Thanks Jim,

We're getting close to being on the same page. But where are the the financial records that are available for everyone to see? You are absolutely right, squeakily wheels can be a huge annoyance!

I think it's very clear that everyone in Fairfield Estates would prefer having cluster mailboxes as opposed to going to the post office. That's a major point. I can not imagine how the Road District was ever established since it has been such a ordeal just to find a site for mailboxes. But the Road District is a major asset to our community and property value.? Let's all work together it improve the Fairfield Estates.?

Best wishes,

Ken

On 4/15/2021 9:19 PM, Jim Ruby wrote:

Ken, the financial records are available for everyone to see. The Board sets the budget, the county approves it, and issues a check book, that they refer to as warrants, that require two signatures, and they keep the records. We have never written more than 5 checks maybe 6 in the past several years. Paying for things like property taxes, mail box rent, and liability insurance.?

Our problem with the county in obtaining monthly statements has been their attempt to automate the system and having us go on line to view them. I liked it better when they just mailed it!

We have more work to do in regards to the county and how they do collections, that will be a topic for the budget meeting for FY 21/22.

Do not pay the attorney it has already been arranged and he should have the check by now. I did see the letter he had drafted to the school board at your request. That prompted me to comment that we shouldn’t pay the attorney for ?things we can do ourselves!

In some cases the squeaky wheel does get the grease, in other cases, it’s an annoyance and you just get a new wheel.?

Thank you for your support to stay on as president, but truthfully I really don’t want the job. I only stayed on this past year because I was asked to due so, because of my longevity and experience. I made it my mission to protect the District from the first President continually committing us to projects that had nothing to do with Fairfield Roads. He was such an analytical type, and spent our money like it was his own.?

I’m glad you have the VDO agreement in writing, I can’t wait to read it as check the signatures. I guess it’s a good thing you discovered it, other wise we would never have the opportunity to fulfill the obligation.

?A 30x50 area for mailboxes in my estimation may not be realistic but that too will be a topic at the next meeting. ?I still believe the PSB will be respective to us using a small area considering ?our district is so small and only grown by two houses in the past 5 or more years.?

Working together is a must, we all have an investment in this goal. You attract more flys with honey than salt. We need to sell this in order to make it happen. Jimmy made a good solid contact.... now let him work on achieving the goal....Please?

Jim

On Apr 15, 2021, at 6:42 PM, Ken Cameron via groups.io <rocks@...> wrote:

?

Jim,

Thank you for your comments. I understand that as President, you want to withhold comments on many of my emails. And I understand that I do send a lot of emails, but frankly, sometimes a wheel needs to be squeaky to get any action.

Below I address your specific questions and comment that are in quotes.

“During the last meeting, it was decided that site #1 (the best site) would be investigated until it had been determined it was unusable.”?

I don’t recall a decision at the meeting that site #1 was the best site. Nor did Jimmy mention that decision in his email a week after the meeting when he listed the two reasons that he and you thought site #1 was the best option.

“We just received a statement from the attorney for $200 for just talking to you the first time. I expect we will receive another bill for the letter of intent you requested him write to the Ellers and School Board without first discussing this with the board.”

I don’t recall requesting him to write the letter. I was certainly in favor of him doing it and he may have written them in anticipation that they would be sent. But I don’t want to quibble. I will contact his office tomorrow and pay the bill myself.

“In regards to your meeting with the VDO?President Lynn……. Again, I ask, did you see any such agreement in writing?”

Yes and a copy is attached. See page 4, third bullet point. ??

“Why may I ask are you so focused with whether there is or is not an easement bordering the school property for Site#1?”

As I’ve said ad nauseam, there are big differences in what rights we have in an easement (some rights) as opposed to private property beyond the easement (no rights.) I was focused on the easement because Jimmy said our request was to install the mailboxes in the easement that doesn’t exist. Our request should be clear that the boxes need to be installed on the private property, not on the easement.

“Do we have the exact dimensions or requirements signed off by the Postmaster?”

I’ve never seen a requirement for exact dimensions for parking, and just from looking at cluster mailbox installations, I doubt there are any. Obviously, the site must be large enough to be safe. I think the site should be large enough to make U-turns on to the road, and parking space for two or three cars. My guess is about 30’x50’, but the Board and all interested residents should decide.

“When he is able to survey our District for the 4th time, rest assured that he will have all the current legal documents to go on. I am curious as to why you?feel the need to speak to him personally, and would like to know your intentions prior to his arrival, especially if it concerns the district.”

We don’t need to have the district survey for the 4^th time! Maybe that’s what causing the delay. I only want to speak to him personally because they may have maps that show the location of the property line. Then we won’t need them to come out at all and save some money. My questions are extremely simple. Where is the property line in two small areas?

“Your personal timeline doesn't matter as much as doing the right thing concerning the District does.”

I completely agree, but taking more than eight months from last September to simply site the mailboxes?does seems unnecessarily long too me.

In closing, Jim, I think you have the personality for a great President, and I greatly appreciate your reviving the Road District. I do believe that we need financial transparently, and I haven’t seen that since September when I joined the Board. I would like to see a financial report, have an outside audit of the books, and know how my tax dollars are going to be spent. Those are pretty normal expectations for an organization like this. If that information is available at the last meeting of the year, then I would like the privilege of nominating you for President again, I’ll vote for you with both hands, and I’ll buy you a bottle or two of your favorite drink. You will deserve it! Let’s work together.

Best wishes,

Ken

On 4/15/2021 2:12 PM, Jim Ruby wrote:

Ken,

We are a?board with members. We were formed to represent the will of the property owners in regards to the "Roads".? During the last meeting, it was decided that site #1 (the best site) would be investigated until it had been determined it was unusable. I do not understand why you consider this site a "long shot", ?and I respectfully disagree!? it appears to me that you are following your own agenda.? ?I will openly admit that I am troubled by some of your?actions.? We just received a statement from the attorney for $200 for just talking to you the first time. I expect we will receive another bill for the letter of intent you requested him write to the Ellers and School Board without first discussing this with the board. FYI, I sent an email to the attorney instructing that any requests of any kind regarding legal matters will come from the Board,?not any single individual.??

In regards to your meeting with the VDO?President Lynn, I had a meeting with Ross Miller, the former President of FRMID?and discussed the agreement with VDO that you mentioned in a previous email, that we possibly overlooked. Since we were both present during the paving of Fairfield, neither of us were aware of any such agreement to pave the unused chained off exit from Palisades. Again I ask, did you see any such agreement in writing?? ?Hopefully you did not commit the district to fulfill such a request without discussing and presenting facts to the board.

