I can find.
Thanks again,
Ken
On 3/21/2021 10:40 AM, Lynn Mattingly wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Hi Ken
VDO deeded all or part of the easement to the
RMID back in 2007 or 08 so the district could be created &
the road could be improved. As far as I recall, you should own
property all the way to 3 Canyons Rd.?
Does this jive with your records?
Regards,
Lynn Mattingly, Pres.
Cochise Vista Del Oro HOA
POB 1535, Hereford, Az 85615
vdohoapresident@...
On Sun, Mar 21, 2021, 8:48
AM Ken Cameron < rocks@...> wrote:
To: Vista Del Oro HOA Board
From: Ken Cameron, Fairfield
Estates Road Maintenance and Improvement District
Re: Installation of Cluster
Mailboxes
Hi Neighbors. We are exploring
potential sites for cluster mailboxes for Fairfield
Estates. There is a 40 ft wide easement along the west
side of the Vista Del Oro property adjacent to
Fairfield Cir road, and we would like to discuss the
possibility of installing mailboxes on this easement
with you. The site would probably have to be about 16
ft deep to allow room for the mailboxes and parking,
but we don’t have any specific location along the
easement in mind. Thank you for considering this
request.
Ken
|
Cluster Mailboxes for Fairfield Estates
To: Vista Del Oro HOA Board
From: Ken Cameron, Fairfield Estates Road
Maintenance and
Improvement District
Re: Installation of Cluster Mailboxes
Hi Neighbors. We are exploring potential sites
for cluster mailboxes
for Fairfield Estates. There is a 40 ft wide easement along the
west side of the Vista
Del Oro property adjacent to Fairfield Cir road, and we would like
to discuss
the possibility of installing mailboxes on this easement with you.
The site
would probably have to be about 16 ft deep to allow room for the
mailboxes and parking, but we don’t have any specific location
along the
easement in mind. Thank you for considering this request.
Ken
|
-------- Forwarded Message --------
thank you! I was surprised at the turnout as well.
It’s good to have participation and I believe we can finally
move forward, not like it was before!
Jimmy and I went to the county yesterday and
contacted the school district. Nathan said that was not
something he could help with. We are waiting for a few call
backs!?
The Surveyor is going to try to fit us in sometime
mid April.
On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at
10:27 PM Ken Cameron < rocks@...> wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Jim,
I just want thank you for doing an excellent job of hosting
and running
the meeting last night, and for re-starting the Road
District. I was
surprised that the turn out was so good and that everyone
was on the
same page on potentially contentious issues like money and
taxes. Well Done!
|
Hi Again All,
Believe it or not, I really don’t enjoy sending
all these
emails, and I apologize that this is in part repetitious for those
of you at
the meeting Thursday night. But I think that it’s important for
the community
to understand the constraints and why the mailboxes end up sited
wherever (and if)
they are sited.
Sharon and I are leaving for the summer in late
May, and my
personal goal is to have the mailboxes installed by the time I
leave. I started
working on this last September. Installation of the mailboxes by
late May, nine
months from last September, doesn’t seem like an unreasonable
goal. But this timetable
maybe too ambitious, and I may be more impatient for results than
the rest of
the community.
At least three things should be considered in
evaluating
potential sites: legality, spaciousness, and convenience. Legality
is by far
the most important and most time consuming, thus I propose that we
work on the
legality of three sites simultaneously. I see nothing to gain by
writing a letter
to one landowner and waiting for their decision before contacting
the next
landowner. We will just lose momentum. If more than one landowner
gives us
permission to install mailboxes, that will be fantastic. Then we
can pick the site
that is most spacious and convenient. But, I suspect that we won’t
have many
legal options. I have no favorited site; I just want to have
mailboxes.
The land situation and compass directions are
key. Regarding
the compass, just remember that east is downhill towards the San
Pedro River
and west is towards the mountains on the other side of Hy 92. The
Road District
own a 40 ft strip of land from near 3 Canyons to the beginning of
Fairfield
Estates (FE) (attached map). In FE the district doesn’t own the
land the road
is on, rather it’s on the 40ft wide easements along the west side
of private
properties. This is important because in FE there are easement
agreements
specifically between the Road District and the property owners.
