|
Nathan Williams, the Road District attorney,
and I had a
very productive meeting this morning. Attached is a copy of the
agenda, and he
is cc on this email.
Nathan looked at the easement documents for
sites ?#1 (On Fairfield
Cir. near 3 Canyons Blvd.)
and #3 (on Fairfield near Paso Venado). He said that from a legal
point of
view, # 3 was preferred for the mailboxes because the easement
agreement is
actually between the Road District and the previous landowner, and
the
agreement was broader in scope that the easement document for the
Palominas
School District property adjacent to site #1. In fact, he says
that we don’t
need the owner’s permission at site #3 so long as the mailboxes
and parking
area are in the easement. He can write a letter to the property
owner telling
them that the Road District intends to install mailboxes and give
them 30 days
to respond.
As I mentioned in a previous email, the
easement is 40ft
wide and the road, Fairfield Cir., is on the east side of the
easement. There
isn’t enough space on the easement east of the road for the
cluster mailboxes,
thus they must be on the west side of the road. See the attached
diagram and
photos for the location and site plan of the mailbox area.
A major physical advantage of site #3 is that
we can take use
the existing partly graveled gate entrance immediately south of
the site and
the partly graveled “pull-out” across the road for parking and
making turns. Those
areas make the site relatively spacious. ?
This is your opportunity to give a thumbs up or
down to site
#3. I’ll assume that everyone checks their email at least every
other day, so if
you are going to respond, I will expect you to do so by midnight
Wednesday,
March 10. If you give the site a thumbs down, please justify your
response, propose
a reasonable alternative site, or state that you don’t want
mailboxes.
The Road District is a hugely important asset
of Fairfield
Estates, and I know from discussions with my neighbors that many
of us wouldn’t
be living here if the main roads weren’t paved. Five roads or
portions of roads
remain to be paved, but they total less than three-quarters of a
mile.
The Road District also is a significant tax
burden. Look at
your property tax bill, and you will find that it’s probably
costing you about
$1,000/yr. in taxes. Nathan told me that there is a governance
document for the
Road District although he doesn’t have a copy. He said that
special districts
are usually governed similar to HOAs. I assume that means there
should be an annual
meeting of the members (taxpayers) and an annual financial
statement and
budget. Does anyone have a copy of the Road District governance
document? If not,
I’ll get a copy from the County Recorder Office after the
mailboxes are history.
Ken
|
Sir,
The Paddocks are good with the site.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Mar 8, 2021, at 4:21 PM, Ken Cameron via < rocks@...> wrote:
Nathan Williams, the Road District attorney,
and I had a
very productive meeting this morning. Attached is a copy of the
agenda, and he
is cc on this email. Nathan looked at the easement documents for
sites ?#1 (On Fairfield
Cir. near 3 Canyons Blvd.)
and #3 (on Fairfield near Paso Venado). He said that from a legal
point of
view, # 3 was preferred for the mailboxes because the easement
agreement is
actually between the Road District and the previous landowner, and
the
agreement was broader in scope that the easement document for the
Palominas
School District property adjacent to site #1. In fact, he says
that we don’t
need the owner’s permission at site #3 so long as the mailboxes
and parking
area are in the easement. He can write a letter to the property
owner telling
them that the Road District intends to install mailboxes and give
them 30 days
to respond. As I mentioned in a previous email, the
easement is 40ft
wide and the road, Fairfield Cir., is on the east side of the
easement. There
isn’t enough space on the easement east of the road for the
cluster mailboxes,
thus they must be on the west side of the road. See the attached
diagram and
photos for the location and site plan of the mailbox area. A major physical advantage of site #3 is that
we can take use
the existing partly graveled gate entrance immediately south of
the site and
the partly graveled “pull-out” across the road for parking and
making turns. Those
areas make the site relatively spacious. ? This is your opportunity to give a thumbs up or
down to site
#3. I’ll assume that everyone checks their email at least every
other day, so if
you are going to respond, I will expect you to do so by midnight
Wednesday,
March 10. If you give the site a thumbs down, please justify your
response, propose
a reasonable alternative site, or state that you don’t want
mailboxes. The Road District is a hugely important asset
of Fairfield
Estates, and I know from discussions with my neighbors that many
of us wouldn’t
be living here if the main roads weren’t paved. Five roads or
portions of roads
remain to be paved, but they total less than three-quarters of a
mile. The Road District also is a significant tax
burden. Look at
your property tax bill, and you will find that it’s probably
costing you about
$1,000/yr. in taxes. Nathan told me that there is a governance
document for the
Road District although he doesn’t have a copy. He said that
special districts
are usually governed similar to HOAs. I assume that means there
should be an annual
meeting of the members (taxpayers) and an annual financial
statement and
budget. Does anyone have a copy of the Road District governance
document? If not,
I’ll get a copy from the County Recorder Office after the
mailboxes are history.