Why may I ask are you so focused with whether there is or is not an easement bordering the school property for Site#1?? We have never approached the school board and asked them to consider allowing us to place mail boxes on a small portion of their property prior to now. If we obtain permission, and I have confidence that we will, we do not need to pursue?any other actions. In my experience the school board will need to see drawings showing exact dimensions of the area we are requesting to use. Do we have the exact dimensions or requirements signed off by the Postmaster??

On a personal note, I feel the need to remind you that this is Cochise County, Arizona and we are currently in the middle of an inflated economy. Everyone that has anything to do with home services, home improvement, construction or land development etc. (which includes our surveyor) are extremely busy. There are shortages on products and materials as well as prices escalating at unimaginal rates. ?

I spoke to the?surveyor yesterday, he apologized and said he will do the best he can considering his current?backlog of work. He is unable to predict just when he will be able to get out to Fairfield but hopes it might be within the next two weeks. When he is able to survey our District for the 4th time, rest assured that he will have all the current legal documents to go on. I am curious as to why you?feel the need to speak to him personally, and would like to know your intentions prior to his arrival, especially if it concerns the district.

In closing, I want to make it known that I personally have not chimed in on your continuous emails for a reason.? As the Board President, I would like to remain politically correct and feel it's better that I say nothing than to add my personal input which might be considered rather negative.

Your personal timeline doesn't matter as much as doing the right thing concerning the District does.?

It is apparent?that you disagree with the way the district is being managed, then I suggest you plan to?attend the last meeting of the year and elect a new board.?

Jim

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 10:51 AM Ken Cameron via <rocks=[email protected]> wrote:

I’ve been working on finding a site for the mailboxes since the Board Meeting last September.? On September 17, 2020, I sent the Chair of the 3 Canyons Master Design Committee a “heads-up” email about our plans to install mailboxes. There was little progress in the fall because I was waiting for a Board meeting to be called to discuss the mailboxes. The meeting in March was the first since September.

I must admit that I’m a little frustrated with the slow pace of progress, especially the past few months. Frankly, I feel it has been me, who has wanted to explore all the potential sites simultaneously, against the Road District that focused solely on site #1 east, which I’ve always thought was a very long shot.

Why is the Road District so set on site #1 east? This is what Jimmy said in his email of March 21.

“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?”?

That’s it. Why have the other potential sites, #3 west and #1 west, been ignored?

As I’ve said numerous times, I have no favorite site. I just want to have mailboxes. At least three factors need to be considered in evaluating potential sites: legality, spaciousness, and convenience, with legality by far the most important. ?Legality involves contacting the property owners and spaciousness involves knowing the location of the property line.

They surveyors were originally scheduled to come out in early February, but they haven’t been here yet. They haven’t been given the priority that they deserve. We don’t need much information. Only the location of the property line at site #1 west and site #3 west.

I request authorization from Jim to contact the surveyors ASAP and to meet with them when they are here.

We also need to contact the property owners of site #3 west.?

I request authorization from Jim to contact the property owners of site #3 west. I believe that he has their contact information.

Unfortunately, we’re not going to make my goal of having mailboxes installed before Sharon and I leave for the summer at the end of May. (I didn’t expect it to take eight months just to find a site along Fairfield Cir!) Nevertheless, I will continue putting my best effort into the project, and hopefully someone will take over when we leave.

Ken

<2011-01-20 Deed (VDO to Fairfield).pdf>

Ken, the financial records are available for everyone to see. The Board sets the budget, the county approves it, and issues a check book, that they refer to as warrants, that require two signatures, and they keep the records. We have never written more than 5 checks maybe 6 in the past several years. Paying for things like property taxes, mail box rent, and liability insurance.?

Our problem with the county in obtaining monthly statements has been their attempt to automate the system and having us go on line to view them. I liked it better when they just mailed it!

We have more work to do in regards to the county and how they do collections, that will be a topic for the budget meeting for FY 21/22.

Do not pay the attorney it has already been arranged and he should have the check by now. I did see the letter he had drafted to the school board at your request. That prompted me to comment that we shouldn’t pay the attorney for ?things we can do ourselves!

In some cases the squeaky wheel does get the grease, in other cases, it’s an annoyance and you just get a new wheel.?

Thank you for your support to stay on as president, but truthfully I really don’t want the job. I only stayed on this past year because I was asked to due so, because of my longevity and experience. I made it my mission to protect the District from the first President continually committing us to projects that had nothing to do with Fairfield Roads. He was such an analytical type, and spent our money like it was his own.?

I’m glad you have the VDO agreement in writing, I can’t wait to read it as check the signatures. I guess it’s a good thing you discovered it, other wise we would never have the opportunity to fulfill the obligation.

?A 30x50 area for mailboxes in my estimation may not be realistic but that too will be a topic at the next meeting. ?I still believe the PSB will be respective to us using a small area considering ?our district is so small and only grown by two houses in the past 5 or more years.?

Working together is a must, we all have an investment in this goal. You attract more flys with honey than salt. We need to sell this in order to make it happen. Jimmy made a good solid contact.... now let him work on achieving the goal....Please?

Jim

On Apr 15, 2021, at 6:42 PM, Ken Cameron via groups.io <rocks@...> wrote:

?

Jim,

Thank you for your comments. I understand that as President, you want to withhold comments on many of my emails. And I understand that I do send a lot of emails, but frankly, sometimes a wheel needs to be squeaky to get any action.

Below I address your specific questions and comment that are in quotes.

“During the last meeting, it was decided that site #1 (the best site) would be investigated until it had been determined it was unusable.”?

I don’t recall a decision at the meeting that site #1 was the best site. Nor did Jimmy mention that decision in his email a week after the meeting when he listed the two reasons that he and you thought site #1 was the best option.

“We just received a statement from the attorney for $200 for just talking to you the first time. I expect we will receive another bill for the letter of intent you requested him write to the Ellers and School Board without first discussing this with the board.”

I don’t recall requesting him to write the letter. I was certainly in favor of him doing it and he may have written them in anticipation that they would be sent. But I don’t want to quibble. I will contact his office tomorrow and pay the bill myself.

“In regards to your meeting with the VDO?President Lynn……. Again, I ask, did you see any such agreement in writing?”

Yes and a copy is attached. See page 4, third bullet point. ??