The Road
District has no such easement agreements with property owners
outside of FE.
Most important, the road is about 17 ft
wide, and it runs
along the east side of the Road District property and the
easements in FE. This
means that south of FE the Road District owns only a few feet of
property east
of the road and that in FE there is only a few feet of easement
east of the
road.
Legally, the sites on the west side of the road
are the simplest
to deal with regarding mailboxes because the Road District either
owns the land
or has an easement agreement with the landowner in FE (e.g. #3
attached map). But
these sites are problematic because the surveyors haven’t been
out, and we
don’t know the exact location of the property line. We have been
told the
property line is near the fence, and the distance between the
fence and road
varies from about 15 to 23 ft. If the property line is more than a
few feet from
the fence, then the sites on the west side of the road may be too
narrow to
accommodate the mailboxes and parking.
Sites on the east side of the road must be on
the easements
of the Palominas School District (site #1) or Vista del Oro HOA
(site #2) (or in
FE, beyond the easement and on private land). The Road District
has no easement agreements
with them. The easement documents for the school district and VDO
HOA are very
generic, allowing for “ingress and egress and underground
utilities”, and are
not as broad and permissive as the agreements between the road
district and ES
landowners. The easements for the school district and VDO HOA
properties are attractive
because they are 40’ wide, and we might negotiate a more spacious
site than at #3,
if somewhat less convenient. Nevertheless, they are more
problematic legally than
site #3, and we will need permission (e.g. good will) of either
the school
district or VDO HOA to install mailboxes on their easements.
I propose that we deal with the legal issues of
sites #1,
#2, and #3 simultaneously. In fact, this has already started for
sites #1 and
#2. Jim and Jimmy are contacting Palominas School District
regarding site #1
(see a following email). I have emailed the entire Vista Del Oro
Board
regarding site #2 (see a following email).
I certainly hope the school district or the VDO
HOA approves
our request, and they do so in a timely manner. But honestly, I’m
not overly
optimistic. Both are bureaucracy with all sorts of rules, and I
don’t see that
they have any motivation to approve it. But I hope I’m wrong.
If the school district and VDO HOA turn us
down, what alternative
do we have? In that case I think site #3 on the west side of the
road is the
most attractive, even if it’s narrow.? I propose
we? have the road district
attorney, Nathan
Williams, send a letter to the property owner of site #3 telling
them we intend
to install mailboxes and giving them 30 days to respond. It’s
going to cost perhaps
a couple hundred dollars for Nathan to send the letter, but it
could save us a
lot of time in moving forward if the school district and VDO HOA
respond
negatively or don’t respond at all.
Is this moving too fast for the community?
Ken
|
Nathan thanks for your quick response. With Jim’s permission I would be for sending a letter to the school District.
Thanks again, Ken
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Mar 19, 2021, at 2:28 PM, <nathan@...> <nathan@...> wrote:
Ken,
Thanks for getting back so quickly. I'll wait on the Eller letter for now.
I wouldn't just put the mailboxes on the school district property without any kind of warning to them. If you did, you'd likely have to immediately remove the mailboxes if the school district objected. As for the Three Canyons HOA issue, I haven't reviewed their CC&R's and can't comment on Jim's understanding of those, but it sounds like that could be a hurdle too.
If you are inclined to pursue putting the mailboxes on the school property, a quick letter to them would go a long way. At the very least, you would know the district's position on the matter and could reformulate your plans if needed. And there's also the possibility that they would just approve the request.
Nathan J. Williams
Williams Melo, PLC
2107B Paseo San Luis, Suite C
Sierra Vista, Arizona 85635
520.458.2022
This electronic mail message contains information which is (a) LEGALLY PRIVILEGED, PROPRIETARY IN NATURE, OR OTHERWISE PROTECTED BY LAW FROM DISCLOSURE, and (b) intended only for the use of the Addressee (s) named herein. If you are not the Addressee (s), or the person responsible for delivering this to the Addressee (s), you are hereby notified that reading, copying, or distributing this message is prohibited. If you have received this electronic mail message in error, please contact us immediately at (520) 458-2022 and take the steps necessary to delete the message completely from your computer system. Thank you.
IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE:
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in the communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing,or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Cameron <rocks@...>
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 12:00 PM
To: nathan@...; jeruby@...; [email protected]
Subject: Re: Authorization
Nathan,
Thanks for checking back. We had a well attended meeting last night to discuss the mailboxes, and decided to have the surveyors define the property line so that we know for sure that there is enough space for the boxes and parking on the Eller's easement on the west side of Fairfield Cir. So please put the letter to the Ellers on hold for the present.
Recall that another potential site for the mailboxes is on the easement of the Palominas School District property near the intersection of 3 Canyons Rd and Fairfield Cir. It was your judgement that the Road District has a better case for installing the boxes on the Eller's easement than the school district easement because the latter is just a generic easement that allows for “ingress and egress and underground utilities” whereas the former is covered by an agreement between the Road District and a former property owner and is much broader in scope.
The school district property is a big vacant lot that isn't fenced, and most likely the school district will never build on. Jim Ruby wondered what the consequences would be if we just put the boxes there without even telling the school district. The 3 Canyons HOA requires permission from all property owners within 100 ft of boxes, so that is a potential problem.
Alternately, what do you think our chances of success would be if we had you send a letter to the school district saying we intend to put the boxes on their easement and give them 30 days to reply?
Thanks,
Ken
On 3/19/2021 9:50 AM, nathan@... wrote:
Ken and Jim,
I have everything I need to prepare the letter to the Ellers. Do I have authorization to do that?
Nathan J. Williams
Williams Melo, PLC
2107B Paseo San Luis, Suite C
Sierra Vista, Arizona 85635
520.458.2022
This electronic mail message contains information which is (a) LEGALLY PRIVILEGED, PROPRIETARY IN NATURE, OR OTHERWISE PROTECTED BY LAW FROM DISCLOSURE, and (b) intended only for the use of the Addressee (s) named herein. If you are not the Addressee (s), or the person responsible for delivering this to the Addressee (s), you are hereby notified that reading, copying, or distributing this message is prohibited. If you have received this electronic mail message in error, please contact us immediately at (520) 458-2022 and take the steps necessary to delete the message completely from your computer system. Thank you.
IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE:
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in the communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing,or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Cameron <rocks@...>
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2021 3:42 PM
To: jeruby@...; nathan@...
Subject: Authorization
Jim and Nathan,
Jim, is Nathan authorized to send the letter to the Eller's regarding the Road District's intent to install the cluster mailboxes?
Nathan, what do you need from us? Are the photos, simulation and sketch of the site plan sufficient, or do they need to be better done?
Ken
ps. Jim, thanks for joining groups.io.
|
Nathan,
Thanks for checking back. We had a well attended meeting last night to discuss the mailboxes, and decided to have the surveyors define the property line so that we know for sure that there is enough space for the boxes and parking on the Eller's easement on the west side of Fairfield Cir.? So please put the letter to the Ellers on hold for the present.
Recall that another potential site for the mailboxes is on the easement of the Palominas School District property near the intersection of 3 Canyons Rd and Fairfield Cir. It was your judgement that the Road District has a better case for installing the boxes on the Eller's easement than the school district easement because the latter is just a generic easement that allows for “ingress and egress and underground utilities” whereas the former is covered by an agreement between the Road District and a former property owner and is much broader in scope.
The school district property is a big vacant lot that isn't fenced, and most likely the school district will never build on. Jim Ruby wondered what the consequences would be if we just put the boxes there without even telling the school district. The 3 Canyons HOA requires permission from all property owners within 100 ft of boxes, so that is a potential problem.
Alternately, what do you think our chances of success would be if we had you send a letter to the school district saying we intend to put the boxes on their easement and give them 30 days to reply?
Thanks,
Ken
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 3/19/2021 9:50 AM, nathan@... wrote: Ken and Jim,
I have everything I need to prepare the letter to the Ellers. Do I have authorization to do that?