Ken
|
The Boggie’s are in agreement with the proposed site.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Sir,
The Paddocks are good with the site.
Matthew Paddock On Mar 8, 2021, at 4:21 PM, Ken Cameron via < rocks@...> wrote:
Nathan Williams, the Road District attorney,
and I had a
very productive meeting this morning. Attached is a copy of the
agenda, and he
is cc on this email. Nathan looked at the easement documents for
sites ?#1 (On Fairfield
Cir. near 3 Canyons Blvd.)
and #3 (on Fairfield near Paso Venado). He said that from a legal
point of
view, # 3 was preferred for the mailboxes because the easement
agreement is
actually between the Road District and the previous landowner, and
the
agreement was broader in scope that the easement document for the
Palominas
School District property adjacent to site #1. In fact, he says
that we don’t
need the owner’s permission at site #3 so long as the mailboxes
and parking
area are in the easement. He can write a letter to the property
owner telling
them that the Road District intends to install mailboxes and give
them 30 days
to respond. As I mentioned in a previous email, the
easement is 40ft
wide and the road, Fairfield Cir., is on the east side of the
easement. There
isn’t enough space on the easement east of the road for the
cluster mailboxes,
thus they must be on the west side of the road. See the attached
diagram and
photos for the location and site plan of the mailbox area. A major physical advantage of site #3 is that
we can take use
the existing partly graveled gate entrance immediately south of
the site and
the partly graveled “pull-out” across the road for parking and
making turns. Those
areas make the site relatively spacious. ? This is your opportunity to give a thumbs up or
down to site
#3. I’ll assume that everyone checks their email at least every
other day, so if
you are going to respond, I will expect you to do so by midnight
Wednesday,
March 10. If you give the site a thumbs down, please justify your
response, propose
a reasonable alternative site, or state that you don’t want
mailboxes. The Road District is a hugely important asset
of Fairfield
Estates, and I know from discussions with my neighbors that many
of us wouldn’t
be living here if the main roads weren’t paved. Five roads or
portions of roads
remain to be paved, but they total less than three-quarters of a
mile. The Road District also is a significant tax
burden. Look at
your property tax bill, and you will find that it’s probably
costing you about
$1,000/yr. in taxes. Nathan told me that there is a governance
document for the
Road District although he doesn’t have a copy. He said that
special districts
are usually governed similar to HOAs. I assume that means there
should be an annual
meeting of the members (taxpayers) and an annual financial
statement and
budget. Does anyone have a copy of the Road District governance
document? If not,
I’ll get a copy from the County Recorder Office after the
mailboxes are history.
Ken
|
Diaz family is good to go with the proposal... ?
Sent from my T-Mobile 5G Device
Get
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
The Boggie’s are in agreement with the proposed site.
Mark
Sir,
The Paddocks are good with the site.
Matthew Paddock
On Mar 8, 2021, at 4:21 PM, Ken Cameron via < rocks@...> wrote:
Nathan Williams, the Road District attorney, and I had a very productive meeting this morning. Attached is a copy of the agenda, and he is cc on this email.
Nathan looked at the easement documents for sites
?#1 (On Fairfield Cir. near 3 Canyons Blvd.) and #3 (on Fairfield near Paso Venado). He said that from a legal point of view, # 3 was preferred for the mailboxes because the easement agreement is actually between the Road District and the previous landowner,
and the agreement was broader in scope that the easement document for the Palominas School District property adjacent to site #1. In fact, he says that we don’t need the owner’s permission at site #3 so long as the mailboxes and parking area are in the easement.
He can write a letter to the property owner telling them that the Road District intends to install mailboxes and give them 30 days to respond.