“Why may I ask are you so focused with whether there is or is not an easement bordering the school property for Site#1?”

As I’ve said ad nauseam, there are big differences in what rights we have in an easement (some rights) as opposed to private property beyond the easement (no rights.) I was focused on the easement because Jimmy said our request was to install the mailboxes in the easement that doesn’t exist. Our request should be clear that the boxes need to be installed on the private property, not on the easement.

“Do we have the exact dimensions or requirements signed off by the Postmaster?”

I’ve never seen a requirement for exact dimensions for parking, and just from looking at cluster mailbox installations, I doubt there are any. Obviously, the site must be large enough to be safe. I think the site should be large enough to make U-turns on to the road, and parking space for two or three cars. My guess is about 30’x50’, but the Board and all interested residents should decide.

“When he is able to survey our District for the 4th time, rest assured that he will have all the current legal documents to go on. I am curious as to why you?feel the need to speak to him personally, and would like to know your intentions prior to his arrival, especially if it concerns the district.”

We don’t need to have the district survey for the 4^th time! Maybe that’s what causing the delay. I only want to speak to him personally because they may have maps that show the location of the property line. Then we won’t need them to come out at all and save some money. My questions are extremely simple. Where is the property line in two small areas?

“Your personal timeline doesn't matter as much as doing the right thing concerning the District does.”

I completely agree, but taking more than eight months from last September to simply site the mailboxes?does seems unnecessarily long too me.

In closing, Jim, I think you have the personality for a great President, and I greatly appreciate your reviving the Road District. I do believe that we need financial transparently, and I haven’t seen that since September when I joined the Board. I would like to see a financial report, have an outside audit of the books, and know how my tax dollars are going to be spent. Those are pretty normal expectations for an organization like this. If that information is available at the last meeting of the year, then I would like the privilege of nominating you for President again, I’ll vote for you with both hands, and I’ll buy you a bottle or two of your favorite drink. You will deserve it! Let’s work together.

Best wishes,

Ken

On 4/15/2021 2:12 PM, Jim Ruby wrote:

Ken,

We are a?board with members. We were formed to represent the will of the property owners in regards to the "Roads".? During the last meeting, it was decided that site #1 (the best site) would be investigated until it had been determined it was unusable. I do not understand why you consider this site a "long shot", ?and I respectfully disagree!? it appears to me that you are following your own agenda.? ?I will openly admit that I am troubled by some of your?actions.? We just received a statement from the attorney for $200 for just talking to you the first time. I expect we will receive another bill for the letter of intent you requested him write to the Ellers and School Board without first discussing this with the board. FYI, I sent an email to the attorney instructing that any requests of any kind regarding legal matters will come from the Board,?not any single individual.??

In regards to your meeting with the VDO?President Lynn, I had a meeting with Ross Miller, the former President of FRMID?and discussed the agreement with VDO that you mentioned in a previous email, that we possibly overlooked. Since we were both present during the paving of Fairfield, neither of us were aware of any such agreement to pave the unused chained off exit from Palisades. Again I ask, did you see any such agreement in writing?? ?Hopefully you did not commit the district to fulfill such a request without discussing and presenting facts to the board.

Why may I ask are you so focused with whether there is or is not an easement bordering the school property for Site#1?? We have never approached the school board and asked them to consider allowing us to place mail boxes on a small portion of their property prior to now. If we obtain permission, and I have confidence that we will, we do not need to pursue?any other actions. In my experience the school board will need to see drawings showing exact dimensions of the area we are requesting to use. Do we have the exact dimensions or requirements signed off by the Postmaster??

On a personal note, I feel the need to remind you that this is Cochise County, Arizona and we are currently in the middle of an inflated economy. Everyone that has anything to do with home services, home improvement, construction or land development etc. (which includes our surveyor) are extremely busy. There are shortages on products and materials as well as prices escalating at unimaginal rates. ?

I spoke to the?surveyor yesterday, he apologized and said he will do the best he can considering his current?backlog of work. He is unable to predict just when he will be able to get out to Fairfield but hopes it might be within the next two weeks. When he is able to survey our District for the 4th time, rest assured that he will have all the current legal documents to go on. I am curious as to why you?feel the need to speak to him personally, and would like to know your intentions prior to his arrival, especially if it concerns the district.

In closing, I want to make it known that I personally have not chimed in on your continuous emails for a reason.? As the Board President, I would like to remain politically correct and feel it's better that I say nothing than to add my personal input which might be considered rather negative.

Your personal timeline doesn't matter as much as doing the right thing concerning the District does.?

It is apparent?that you disagree with the way the district is being managed, then I suggest you plan to?attend the last meeting of the year and elect a new board.?

Jim

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 10:51 AM Ken Cameron via <rocks=[email protected]> wrote:

I’ve been working on finding a site for the mailboxes since the Board Meeting last September.? On September 17, 2020, I sent the Chair of the 3 Canyons Master Design Committee a “heads-up” email about our plans to install mailboxes. There was little progress in the fall because I was waiting for a Board meeting to be called to discuss the mailboxes. The meeting in March was the first since September.

I must admit that I’m a little frustrated with the slow pace of progress, especially the past few months. Frankly, I feel it has been me, who has wanted to explore all the potential sites simultaneously, against the Road District that focused solely on site #1 east, which I’ve always thought was a very long shot.

Why is the Road District so set on site #1 east? This is what Jimmy said in his email of March 21.

“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?”?

That’s it. Why have the other potential sites, #3 west and #1 west, been ignored?

As I’ve said numerous times, I have no favorite site. I just want to have mailboxes. At least three factors need to be considered in evaluating potential sites: legality, spaciousness, and convenience, with legality by far the most important. ?Legality involves contacting the property owners and spaciousness involves knowing the location of the property line.

They surveyors were originally scheduled to come out in early February, but they haven’t been here yet. They haven’t been given the priority that they deserve. We don’t need much information. Only the location of the property line at site #1 west and site #3 west.

I request authorization from Jim to contact the surveyors ASAP and to meet with them when they are here.

We also need to contact the property owners of site #3 west.?

I request authorization from Jim to contact the property owners of site #3 west. I believe that he has their contact information.

Unfortunately, we’re not going to make my goal of having mailboxes installed before Sharon and I leave for the summer at the end of May. (I didn’t expect it to take eight months just to find a site along Fairfield Cir!) Nevertheless, I will continue putting my best effort into the project, and hopefully someone will take over when we leave.