Nathan J. Williams
Williams Melo, PLC
2107B Paseo San Luis, Suite C
Sierra Vista, Arizona 85635
520.458.2022
This electronic mail message contains information which is (a) LEGALLY PRIVILEGED, PROPRIETARY IN NATURE, OR OTHERWISE PROTECTED BY LAW FROM DISCLOSURE, and (b) intended only for the use of the Addressee (s) named herein. If you are not the Addressee (s), or the person responsible for delivering this to the Addressee (s), you are hereby notified that reading, copying, or distributing this message is prohibited. If you have received this electronic mail message in error, please contact us immediately at (520) 458-2022 and take the steps necessary to delete the message completely from your computer system. Thank you.
IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE:
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in the communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing,or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Cameron <rocks@...>
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2021 3:42 PM
To: jeruby@...; nathan@...
Subject: Authorization
Jim and Nathan,
Jim, is Nathan authorized to send the letter to the Eller's regarding the Road District's intent to install the cluster mailboxes?
Nathan, what do you need from us? Are the photos, simulation and sketch of the site plan sufficient, or do they need to be better done?
Ken
ps. Jim, thanks for joining groups.io.
|
Open Board Meeting this Thursday
In case you missed the sign, Jim has called an open Board meeting for Thursday March 18 at 6:00pm at the Meeting Room of Ricardo's Restaurant to discuss and vote on rural mailboxes and review the budget.
Hope to see you there.
Ken
|
Re: Does the USPS pay for cluster mailboxes?
Hi Jim have not seen you in years!? Yes I'm looking forward to the meeting as well!!
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 11:36 AM Jim Ruby < jeruby@...> wrote: Ken, all information I’ve been given told us that USPS doesn’t provide anything, thus it was included in ?our budget for 20/21. Hearing from someone at the last meeting saying that the USPS would provide the mailboxes was promising. In my experience, whether it be with the HOA, County, City, Post Office, etc. is difficult and frustrating. ? I look forward to the board meeting this Thursday and your input! Jim Ruby ?
Good Morning Karen,
The PO will only deliver to cluster
mailboxes in developments like 3 Canyons. There are no individual
mailboxes in 3 Canyons. The developer of Fairfield Estates should
have put in cluster mailboxes with enough tenant doors for all the
lots, but he did it on the cheap with no paved roads, no
mailboxes, very shallow wells, and insufficient wells (we're on a
9 share).? My guess is that the developer of VDO installled the
mailboxes at the time the roads were paved and even before there
were any houses. At Covey Run there is a 13 door unit and a 2 door
parcel box but only three houses. Likewise at Wild Horse, the part
with the entrance on Andalusian Way, they have eight units of 16
doors, enough for 128 homes, and the development isn't even half
built out.
If you don't mind me asking, where are
you? Just curious.
Ken
On 3/14/2021 6:52 AM, Karen McKnight
wrote:
Hello I have a question also on the payment of
installation of the mailboxes.? Has anyone looked into the
developers responsibility? ? Also it might be worth checking
with the VDO HOA to see what steps they took to install their
mailboxes if this hasn't been done already? What's the
difference in installing individual mailboxes, might be cheaper
as each person would be responsible for their own mailboxes
located at their homes?? Just a thought..
Karen
There
have been two comments on
about "if the USPS will pay
for the mail boxes". If you are not on , then you didn't see
them. It's a pain for me to have two email list, and to
relay this type
of information to only a very few not on . Frankly, at this
point, I figure that if you're not on , then you're really
not
that interested in keeping up with what's going on. So, from
now on I'm
only dealing with .
However, I hope those of you who haven't
joined will
want to continue communicating with the community.
If you want to join, I will be happy to help.
The comments were:
"I thought the post office was providing the mailbox unit.
Not sure what
they charge."
and
"I was also under the impression the post office provides
and installs
the boxes"
At the only Board meeting I've been at, someone commented
that the PO
would pay for the boxes. They were going to look into it,
but I've heard
nothing more. It may be true under some circumstances, but
everything
I've read on the web is like the following:
"Appropriate mail receptacles must be provided for the
receipt of mail.