As I mentioned in a previous email, the easement is 40ft wide and the road, Fairfield Cir., is on the east side of the easement. There isn’t enough space on the easement east of the road for the cluster mailboxes, thus they must be on
the west side of the road. See the attached diagram and photos for the location and site plan of the mailbox area.
A major physical advantage of site #3 is that we can take use the existing partly graveled gate entrance immediately south of the site and the partly graveled “pull-out” across the road for parking and making turns. Those areas make the
site relatively spacious. ?
This is your opportunity to give a thumbs up or down to site #3. I’ll assume that everyone checks their email at least every other day, so if you are going to respond, I will expect you to do so by midnight Wednesday, March 10. If you
give the site a thumbs down, please justify your response, propose a reasonable alternative site, or state that you don’t want mailboxes.
The Road District is a hugely important asset of Fairfield Estates, and I know from discussions with my neighbors that many of us wouldn’t be living here if the main roads weren’t paved. Five roads or portions of roads remain to be paved,
but they total less than three-quarters of a mile.
The Road District also is a significant tax burden. Look at your property tax bill, and you will find that it’s probably costing you about $1,000/yr. in taxes. Nathan told me that there is a governance document for the Road District although
he doesn’t have a copy. He said that special districts are usually governed similar to HOAs. I assume that means there should be an annual meeting of the members (taxpayers) and an annual financial statement and budget. Does anyone have a copy of the Road
District governance document? If not, I’ll get a copy from the County Recorder Office after the mailboxes are history.
Ken
<Williams Meeting 2.docx><Figure-1-web.jpg><Figure-2-web.jpg><Figure-3a-web.jpg><Figure-4-web.jpg>
|
I don't have a photo of either option can someone send me a copy.
Thank you, Karen
On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 5:54 PM J DIAZ < chuy_65@...> wrote:
Diaz family is good to go with the proposal... ?
Sent from my T-Mobile 5G Device
Get
The Boggie’s are in agreement with the proposed site.
Mark
Sir,
The Paddocks are good with the site.
Matthew Paddock
On Mar 8, 2021, at 4:21 PM, Ken Cameron via < rocks@...> wrote:
Nathan Williams, the Road District attorney, and I had a very productive meeting this morning. Attached is a copy of the agenda, and he is cc on this email.
Nathan looked at the easement documents for sites
?#1 (On Fairfield Cir. near 3 Canyons Blvd.) and #3 (on Fairfield near Paso Venado). He said that from a legal point of view, # 3 was preferred for the mailboxes because the easement agreement is actually between the Road District and the previous landowner,
and the agreement was broader in scope that the easement document for the Palominas School District property adjacent to site #1. In fact, he says that we don’t need the owner’s permission at site #3 so long as the mailboxes and parking area are in the easement.
He can write a letter to the property owner telling them that the Road District intends to install mailboxes and give them 30 days to respond.
As I mentioned in a previous email, the easement is 40ft wide and the road, Fairfield Cir., is on the east side of the easement. There isn’t enough space on the easement east of the road for the cluster mailboxes, thus they must be on
the west side of the road. See the attached diagram and photos for the location and site plan of the mailbox area.
A major physical advantage of site #3 is that we can take use the existing partly graveled gate entrance immediately south of the site and the partly graveled “pull-out” across the road for parking and making turns. Those areas make the
site relatively spacious. ?
This is your opportunity to give a thumbs up or down to site #3. I’ll assume that everyone checks their email at least every other day, so if you are going to respond, I will expect you to do so by midnight Wednesday, March 10. If you
give the site a thumbs down, please justify your response, propose a reasonable alternative site, or state that you don’t want mailboxes.
The Road District is a hugely important asset of Fairfield Estates, and I know from discussions with my neighbors that many of us wouldn’t be living here if the main roads weren’t paved. Five roads or portions of roads remain to be paved,
but they total less than three-quarters of a mile.
The Road District also is a significant tax burden. Look at your property tax bill, and you will find that it’s probably costing you about $1,000/yr. in taxes. Nathan told me that there is a governance document for the Road District although
he doesn’t have a copy. He said that special districts are usually governed similar to HOAs. I assume that means there should be an annual meeting of the members (taxpayers) and an annual financial statement and budget. Does anyone have a copy of the Road
District governance document? If not, I’ll get a copy from the County Recorder Office after the mailboxes are history.