Ken

<2011-01-20 Deed (VDO to Fairfield).pdf>

On Apr 15, 2021, at 9:19 PM, Jim Ruby <jeruby@...> wrote:

?

Ken, the financial records are available for everyone to see. The Board sets the budget, the county approves it, and issues a check book, that they refer to as warrants, that require two signatures, and they keep the records. We have never written more than 5 checks maybe 6 in the past several years. Paying for things like property taxes, mail box rent, and liability insurance.?

Our problem with the county in obtaining monthly statements has been their attempt to automate the system and having us go on line to view them. I liked it better when they just mailed it!

We have more work to do in regards to the county and how they do collections, that will be a topic for the budget meeting for FY 21/22.

Do not pay the attorney it has already been arranged and he should have the check by now. I did see the letter he had drafted to the school board at your request. That prompted me to comment that we shouldn’t pay the attorney for ?things we can do ourselves!

In some cases the squeaky wheel does get the grease, in other cases, it’s an annoyance and you just get a new wheel.?

Thank you for your support to stay on as president, but truthfully I really don’t want the job. I only stayed on this past year because I was asked to due so, because of my longevity and experience. I made it my mission to protect the District from the first President continually committing us to projects that had nothing to do with Fairfield Roads. He was such an analytical type, and spent our money like it was his own.?

I’m glad you have the VDO agreement in writing, I can’t wait to read it as check the signatures. I guess it’s a good thing you discovered it, other wise we would never have the opportunity to fulfill the obligation.

?A 30x50 area for mailboxes in my estimation may not be realistic but that too will be a topic at the next meeting. ?I still believe the PSB will be respective to us using a small area considering ?our district is so small and only grown by two houses in the past 5 or more years.?

Working together is a must, we all have an investment in this goal. You attract more flys with honey than salt. We need to sell this in order to make it happen. Jimmy made a good solid contact.... now let him work on achieving the goal....Please?

Jim

On Apr 15, 2021, at 6:42 PM, Ken Cameron via groups.io <rocks@...> wrote:

?

Jim,

Thank you for your comments. I understand that as President, you want to withhold comments on many of my emails. And I understand that I do send a lot of emails, but frankly, sometimes a wheel needs to be squeaky to get any action.

Below I address your specific questions and comment that are in quotes.

“During the last meeting, it was decided that site #1 (the best site) would be investigated until it had been determined it was unusable.”?

I don’t recall a decision at the meeting that site #1 was the best site. Nor did Jimmy mention that decision in his email a week after the meeting when he listed the two reasons that he and you thought site #1 was the best option.

“We just received a statement from the attorney for $200 for just talking to you the first time. I expect we will receive another bill for the letter of intent you requested him write to the Ellers and School Board without first discussing this with the board.”

I don’t recall requesting him to write the letter. I was certainly in favor of him doing it and he may have written them in anticipation that they would be sent. But I don’t want to quibble. I will contact his office tomorrow and pay the bill myself.

“In regards to your meeting with the VDO?President Lynn……. Again, I ask, did you see any such agreement in writing?”

Yes and a copy is attached. See page 4, third bullet point. ??

“Why may I ask are you so focused with whether there is or is not an easement bordering the school property for Site#1?”

As I’ve said ad nauseam, there are big differences in what rights we have in an easement (some rights) as opposed to private property beyond the easement (no rights.) I was focused on the easement because Jimmy said our request was to install the mailboxes in the easement that doesn’t exist. Our request should be clear that the boxes need to be installed on the private property, not on the easement.

“Do we have the exact dimensions or requirements signed off by the Postmaster?”

I’ve never seen a requirement for exact dimensions for parking, and just from looking at cluster mailbox installations, I doubt there are any. Obviously, the site must be large enough to be safe. I think the site should be large enough to make U-turns on to the road, and parking space for two or three cars. My guess is about 30’x50’, but the Board and all interested residents should decide.

“When he is able to survey our District for the 4th time, rest assured that he will have all the current legal documents to go on. I am curious as to why you?feel the need to speak to him personally, and would like to know your intentions prior to his arrival, especially if it concerns the district.”

We don’t need to have the district survey for the 4^th time! Maybe that’s what causing the delay. I only want to speak to him personally because they may have maps that show the location of the property line. Then we won’t need them to come out at all and save some money. My questions are extremely simple. Where is the property line in two small areas?

“Your personal timeline doesn't matter as much as doing the right thing concerning the District does.”

I completely agree, but taking more than eight months from last September to simply site the mailboxes?does seems unnecessarily long too me.

In closing, Jim, I think you have the personality for a great President, and I greatly appreciate your reviving the Road District. I do believe that we need financial transparently, and I haven’t seen that since September when I joined the Board. I would like to see a financial report, have an outside audit of the books, and know how my tax dollars are going to be spent. Those are pretty normal expectations for an organization like this. If that information is available at the last meeting of the year, then I would like the privilege of nominating you for President again, I’ll vote for you with both hands, and I’ll buy you a bottle or two of your favorite drink. You will deserve it! Let’s work together.

Best wishes,

Ken

On 4/15/2021 2:12 PM, Jim Ruby wrote:

Ken,

We are a?board with members. We were formed to represent the will of the property owners in regards to the "Roads".? During the last meeting, it was decided that site #1 (the best site) would be investigated until it had been determined it was unusable. I do not understand why you consider this site a "long shot", ?and I respectfully disagree!? it appears to me that you are following your own agenda.? ?I will openly admit that I am troubled by some of your?actions.? We just received a statement from the attorney for $200 for just talking to you the first time. I expect we will receive another bill for the letter of intent you requested him write to the Ellers and School Board without first discussing this with the board. FYI, I sent an email to the attorney instructing that any requests of any kind regarding legal matters will come from the Board,?not any single individual.??

In regards to your meeting with the VDO?President Lynn, I had a meeting with Ross Miller, the former President of FRMID?and discussed the agreement with VDO that you mentioned in a previous email, that we possibly overlooked. Since we were both present during the paving of Fairfield, neither of us were aware of any such agreement to pave the unused chained off exit from Palisades. Again I ask, did you see any such agreement in writing?? ?Hopefully you did not commit the district to fulfill such a request without discussing and presenting facts to the board.

Why may I ask are you so focused with whether there is or is not an easement bordering the school property for Site#1?? We have never approached the school board and asked them to consider allowing us to place mail boxes on a small portion of their property prior to now. If we obtain permission, and I have confidence that we will, we do not need to pursue?any other actions. In my experience the school board will need to see drawings showing exact dimensions of the area we are requesting to use. Do we have the exact dimensions or requirements signed off by the Postmaster??

