Editor:

My wife and I were recently shocked by the fraud and favoritism shown by the RMA’s Architectural Review Committee (ARC).

We asked ARC approval to build a 40-foot privacy screen using white vinyl lattice. They said that “white vinyl was not an approved product” and we were required to use redwood lattice which we did. They also recommended clear coat. We spent $700 to paint the lattice white because (1) we asked for white (2) clear coat was a recommendation (3) the CC&Rs (Article IV, Section 2i) require lattice to be in the color family of the structure (our house is white) and (4) most RM residents have lattice painted to match their house. 

Our neighbor had the ARC staff issue his good friend a fraudulent stop work order (SWO) because he didn’t want the lattice painted white. The staff lied in the SWO by saying we were required to use clear coat then lied again by stating “the painting of the lattice is in violation of the CC&Rs …” (later the board chair committed fraud in his letter when he changed “white vinyl” to “white material” to cover redwood).

We appealed the fraudulent SWO to the RMA general manager, the ARC and the RMA Board. The ARC required us to waste the $700 white paint job which matched our house and repaint the lattice gray to match our trim. At the board appeal, we planned on discussing the issues with the staff in front of the board. They excluded the staff, asked no questions, and upheld the ARC order. In six months, not one RMA representative in the entire organization would look us in the eye and talk about staff fraud. 

Many residents have negative views of ARC staff as self-important and non-helpful which results in their making improvements without asking for the CC&R required approval. As an example, ARC prohibits use of white vinyl lattice. This lattice has been used in the past and presently (white and painted) all over RM North.

The behavior of the RMA defeats the purpose of the CC&Rs.