Ken
<Williams Meeting 2.docx><Figure-1-web.jpg><Figure-2-web.jpg><Figure-3a-web.jpg><Figure-4-web.jpg>
|
Is the propose site across the street from my house at 8081 S. Fairfield circle?
Nathan Williams, the Road District attorney,
and I had a
very productive meeting this morning. Attached is a copy of the
agenda, and he
is cc on this email.
Nathan looked at the easement documents for
sites ?#1 (On Fairfield
Cir. near 3 Canyons Blvd.)
and #3 (on Fairfield near Paso Venado). He said that from a legal
point of
view, # 3 was preferred for the mailboxes because the easement
agreement is
actually between the Road District and the previous landowner, and
the
agreement was broader in scope that the easement document for the
Palominas
School District property adjacent to site #1. In fact, he says
that we don’t
need the owner’s permission at site #3 so long as the mailboxes
and parking
area are in the easement. He can write a letter to the property
owner telling
them that the Road District intends to install mailboxes and give
them 30 days
to respond.
As I mentioned in a previous email, the
easement is 40ft
wide and the road, Fairfield Cir., is on the east side of the
easement. There
isn’t enough space on the easement east of the road for the
cluster mailboxes,
thus they must be on the west side of the road. See the attached
diagram and
photos for the location and site plan of the mailbox area.
A major physical advantage of site #3 is that
we can take use
the existing partly graveled gate entrance immediately south of
the site and
the partly graveled “pull-out” across the road for parking and
making turns. Those
areas make the site relatively spacious. ?
This is your opportunity to give a thumbs up or
down to site
#3. I’ll assume that everyone checks their email at least every
other day, so if
you are going to respond, I will expect you to do so by midnight
Wednesday,
March 10. If you give the site a thumbs down, please justify your
response, propose
a reasonable alternative site, or state that you don’t want
mailboxes.
The Road District is a hugely important asset
of Fairfield
Estates, and I know from discussions with my neighbors that many
of us wouldn’t
be living here if the main roads weren’t paved. Five roads or
portions of roads
remain to be paved, but they total less than three-quarters of a
mile.
The Road District also is a significant tax
burden. Look at
your property tax bill, and you will find that it’s probably
costing you about
$1,000/yr. in taxes. Nathan told me that there is a governance
document for the
Road District although he doesn’t have a copy. He said that
special districts
are usually governed similar to HOAs. I assume that means there
should be an annual
meeting of the members (taxpayers) and an annual financial
statement and
budget. Does anyone have a copy of the Road District governance
document? If not,
I’ll get a copy from the County Recorder Office after the
mailboxes are history.
Ken
|
The Nyander's concur with the proposed site.
Nathan Williams, the Road District attorney,
and I had a
very productive meeting this morning. Attached is a copy of the
agenda, and he
is cc on this email.
Nathan looked at the easement documents for
sites ?#1 (On Fairfield
Cir. near 3 Canyons Blvd.)
and #3 (on Fairfield near Paso Venado). He said that from a legal
point of
view, # 3 was preferred for the mailboxes because the easement
agreement is
actually between the Road District and the previous landowner, and
the
agreement was broader in scope that the easement document for the
Palominas
School District property adjacent to site #1. In fact, he says
that we don’t
need the owner’s permission at site #3 so long as the mailboxes
and parking
area are in the easement. He can write a letter to the property
owner telling
them that the Road District intends to install mailboxes and give
them 30 days
to respond.
As I mentioned in a previous email, the
easement is 40ft
wide and the road, Fairfield Cir., is on the east side of the
easement. There
isn’t enough space on the easement east of the road for the
cluster mailboxes,
thus they must be on the west side of the road. See the attached
diagram and
photos for the location and site plan of the mailbox area.
A major physical advantage of site #3 is that
we can take use
the existing partly graveled gate entrance immediately south of
the site and
the partly graveled “pull-out” across the road for parking and
making turns. Those
areas make the site relatively spacious. ?
This is your opportunity to give a thumbs up or
down to site
#3. I’ll assume that everyone checks their email at least every
other day, so if
you are going to respond, I will expect you to do so by midnight
Wednesday,
March 10. If you give the site a thumbs down, please justify your
response, propose
a reasonable alternative site, or state that you don’t want
mailboxes.