On a personal note, I feel the need to remind you that this is Cochise County, Arizona and we are currently in the middle of an inflated economy. Everyone that has anything to do with home services, home improvement, construction or land development etc. (which includes our surveyor) are extremely busy. There are shortages on products and materials as well as prices escalating at unimaginal rates. ?

I spoke to the?surveyor yesterday, he apologized and said he will do the best he can considering his current?backlog of work. He is unable to predict just when he will be able to get out to Fairfield but hopes it might be within the next two weeks. When he is able to survey our District for the 4th time, rest assured that he will have all the current legal documents to go on. I am curious as to why you?feel the need to speak to him personally, and would like to know your intentions prior to his arrival, especially if it concerns the district.

In closing, I want to make it known that I personally have not chimed in on your continuous emails for a reason.? As the Board President, I would like to remain politically correct and feel it's better that I say nothing than to add my personal input which might be considered rather negative.

Your personal timeline doesn't matter as much as doing the right thing concerning the District does.?

It is apparent?that you disagree with the way the district is being managed, then I suggest you plan to?attend the last meeting of the year and elect a new board.?

Jim

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 10:51 AM Ken Cameron via <rocks=[email protected]> wrote:

I’ve been working on finding a site for the mailboxes since the Board Meeting last September.? On September 17, 2020, I sent the Chair of the 3 Canyons Master Design Committee a “heads-up” email about our plans to install mailboxes. There was little progress in the fall because I was waiting for a Board meeting to be called to discuss the mailboxes. The meeting in March was the first since September.

I must admit that I’m a little frustrated with the slow pace of progress, especially the past few months. Frankly, I feel it has been me, who has wanted to explore all the potential sites simultaneously, against the Road District that focused solely on site #1 east, which I’ve always thought was a very long shot.

Why is the Road District so set on site #1 east? This is what Jimmy said in his email of March 21.

“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?”?

That’s it. Why have the other potential sites, #3 west and #1 west, been ignored?

As I’ve said numerous times, I have no favorite site. I just want to have mailboxes. At least three factors need to be considered in evaluating potential sites: legality, spaciousness, and convenience, with legality by far the most important. ?Legality involves contacting the property owners and spaciousness involves knowing the location of the property line.

They surveyors were originally scheduled to come out in early February, but they haven’t been here yet. They haven’t been given the priority that they deserve. We don’t need much information. Only the location of the property line at site #1 west and site #3 west.

I request authorization from Jim to contact the surveyors ASAP and to meet with them when they are here.

We also need to contact the property owners of site #3 west.?

I request authorization from Jim to contact the property owners of site #3 west. I believe that he has their contact information.

Unfortunately, we’re not going to make my goal of having mailboxes installed before Sharon and I leave for the summer at the end of May. (I didn’t expect it to take eight months just to find a site along Fairfield Cir!) Nevertheless, I will continue putting my best effort into the project, and hopefully someone will take over when we leave.

Ken

<2011-01-20 Deed (VDO to Fairfield).pdf>

On Apr 15, 2021, at 6:42 PM, Ken Cameron via groups.io <rocks@...> wrote:

?

Jim,

Thank you for your comments. I understand that as President, you want to withhold comments on many of my emails. And I understand that I do send a lot of emails, but frankly, sometimes a wheel needs to be squeaky to get any action.

Below I address your specific questions and comment that are in quotes.

“During the last meeting, it was decided that site #1 (the best site) would be investigated until it had been determined it was unusable.”?

I don’t recall a decision at the meeting that site #1 was the best site. Nor did Jimmy mention that decision in his email a week after the meeting when he listed the two reasons that he and you thought site #1 was the best option.

“We just received a statement from the attorney for $200 for just talking to you the first time. I expect we will receive another bill for the letter of intent you requested him write to the Ellers and School Board without first discussing this with the board.”

I don’t recall requesting him to write the letter. I was certainly in favor of him doing it and he may have written them in anticipation that they would be sent. But I don’t want to quibble. I will contact his office tomorrow and pay the bill myself.

“In regards to your meeting with the VDO?President Lynn……. Again, I ask, did you see any such agreement in writing?”

Yes and a copy is attached. See page 4, third bullet point. ??

“Why may I ask are you so focused with whether there is or is not an easement bordering the school property for Site#1?”

As I’ve said ad nauseam, there are big differences in what rights we have in an easement (some rights) as opposed to private property beyond the easement (no rights.) I was focused on the easement because Jimmy said our request was to install the mailboxes in the easement that doesn’t exist. Our request should be clear that the boxes need to be installed on the private property, not on the easement.

“Do we have the exact dimensions or requirements signed off by the Postmaster?”

I’ve never seen a requirement for exact dimensions for parking, and just from looking at cluster mailbox installations, I doubt there are any. Obviously, the site must be large enough to be safe. I think the site should be large enough to make U-turns on to the road, and parking space for two or three cars. My guess is about 30’x50’, but the Board and all interested residents should decide.

“When he is able to survey our District for the 4th time, rest assured that he will have all the current legal documents to go on. I am curious as to why you?feel the need to speak to him personally, and would like to know your intentions prior to his arrival, especially if it concerns the district.”

We don’t need to have the district survey for the 4^th time! Maybe that’s what causing the delay. I only want to speak to him personally because they may have maps that show the location of the property line. Then we won’t need them to come out at all and save some money. My questions are extremely simple. Where is the property line in two small areas?

“Your personal timeline doesn't matter as much as doing the right thing concerning the District does.”

I completely agree, but taking more than eight months from last September to simply site the mailboxes?does seems unnecessarily long too me.

In closing, Jim, I think you have the personality for a great President, and I greatly appreciate your reviving the Road District. I do believe that we need financial transparently, and I haven’t seen that since September when I joined the Board. I would like to see a financial report, have an outside audit of the books, and know how my tax dollars are going to be spent. Those are pretty normal expectations for an organization like this. If that information is available at the last meeting of the year, then I would like the privilege of nominating you for President again, I’ll vote for you with both hands, and I’ll buy you a bottle or two of your favorite drink. You will deserve it! Let’s work together.