The type of mail receptacle depends on the mode of delivery
in place.
Purchase, installation, and maintenance of mail receptacles
are the
responsibility of the customer."
Most of what I've read seems to pertain to new developments,
so maybe
that doesn't pertain to us. I haven't pursued it yet because
it makes no
sense to me. Why would the USPS pay for cluster mailboxes so
we will
stop paying to rent boxes at the post office? But life often
doesn't
make sense, lol.
In any case, I was going to ask the Postmaster, Doug Hover,
about it
when I talked to him about approving the site.? Back in
September when
this all started, he did come out and approve the site at
the "pull-out"
on the east side of Fairfield Cir directly across from the
present
preferred site. But the approval was for a drive-around
installation
like at Vista Del Oro. I've learned an enormous amount about
easements
etc since then.? The VDO site was on HOA property, and we
don't have
that luxury. Doug is a very reasonable guy and I don't
expect him to
have any problem approving the new site on the west side of
the road.
In any case, I'll definitely ask him about USPS owned boxes.
Ken
|
Re: Does the USPS pay for cluster mailboxes?
Ken, all information I’ve been given told us that USPS doesn’t provide anything, thus it was included in ?our budget for 20/21. Hearing from someone at the last meeting saying that the USPS would provide the mailboxes was promising. In my experience, whether it be with the HOA, County, City, Post Office, etc. is difficult and frustrating. ? I look forward to the board meeting this Thursday and your input! Jim Ruby
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Mar 14, 2021, at 7:53 AM, Ken Cameron via groups.io <rocks@...> wrote:
?
Good Morning Karen,
The PO will only deliver to cluster
mailboxes in developments like 3 Canyons. There are no individual
mailboxes in 3 Canyons. The developer of Fairfield Estates should
have put in cluster mailboxes with enough tenant doors for all the
lots, but he did it on the cheap with no paved roads, no
mailboxes, very shallow wells, and insufficient wells (we're on a
9 share).? My guess is that the developer of VDO installled the
mailboxes at the time the roads were paved and even before there
were any houses. At Covey Run there is a 13 door unit and a 2 door
parcel box but only three houses. Likewise at Wild Horse, the part
with the entrance on Andalusian Way, they have eight units of 16
doors, enough for 128 homes, and the development isn't even half
built out.
If you don't mind me asking, where are
you? Just curious.
Ken
On 3/14/2021 6:52 AM, Karen McKnight
wrote:
Hello I have a question also on the payment of
installation of the mailboxes.? Has anyone looked into the
developers responsibility? ? Also it might be worth checking
with the VDO HOA to see what steps they took to install their
mailboxes if this hasn't been done already? What's the
difference in installing individual mailboxes, might be cheaper
as each person would be responsible for their own mailboxes
located at their homes?? Just a thought..
Karen
There
have been two comments on
about "if the USPS will pay
for the mail boxes". If you are not on , then you didn't see
them. It's a pain for me to have two email list, and to
relay this type
of information to only a very few not on . Frankly, at this
point, I figure that if you're not on , then you're really
not
that interested in keeping up with what's going on. So, from
now on I'm
only dealing with .
However, I hope those of you who haven't
joined will
want to continue communicating with the community.
If you want to join, I will be happy to help.
The comments were:
"I thought the post office was providing the mailbox unit.
Not sure what
they charge."
and
"I was also under the impression the post office provides
and installs
the boxes"
At the only Board meeting I've been at, someone commented
that the PO
would pay for the boxes. They were going to look into it,
but I've heard
nothing more. It may be true under some circumstances, but
everything
I've read on the web is like the following:
"Appropriate mail receptacles must be provided for the
receipt of mail.
The type of mail receptacle depends on the mode of delivery
in place.
Purchase, installation, and maintenance of mail receptacles
are the
responsibility of the customer."
Most of what I've read seems to pertain to new developments,
so maybe
that doesn't pertain to us. I haven't pursued it yet because
it makes no
sense to me. Why would the USPS pay for cluster mailboxes so
we will
stop paying to rent boxes at the post office? But life often
doesn't
make sense, lol.