The Road District is a hugely important asset
of Fairfield
Estates, and I know from discussions with my neighbors that many
of us wouldn’t
be living here if the main roads weren’t paved. Five roads or
portions of roads
remain to be paved, but they total less than three-quarters of a
mile.
The Road District also is a significant tax
burden. Look at
your property tax bill, and you will find that it’s probably
costing you about
$1,000/yr. in taxes. Nathan told me that there is a governance
document for the
Road District although he doesn’t have a copy. He said that
special districts
are usually governed similar to HOAs. I assume that means there
should be an annual
meeting of the members (taxpayers) and an annual financial
statement and
budget. Does anyone have a copy of the Road District governance
document? If not,
I’ll get a copy from the County Recorder Office after the
mailboxes are history.
Ken
|
This site/ plan seems great?
- The Apodacas
|
Karen,
No it's not. See the attached map. It's
"before" (south of) Paso Venado.
Ken
On 3/8/2021 6:49 PM, Karen McKnight
wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Is the propose site across the street from my
house at 8081 S. Fairfield circle?
Nathan Williams, the Road District
attorney, and I had a very productive meeting this
morning. Attached is a copy of the agenda, and he is cc
on this email.
Nathan looked at the easement
documents for sites ?#1 (On Fairfield Cir.
near 3 Canyons Blvd.) and #3 (on Fairfield near Paso
Venado). He said that from a legal point of view, # 3
was preferred for the mailboxes because the easement
agreement is actually between the Road District and the
previous landowner, and the agreement was broader in
scope that the easement document for the Palominas
School District property adjacent to site #1. In fact,
he says that we don’t need the owner’s permission at
site #3 so long as the mailboxes and parking area are in
the easement. He can write a letter to the property
owner telling them that the Road District intends to
install mailboxes and give them 30 days to respond.
As I mentioned in a previous email,
the easement is 40ft wide and the road, Fairfield Cir.,
is on the east side of the easement. There isn’t enough
space on the easement east of the road for the cluster
mailboxes, thus they must be on the west side of the
road. See the attached diagram and photos for the
location and site plan of the mailbox area.
A major physical advantage of site #3
is that we can take use the existing partly graveled
gate entrance immediately south of the site and the
partly graveled “pull-out” across the road for parking
and making turns. Those areas make the site relatively
spacious. ?
This is your opportunity to give a
thumbs up or down to site #3. I’ll assume that everyone
checks their email at least every other day, so if you
are going to respond, I will expect you to do so by
midnight Wednesday, March 10. If you give the site a
thumbs down, please justify your response, propose a
reasonable alternative site, or state that you don’t
want mailboxes.
The Road District is a hugely
important asset of Fairfield Estates, and I know from
discussions with my neighbors that many of us wouldn’t
be living here if the main roads weren’t paved. Five
roads or portions of roads remain to be paved, but they
total less than three-quarters of a mile.
The Road District also is a
significant tax burden. Look at your property tax bill,
and you will find that it’s probably costing you about
$1,000/yr. in taxes. Nathan told me that there is a
governance document for the Road District although he
doesn’t have a copy. He said that special districts are
usually governed similar to HOAs. I assume that means
there should be an annual meeting of the members
(taxpayers) and an annual financial statement and
budget. Does anyone have a copy of the Road District
governance document? If not, I’ll get a copy from the
County Recorder Office after the mailboxes are history.
Ken
|
Sounds good.?
Bill Condon.?
Nathan Williams, the Road District attorney,
and I had a
very productive meeting this morning. Attached is a copy of the
agenda, and he
is cc on this email.
Nathan looked at the easement documents for
sites ?#1 (On Fairfield
Cir. near 3 Canyons Blvd.)
and #3 (on Fairfield near Paso Venado). He said that from a legal
point of
view, # 3 was preferred for the mailboxes because the easement
agreement is
actually between the Road District and the previous landowner, and
the
agreement was broader in scope that the easement document for the
Palominas
School District property adjacent to site #1. In fact, he says
that we don’t
need the owner’s permission at site #3 so long as the mailboxes
and parking
area are in the easement. He can write a letter to the property
owner telling
them that the Road District intends to install mailboxes and give
them 30 days
to respond.