Best wishes,

Ken

On 4/15/2021 2:12 PM, Jim Ruby wrote:

Ken,

We are a?board with members. We were formed to represent the will of the property owners in regards to the "Roads".? During the last meeting, it was decided that site #1 (the best site) would be investigated until it had been determined it was unusable. I do not understand why you consider this site a "long shot", ?and I respectfully disagree!? it appears to me that you are following your own agenda.? ?I will openly admit that I am troubled by some of your?actions.? We just received a statement from the attorney for $200 for just talking to you the first time. I expect we will receive another bill for the letter of intent you requested him write to the Ellers and School Board without first discussing this with the board. FYI, I sent an email to the attorney instructing that any requests of any kind regarding legal matters will come from the Board,?not any single individual.??

In regards to your meeting with the VDO?President Lynn, I had a meeting with Ross Miller, the former President of FRMID?and discussed the agreement with VDO that you mentioned in a previous email, that we possibly overlooked. Since we were both present during the paving of Fairfield, neither of us were aware of any such agreement to pave the unused chained off exit from Palisades. Again I ask, did you see any such agreement in writing?? ?Hopefully you did not commit the district to fulfill such a request without discussing and presenting facts to the board.

Why may I ask are you so focused with whether there is or is not an easement bordering the school property for Site#1?? We have never approached the school board and asked them to consider allowing us to place mail boxes on a small portion of their property prior to now. If we obtain permission, and I have confidence that we will, we do not need to pursue?any other actions. In my experience the school board will need to see drawings showing exact dimensions of the area we are requesting to use. Do we have the exact dimensions or requirements signed off by the Postmaster??

On a personal note, I feel the need to remind you that this is Cochise County, Arizona and we are currently in the middle of an inflated economy. Everyone that has anything to do with home services, home improvement, construction or land development etc. (which includes our surveyor) are extremely busy. There are shortages on products and materials as well as prices escalating at unimaginal rates. ?

I spoke to the?surveyor yesterday, he apologized and said he will do the best he can considering his current?backlog of work. He is unable to predict just when he will be able to get out to Fairfield but hopes it might be within the next two weeks. When he is able to survey our District for the 4th time, rest assured that he will have all the current legal documents to go on. I am curious as to why you?feel the need to speak to him personally, and would like to know your intentions prior to his arrival, especially if it concerns the district.

In closing, I want to make it known that I personally have not chimed in on your continuous emails for a reason.? As the Board President, I would like to remain politically correct and feel it's better that I say nothing than to add my personal input which might be considered rather negative.

Your personal timeline doesn't matter as much as doing the right thing concerning the District does.?

It is apparent?that you disagree with the way the district is being managed, then I suggest you plan to?attend the last meeting of the year and elect a new board.?

Jim

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 10:51 AM Ken Cameron via <rocks=[email protected]> wrote:

I’ve been working on finding a site for the mailboxes since the Board Meeting last September.? On September 17, 2020, I sent the Chair of the 3 Canyons Master Design Committee a “heads-up” email about our plans to install mailboxes. There was little progress in the fall because I was waiting for a Board meeting to be called to discuss the mailboxes. The meeting in March was the first since September.

I must admit that I’m a little frustrated with the slow pace of progress, especially the past few months. Frankly, I feel it has been me, who has wanted to explore all the potential sites simultaneously, against the Road District that focused solely on site #1 east, which I’ve always thought was a very long shot.

Why is the Road District so set on site #1 east? This is what Jimmy said in his email of March 21.

“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?”?

That’s it. Why have the other potential sites, #3 west and #1 west, been ignored?

As I’ve said numerous times, I have no favorite site. I just want to have mailboxes. At least three factors need to be considered in evaluating potential sites: legality, spaciousness, and convenience, with legality by far the most important. ?Legality involves contacting the property owners and spaciousness involves knowing the location of the property line.

They surveyors were originally scheduled to come out in early February, but they haven’t been here yet. They haven’t been given the priority that they deserve. We don’t need much information. Only the location of the property line at site #1 west and site #3 west.

I request authorization from Jim to contact the surveyors ASAP and to meet with them when they are here.

We also need to contact the property owners of site #3 west.?

I request authorization from Jim to contact the property owners of site #3 west. I believe that he has their contact information.

Unfortunately, we’re not going to make my goal of having mailboxes installed before Sharon and I leave for the summer at the end of May. (I didn’t expect it to take eight months just to find a site along Fairfield Cir!) Nevertheless, I will continue putting my best effort into the project, and hopefully someone will take over when we leave.

Ken

<2011-01-20 Deed (VDO to Fairfield).pdf>

I appreciate your work.

3 Canyons has been going to the post office for 17 years (?). We can wait while you enjoy life.?

I am open to helping if you would like to delegate and are open to a meeting about your expectations.?

Or I can wait until you return.?

In good health,?

Dr.Gail Pielack,? FNP-C?

Ken,

We are a?board with members. We were formed to represent the will of the property owners in regards to the "Roads".? During the last meeting, it was decided that site #1 (the best site) would be investigated until it had been determined it was unusable. I do not understand why you consider this site a "long shot", ?and I respectfully disagree!? it appears to me that you are following your own agenda.? ?I will openly admit that I am troubled by some of your?actions.? We just received a statement from the attorney for $200 for just talking to you the first time. I expect we will receive another bill for the letter of intent you requested him write to the Ellers and School Board without first discussing this with the board. FYI, I sent an email to the attorney instructing that any requests of any kind regarding legal matters will come from the Board,?not any single individual.??

In regards to your meeting with the VDO?President Lynn, I had a meeting with Ross Miller, the former President of FRMID?and discussed the agreement with VDO that you mentioned in a previous email, that we possibly overlooked. Since we were both present during the paving of Fairfield, neither of us were aware of any such agreement to pave the unused chained off exit from Palisades. Again I ask, did you see any such agreement in writing?? ?Hopefully you did not commit the district to fulfill such a request without discussing and presenting facts to the board.

Why may I ask are you so focused with whether there is or is not an easement bordering the school property for Site#1?? We have never approached the school board and asked them to consider allowing us to place mail boxes on a small portion of their property prior to now. If we obtain permission, and I have confidence that we will, we do not need to pursue?any other actions. In my experience the school board will need to see drawings showing exact dimensions of the area we are requesting to use. Do we have the exact dimensions or requirements signed off by the Postmaster??

On a personal note, I feel the need to remind you that this is Cochise County, Arizona and we are currently in the middle of an inflated economy. Everyone that has anything to do with home services, home improvement, construction or land development etc. (which includes our surveyor) are extremely busy. There are shortages on products and materials as well as prices escalating at unimaginal rates. ?