In any case, I was going to ask the Postmaster, Doug Hover,
about it
when I talked to him about approving the site.? Back in
September when
this all started, he did come out and approve the site at
the "pull-out"
on the east side of Fairfield Cir directly across from the
present
preferred site. But the approval was for a drive-around
installation
like at Vista Del Oro. I've learned an enormous amount about
easements
etc since then.? The VDO site was on HOA property, and we
don't have
that luxury. Doug is a very reasonable guy and I don't
expect him to
have any problem approving the new site on the west side of
the road.
In any case, I'll definitely ask him about USPS owned boxes.
Ken
|
Re: Does the USPS pay for cluster mailboxes?
From Louisiana originally but been an AZ resident since 1996!? Thank you for the update and information. VDO did not get their mailboxes to after 2007-2008, my sister lives in there.? Yes we at Fairfield Estates got the short end of the stick for sure.? We do however have the best views!
Thanks for all the hard work and dedication to our community!!!
Good Morning Karen,
The PO will only deliver to cluster
mailboxes in developments like 3 Canyons. There are no individual
mailboxes in 3 Canyons. The developer of Fairfield Estates should
have put in cluster mailboxes with enough tenant doors for all the
lots, but he did it on the cheap with no paved roads, no
mailboxes, very shallow wells, and insufficient wells (we're on a
9 share).? My guess is that the developer of VDO installled the
mailboxes at the time the roads were paved and even before there
were any houses. At Covey Run there is a 13 door unit and a 2 door
parcel box but only three houses. Likewise at Wild Horse, the part
with the entrance on Andalusian Way, they have eight units of 16
doors, enough for 128 homes, and the development isn't even half
built out.
If you don't mind me asking, where are
you? Just curious.
Ken
On 3/14/2021 6:52 AM, Karen McKnight
wrote:
Hello I have a question also on the payment of
installation of the mailboxes.? Has anyone looked into the
developers responsibility? ? Also it might be worth checking
with the VDO HOA to see what steps they took to install their
mailboxes if this hasn't been done already? What's the
difference in installing individual mailboxes, might be cheaper
as each person would be responsible for their own mailboxes
located at their homes?? Just a thought..
Karen
There
have been two comments on
about "if the USPS will pay
for the mail boxes". If you are not on , then you didn't see
them. It's a pain for me to have two email list, and to
relay this type
of information to only a very few not on . Frankly, at this
point, I figure that if you're not on , then you're really
not
that interested in keeping up with what's going on. So, from
now on I'm
only dealing with .
However, I hope those of you who haven't
joined will
want to continue communicating with the community.
If you want to join, I will be happy to help.
The comments were:
"I thought the post office was providing the mailbox unit.
Not sure what
they charge."
and
"I was also under the impression the post office provides
and installs
the boxes"
At the only Board meeting I've been at, someone commented
that the PO
would pay for the boxes. They were going to look into it,
but I've heard
nothing more. It may be true under some circumstances, but
everything
I've read on the web is like the following:
"Appropriate mail receptacles must be provided for the
receipt of mail.
The type of mail receptacle depends on the mode of delivery
in place.
Purchase, installation, and maintenance of mail receptacles
are the
responsibility of the customer."
Most of what I've read seems to pertain to new developments,
so maybe
that doesn't pertain to us. I haven't pursued it yet because
it makes no
sense to me. Why would the USPS pay for cluster mailboxes so
we will
stop paying to rent boxes at the post office? But life often
doesn't
make sense, lol.
In any case, I was going to ask the Postmaster, Doug Hover,
about it
when I talked to him about approving the site.? Back in
September when
this all started, he did come out and approve the site at
the "pull-out"
on the east side of Fairfield Cir directly across from the
present
preferred site. But the approval was for a drive-around
installation
like at Vista Del Oro. I've learned an enormous amount about
easements
etc since then.? The VDO site was on HOA property, and we
don't have
that luxury. Doug is a very reasonable guy and I don't
expect him to
have any problem approving the new site on the west side of
the road.
In any case, I'll definitely ask him about USPS owned boxes.
Ken
|