As I mentioned in a previous email, the
easement is 40ft
wide and the road, Fairfield Cir., is on the east side of the
easement. There
isn’t enough space on the easement east of the road for the
cluster mailboxes,
thus they must be on the west side of the road. See the attached
diagram and
photos for the location and site plan of the mailbox area.
A major physical advantage of site #3 is that
we can take use
the existing partly graveled gate entrance immediately south of
the site and
the partly graveled “pull-out” across the road for parking and
making turns. Those
areas make the site relatively spacious. ?
This is your opportunity to give a thumbs up or
down to site
#3. I’ll assume that everyone checks their email at least every
other day, so if
you are going to respond, I will expect you to do so by midnight
Wednesday,
March 10. If you give the site a thumbs down, please justify your
response, propose
a reasonable alternative site, or state that you don’t want
mailboxes.
The Road District is a hugely important asset
of Fairfield
Estates, and I know from discussions with my neighbors that many
of us wouldn’t
be living here if the main roads weren’t paved. Five roads or
portions of roads
remain to be paved, but they total less than three-quarters of a
mile.
The Road District also is a significant tax
burden. Look at
your property tax bill, and you will find that it’s probably
costing you about
$1,000/yr. in taxes. Nathan told me that there is a governance
document for the
Road District although he doesn’t have a copy. He said that
special districts
are usually governed similar to HOAs. I assume that means there
should be an annual
meeting of the members (taxpayers) and an annual financial
statement and
budget. Does anyone have a copy of the Road District governance
document? If not,
I’ll get a copy from the County Recorder Office after the
mailboxes are history.
Ken
|
The Zieglers are fine with the proposal
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Mar 8, 2021, at 4:21 PM, Ken Cameron via < rocks@...> wrote:
Nathan Williams, the Road District attorney,
and I had a
very productive meeting this morning. Attached is a copy of the
agenda, and he
is cc on this email. Nathan looked at the easement documents for
sites ?#1 (On Fairfield
Cir. near 3 Canyons Blvd.)
and #3 (on Fairfield near Paso Venado). He said that from a legal
point of
view, # 3 was preferred for the mailboxes because the easement
agreement is
actually between the Road District and the previous landowner, and
the
agreement was broader in scope that the easement document for the
Palominas
School District property adjacent to site #1. In fact, he says
that we don’t
need the owner’s permission at site #3 so long as the mailboxes
and parking
area are in the easement. He can write a letter to the property
owner telling
them that the Road District intends to install mailboxes and give
them 30 days
to respond. As I mentioned in a previous email, the
easement is 40ft
wide and the road, Fairfield Cir., is on the east side of the
easement. There
isn’t enough space on the easement east of the road for the
cluster mailboxes,
thus they must be on the west side of the road. See the attached
diagram and
photos for the location and site plan of the mailbox area. A major physical advantage of site #3 is that
we can take use
the existing partly graveled gate entrance immediately south of
the site and
the partly graveled “pull-out” across the road for parking and
making turns. Those
areas make the site relatively spacious. ? This is your opportunity to give a thumbs up or
down to site
#3. I’ll assume that everyone checks their email at least every
other day, so if
you are going to respond, I will expect you to do so by midnight
Wednesday,
March 10. If you give the site a thumbs down, please justify your
response, propose
a reasonable alternative site, or state that you don’t want
mailboxes. The Road District is a hugely important asset
of Fairfield
Estates, and I know from discussions with my neighbors that many
of us wouldn’t
be living here if the main roads weren’t paved. Five roads or
portions of roads
remain to be paved, but they total less than three-quarters of a
mile. The Road District also is a significant tax
burden. Look at
your property tax bill, and you will find that it’s probably
costing you about
$1,000/yr. in taxes. Nathan told me that there is a governance
document for the
Road District although he doesn’t have a copy. He said that
special districts
are usually governed similar to HOAs. I assume that means there
should be an annual
meeting of the members (taxpayers) and an annual financial
statement and
budget. Does anyone have a copy of the Road District governance
document? If not,
I’ll get a copy from the County Recorder Office after the
mailboxes are history.