I spoke to the?surveyor yesterday, he apologized and said he will do the best he can considering his current?backlog of work. He is unable to predict just when he will be able to get out to Fairfield but hopes it might be within the next two weeks. When he is able to survey our District for the 4th time, rest assured that he will have all the current legal documents to go on. I am curious as to why you?feel the need to speak to him personally, and would like to know your intentions prior to his arrival, especially if it concerns the district.

In closing, I want to make it known that I personally have not chimed in on your continuous emails for a reason.? As the Board President, I would like to remain politically correct and feel it's better that I say nothing than to add my personal input which might be considered rather negative.

Your personal timeline doesn't matter as much as doing the right thing concerning the District does.?

It is apparent?that you disagree with the way the district is being managed, then I suggest you plan to?attend the last meeting of the year and elect a new board.?

Jim

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 10:51 AM Ken Cameron via <rocks=[email protected]> wrote:

I’ve been working on finding a site for the mailboxes since the Board Meeting last September.? On September 17, 2020, I sent the Chair of the 3 Canyons Master Design Committee a “heads-up” email about our plans to install mailboxes. There was little progress in the fall because I was waiting for a Board meeting to be called to discuss the mailboxes. The meeting in March was the first since September.

I must admit that I’m a little frustrated with the slow pace of progress, especially the past few months. Frankly, I feel it has been me, who has wanted to explore all the potential sites simultaneously, against the Road District that focused solely on site #1 east, which I’ve always thought was a very long shot.

Why is the Road District so set on site #1 east? This is what Jimmy said in his email of March 21.

“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?”?

That’s it. Why have the other potential sites, #3 west and #1 west, been ignored?

As I’ve said numerous times, I have no favorite site. I just want to have mailboxes. At least three factors need to be considered in evaluating potential sites: legality, spaciousness, and convenience, with legality by far the most important. ?Legality involves contacting the property owners and spaciousness involves knowing the location of the property line.

They surveyors were originally scheduled to come out in early February, but they haven’t been here yet. They haven’t been given the priority that they deserve. We don’t need much information. Only the location of the property line at site #1 west and site #3 west.

I request authorization from Jim to contact the surveyors ASAP and to meet with them when they are here.

We also need to contact the property owners of site #3 west.?

I request authorization from Jim to contact the property owners of site #3 west. I believe that he has their contact information.

Unfortunately, we’re not going to make my goal of having mailboxes installed before Sharon and I leave for the summer at the end of May. (I didn’t expect it to take eight months just to find a site along Fairfield Cir!) Nevertheless, I will continue putting my best effort into the project, and hopefully someone will take over when we leave.

Ken

On Apr 14, 2021, at 11:37, Ken Cameron via groups.io <rocks@...> wrote:

?

Thanks Matthew,

In terms of spaciousness, site 1 west is clearly the least desirable, but it has one hugely important thing going for it.? We own the land.?

At site 1, there is about 17' between the west edge of the road and the fence.? We don't know the exact location of the property line, thus don't know how much room we would have for the boxes and parking.? My guess is that we might have 12' between the road and property line, which would be the minimum needed for the base of the boxes (4 ft) and parking. But 12' is only a guess and it might prove to be significantly less.?

At site #3 west there is a few more feet between the edge of the road and fence, thus it's likely to be more spacious. Also I would consider it more convenient to the houses than #1 west.? But we haven't dealt with the legal issues yet.

Ken

On 4/14/2021 11:10 AM, Matthew Paddock wrote:

I concur with Ken and support his request to contact and meet the Surveyors and contact the property owner for Site 3.?

I guess I wasn’t tracking site 1 west was still an option. Correct me if I am wrong, but that would be on the remaining part of the easement the road is built on? If so then I think that would be a great location and we should also pursue it. With the understanding we need the surveyor to confirm the property line.?

Respectfully,

Matthew Paddock

On Apr 14, 2021, at 10:51 AM, Ken Cameron via <rocks@...> wrote:

I’ve been working on finding a site for the mailboxes since the Board Meeting last September.? On September 17, 2020, I sent the Chair of the 3 Canyons Master Design Committee a “heads-up” email about our plans to install mailboxes. There was little progress in the fall because I was waiting for a Board meeting to be called to discuss the mailboxes. The meeting in March was the first since September.

I must admit that I’m a little frustrated with the slow pace of progress, especially the past few months. Frankly, I feel it has been me, who has wanted to explore all the potential sites simultaneously, against the Road District that focused solely on site #1 east, which I’ve always thought was a very long shot.

Why is the Road District so set on site #1 east? This is what Jimmy said in his email of March 21.

“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?”?

That’s it. Why have the other potential sites, #3 west and #1 west, been ignored?

As I’ve said numerous times, I have no favorite site. I just want to have mailboxes. At least three factors need to be considered in evaluating potential sites: legality, spaciousness, and convenience, with legality by far the most important. ?Legality involves contacting the property owners and spaciousness involves knowing the location of the property line.

They surveyors were originally scheduled to come out in early February, but they haven’t been here yet. They haven’t been given the priority that they deserve. We don’t need much information. Only the location of the property line at site #1 west and site #3 west.

I request authorization from Jim to contact the surveyors ASAP and to meet with them when they are here.

We also need to contact the property owners of site #3 west.?

I request authorization from Jim to contact the property owners of site #3 west. I believe that he has their contact information.

Unfortunately, we’re not going to make my goal of having mailboxes installed before Sharon and I leave for the summer at the end of May. (I didn’t expect it to take eight months just to find a site along Fairfield Cir!) Nevertheless, I will continue putting my best effort into the project, and hopefully someone will take over when we leave.

Ken

I concur with Ken and support his request to contact and meet the Surveyors and contact the property owner for Site 3.?

I guess I wasn’t tracking site 1 west was still an option. Correct me if I am wrong, but that would be on the remaining part of the easement the road is built on? If so then I think that would be a great location and we should also pursue it. With the understanding we need the surveyor to confirm the property line.?

Respectfully,

Matthew Paddock

On Apr 14, 2021, at 10:51 AM, Ken Cameron via <rocks@...> wrote:

I’ve been working on finding a site for the mailboxes since the Board Meeting last September.? On September 17, 2020, I sent the Chair of the 3 Canyons Master Design Committee a “heads-up” email about our plans to install mailboxes. There was little progress in the fall because I was waiting for a Board meeting to be called to discuss the mailboxes. The meeting in March was the first since September.