Ken
|
The Fish’s concur with the proposed mailbox location #3.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Mar 8, 2021, at 4:21 PM, Ken Cameron via groups.io <rocks@...> wrote:
?
Nathan Williams, the Road District attorney, and I had a very productive meeting this morning. Attached is a copy of the agenda, and he is cc on this email.
Nathan looked at the easement documents for sites
?#1 (On Fairfield Cir. near 3 Canyons Blvd.) and #3 (on Fairfield near Paso Venado). He said that from a legal point of view, # 3 was preferred for the mailboxes because the easement agreement is actually between the Road District and the previous landowner,
and the agreement was broader in scope that the easement document for the Palominas School District property adjacent to site #1. In fact, he says that we don’t need the owner’s permission at site #3 so long as the mailboxes and parking area are in the easement.
He can write a letter to the property owner telling them that the Road District intends to install mailboxes and give them 30 days to respond.
As I mentioned in a previous email, the easement is 40ft wide and the road, Fairfield Cir., is on the east side of the easement. There isn’t enough space on the easement east of the road for the cluster mailboxes, thus they must be on the
west side of the road. See the attached diagram and photos for the location and site plan of the mailbox area.
A major physical advantage of site #3 is that we can take use the existing partly graveled gate entrance immediately south of the site and the partly graveled “pull-out” across the road for parking and making turns. Those areas make the
site relatively spacious. ?
This is your opportunity to give a thumbs up or down to site #3. I’ll assume that everyone checks their email at least every other day, so if you are going to respond, I will expect you to do so by midnight Wednesday, March 10. If you give
the site a thumbs down, please justify your response, propose a reasonable alternative site, or state that you don’t want mailboxes.
The Road District is a hugely important asset of Fairfield Estates, and I know from discussions with my neighbors that many of us wouldn’t be living here if the main roads weren’t paved. Five roads or portions of roads remain to be paved,
but they total less than three-quarters of a mile.
The Road District also is a significant tax burden. Look at your property tax bill, and you will find that it’s probably costing you about $1,000/yr. in taxes. Nathan told me that there is a governance document for the Road District although
he doesn’t have a copy. He said that special districts are usually governed similar to HOAs. I assume that means there should be an annual meeting of the members (taxpayers) and an annual financial statement and budget. Does anyone have a copy of the Road
District governance document? If not, I’ll get a copy from the County Recorder Office after the mailboxes are history.
Ken
<Williams Meeting 2.docx>
<Figure-1-web.jpg>
<Figure-2-web.jpg>
<Figure-3a-web.jpg>
<Figure-4-web.jpg>
|
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
?
|
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
?
|
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
?
|
Ken,
First: From what I know they have turned it over to their attorney.? I contacted the president of the board using this page.?
Their?office called me and said they would run it by their?attorney. I have no Idea how long it will take but I will follow up in a week. If you would like we can assign?a deadline to consider this option exhausted.?
Second: I am not sure how you are used to conducting business. I think leveraging an attorney at $250 per hour or so, to write letters is a waste of money. I do not know what our tab with Nathan is up to, but I fear getting a bill for several thousand dollars. I understand you want to send the property owner behind site #3 a courtesy notice. However, if anyone sent me a letter from an attorney?I would be very alarmed. Why do we need to have an attorney write a letter where a friendly conversation can take place??
Third:?We left the meeting in agreement that more information was to be obtained. We need:?
1. Where the property line is exactly via a land survey. 2. Will the post office provide the mail boxes. If not, how much will it cost?? 3. How much will the slab and gravel cost??
Once we have a total estimate per viable site, we can take a vote for approval during the next board meeting.?
Fourth: I appreciate all your efforts, I really do. For the respect of the district members, residents, and property owners, we need to stick to what was voted on. We are just getting back on track as a board with active members. We need to remember that we have requirements as a district to post meeting notices,?agenda, and results to the public. If we are making judgements and approvals via email without public notice we are opening ourselves up to liability. Everything needs to be documented and publicly available.?
Jimmy R.?
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
?
--
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
The contents of this email message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee(s)
and may contain confidential and/or privileged information and may be legally protected from
disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message or their agent, or if this message
has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply email and then
delete this message and any attachments. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any use, dissemination, copying, or storage of this message or its attachments is
strictly prohibited.?
|