I must admit that I’m a little frustrated with the slow pace of progress, especially the past few months. Frankly, I feel it has been me, who has wanted to explore all the potential sites simultaneously, against the Road District that focused solely on site #1 east, which I’ve always thought was a very long shot.

Why is the Road District so set on site #1 east? This is what Jimmy said in his email of March 21.

“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?”?

That’s it. Why have the other potential sites, #3 west and #1 west, been ignored?

As I’ve said numerous times, I have no favorite site. I just want to have mailboxes. At least three factors need to be considered in evaluating potential sites: legality, spaciousness, and convenience, with legality by far the most important. ?Legality involves contacting the property owners and spaciousness involves knowing the location of the property line.

They surveyors were originally scheduled to come out in early February, but they haven’t been here yet. They haven’t been given the priority that they deserve. We don’t need much information. Only the location of the property line at site #1 west and site #3 west.

I request authorization from Jim to contact the surveyors ASAP and to meet with them when they are here.

We also need to contact the property owners of site #3 west.?

I request authorization from Jim to contact the property owners of site #3 west. I believe that he has their contact information.

Unfortunately, we’re not going to make my goal of having mailboxes installed before Sharon and I leave for the summer at the end of May. (I didn’t expect it to take eight months just to find a site along Fairfield Cir!) Nevertheless, I will continue putting my best effort into the project, and hopefully someone will take over when we leave.

Ken

On Apr 14, 2021, at 10:51 AM, Ken Cameron via <rocks@...> wrote:

I’ve been working on finding a site for the mailboxes since the Board Meeting last September.? On September 17, 2020, I sent the Chair of the 3 Canyons Master Design Committee a “heads-up” email about our plans to install mailboxes. There was little progress in the fall because I was waiting for a Board meeting to be called to discuss the mailboxes. The meeting in March was the first since September.

I must admit that I’m a little frustrated with the slow pace of progress, especially the past few months. Frankly, I feel it has been me, who has wanted to explore all the potential sites simultaneously, against the Road District that focused solely on site #1 east, which I’ve always thought was a very long shot.

Why is the Road District so set on site #1 east? This is what Jimmy said in his email of March 21.

“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?”?

That’s it. Why have the other potential sites, #3 west and #1 west, been ignored?

As I’ve said numerous times, I have no favorite site. I just want to have mailboxes. At least three factors need to be considered in evaluating potential sites: legality, spaciousness, and convenience, with legality by far the most important. ?Legality involves contacting the property owners and spaciousness involves knowing the location of the property line.

They surveyors were originally scheduled to come out in early February, but they haven’t been here yet. They haven’t been given the priority that they deserve. We don’t need much information. Only the location of the property line at site #1 west and site #3 west.

I request authorization from Jim to contact the surveyors ASAP and to meet with them when they are here.

We also need to contact the property owners of site #3 west.?

I request authorization from Jim to contact the property owners of site #3 west. I believe that he has their contact information.

Unfortunately, we’re not going to make my goal of having mailboxes installed before Sharon and I leave for the summer at the end of May. (I didn’t expect it to take eight months just to find a site along Fairfield Cir!) Nevertheless, I will continue putting my best effort into the project, and hopefully someone will take over when we leave.

Ken

On Apr 13, 2021, at 20:38, Ken Cameron via groups.io <rocks@...> wrote:

?

We really need comments on how to move ahead, if the community is seriously interested in moving ahead. To dates there have been few emails and comments other than those of Jimmy and myself.

On 4/13/2021 8:02 PM, Ken Cameron via groups.io wrote:

I've haven't heard from Jimmy but I just finished watching the School District meeting on Goggle Meet.? Our request came up at the very end under G.1. on the agenda, that is, "Request for Future Agenda Items". The request isn't going to be considered until next month. I've got some ideas on how it should be handled.? I think we should meet with the President of the Board in the next week or two, explain the evolution of the easement, ask what their plans are for the property, present what we want in a formal written request with photos etc., ask for about 30'x50' adjacent to Fairfield Cir, and offer to give them a fair compensation for the permission to install the boxes.?

This is kind-of what we did with site #2. The Vista del Oro President said he thought there would be little interest in granting our request. I suspect the school district will say the same but it's worth a try.

If the Road District is serious about having mailboxes installed (frankly, I have some doubts based on the progress, or lack there of, since the first of the year), we must get the surveyors out here ASAP and also move forward on site 3 west.

I welcome your comments.

Ken

On 4/13/2021 8:45 AM, Ken Cameron via groups.io wrote:

The agenda for the School Board Meeting must be published 24 hours before the meeting, and a copy is attached as a Word document. I don’t see the school district attorney’s name, Roger Decker, on the agenda nor anything about a request from the Road District.

Jimmy, please contact Decker and make sure our request will be considered tonight, and ask him when we should hear the decision.

Thanks,

Ken

I've haven't heard from Jimmy but I just finished watching the School District meeting on Goggle Meet.? Our request came up at the very end under G.1. on the agenda, that is, "Request for Future Agenda Items". The request isn't going to be considered until next month. I've got some ideas on how it should be handled.? I think we should meet with the President of the Board in the next week or two, explain the evolution of the easement, ask what their plans are for the property, present what we want in a formal written request with photos etc., ask for about 30'x50' adjacent to Fairfield Cir, and offer to give them a fair compensation for the permission to install the boxes.?

This is kind-of what we did with site #2. The Vista del Oro President said he thought there would be little interest in granting our request. I suspect the school district will say the same but it's worth a try.

If the Road District is serious about having mailboxes installed (frankly, I have some doubts based on the progress, or lack there of, since the first of the year), we must get the surveyors out here ASAP and also move forward on site 3 west.

I welcome your comments.

Ken

On 4/13/2021 8:45 AM, Ken Cameron via groups.io wrote:

The agenda for the School Board Meeting must be published 24 hours before the meeting, and a copy is attached as a Word document. I don’t see the school district attorney’s name, Roger Decker, on the agenda nor anything about a request from the Road District.

Jimmy, please contact Decker and make sure our request will be considered tonight, and ask him when we should hear the decision.

Thanks,

Ken

The agenda for the School Board Meeting must be published 24 hours before the meeting, and a copy is attached as a Word document. I don’t see the school district attorney’s name, Roger Decker, on the agenda nor anything about a request from the Road District.

Jimmy, please contact Decker and make sure our request will be considered tonight, and ask him when we should hear the decision.

Thanks,

Ken