RANCHO MURIETA, CA (MPG) - The Rancho Murieta Association (RMA) Board of Directors managed to address half a dozen issues during their Sept. 17 monthly meeting, which lasted only 50 minutes.

The agenda included discussions on juvenile misconduct within the community, a proposed budget that will slightly raise monthly dues, and the annexation of a new development. Additionally, the board revisited a previous claim by one director, alleging that other members had a conflict of interest in approving a residences subdivision trail on Aug. 2.

In other matters, the board was informed that the upcoming election for two vacant seats will be uncontested, as the only candidates are incumbents Tom Reimers and John Van Doren. The board also approved spending $46,500 to replace the tile roofs of the Laguna Joaquin gazebo and restrooms with metal ones.

Misbehaving Juveniles

Director Chris Childs informed the board that recent incidents involving two juveniles misbehaving while riding electric dirt bikes prompted him to propose exploring potential solutions to better control pedestrian and cyclist access through the gates. One suggestion was to implement a keypad entry system utilizing the security codes already provided to residents.

Childs reported, “quite a bit of chatter” on social media about two juveniles riding electric dirt bikes inside the gates, on roads, trails and even across the golf course, including areas near the driving range, through flower beds, and along the first fairway, leaving tire tracks.

“And anytime they’re approached, they simply hit the gas, or the electricity, and run up the trails,” Childs said. “We know where they live, but it is across the highway, which really calls into question how we control the pedestrians and bicyclists that come in through the North Gate and the South Gate, but particularly, the North Gate because we have that huge shopping center across the highway.”

Childs emphasized that the board owes it to RMA members to explore improvements to the current security system at the gates. He also made a second request to the community regarding the juveniles.

He urged residents not to approach the dirt bike riders but instead to record videos of their actions and submit the footage confidentially to RMA Compliance Supervisor Chris Smith. He also advised against posting the juveniles' faces on social media, as they are minors.

Childs also pointed out that, under California Vehicle Code, the youths are technically riding motorcycles, which requires them to wear helmets and have the “M” endorsement on their driver's licenses.

When Childs asked which committee should review his proposal to control pedestrian and cyclist access, General Manager Rod Hart suggested the Architectural Review Committee as the appropriate starting point.

Director Tom Reimers, chair of the Compliance Committee, added that he has observed the juveniles riding along Murieta Parkway without wearing a shirt or helmet and had also seen them “sneaking around” the Lago Gate.

RMA General Manager Rod Hart said he wanted to clarify a proposal to annex part of the Murieta Hills Residences subdivision, which had been discussed at the August Board meeting. 

He explained that developer Bob Keil had approached him late last year about annexing the entire subdivision, consisting of 198 lots. In response, Hart provided Keil with the RMA design guidelines and allowed him to attend an Architectural Review Committee meeting.

“Within four days, he handed back the documents and said, ‘We can’t stay within those parameters,’” Hart said.

However, Keil remained interested in the annexation of three lots along Puerto Drive, which can only be accessed from that street and not from within the subdivision.

“He’s made that request but without any proof they’ll meet those requirements,” Hart said. “That hasn’t been approved, nor has it been voted on. If it does get to that point, it will be voted on in open session.”

Director Scott Adams added that if Keil's three-lot annexation request comes before the board, his main concern would be for the existing neighbors. “We just want to make sure the area looks consistent,” he said.

Director Danny Carrillo’s belief that other directors had a conflict of interest surfaced for the third time at the Sept. 17 meeting. Carrillo concluded the discussion by apologizing to his fellow board members.

His concerns first emerged on Aug. 2, when the board held a special meeting to consider Developer Bob Keil's proposal for construction of a trail section through a wooded area in the Residences subdivision. The board ultimately approved a plan in which the developer would grade an 8-foot-wide natural surface trail, install a wooden bridge over a sensitive area, and grant the association a 20-foot-wide easement for future trail maintenance. 

Additionally, Keil agreed to deposit $50,000 into an account so RMA could pave the trail in the future. 

Initially, when Keil sought approval for the trail over a year ago, the board required it to be paved and 12-feet wide.

The board voted 5:1 in favor of the compromise and forwarded the association’s two votes to the Parks Committee.

Carrillo was the lone dissenting vote, arguing that any board member who had privately communicated with the developer should have recused themselves from the vote due to a potential conflict of interest. He also raised concerns about possible collusion and expressed a desire to seek legal counsel's opinion.

Carrillo's conflict-of-interest concerns re-emerged at the Aug. 20 board meeting, where he took the unusual step of leaving his seat to address the other directors from the public podium. He reiterated his belief that some directors had a conflict of interest, which he felt had compromised the Aug. 2 vote. Carrillo also made similar criticisms about the annexation of the three Residences lots although the board had yet to vote on that issue.

 The RMA Board allows members to talk about about non-agendized topics during public comments. However, the board isn’t obligated to respond to member comments per state HOA law. Nobody responded to Carrillo's remarks at the Aug. 20 meeting.

The trail compromise came up again at the Sept. 18 board meeting when President Scott Adams reported that the Parks Committee had approved the compromise during their Aug. 28 meeting. Adams also noted that Hart, along with various board members, including Carrillo, had met with Keil six or seven times to work on a resolution for the trail before the Aug. 2 meeting.

During the discussion of the Parks Committee report, Directors Van Doren and Patrick O’Hern addressed the criticisms Carrillo had raised at the two previous meetings.

 Van Doren, an attorney, directly responded to Carrillo’s claim that two directors should have recused themselves due to a conflict of interest and possible collusion because they had spoken to Keil before voting.

“I would point out that communication with a developer does not amount to collusion,” Van Doren said, referencing the relevant penal code section. “In this case, there is absolutely no evidence set forth that Director (Renee) Bechtold or O’Hern operated in an attempt to collude or commit an illegal conspiracy.”

O’Hern, also an attorney, offered a more extensive response, though he never mentioned Carrillo by name. O’Hern said he had been “blindsided with unfounded allegations of unethical behavior or possible collusion by another member of the board” during the Aug. 2 special meeting. However, according to Carrillo’s comments at the Aug. 20 meeting, O’Hern had interestingly gone from being an unethical board member to one with integrity because he had been transparent about communicating with the developer.

O’Hern said that by making accusatory comments at both meetings, “The board member seems fixated on creating an atmosphere of adversity within the board.” He emphasized that while board members may not always agree, they were elected to work as a team to determine what is best for the community and the association. He also noted that Carrillo’s accusations had “a chilling effect on the board.”

Carrillo immediately responded, saying, “I hear Director O’Hern’s concerns. I greatly apologize for any uncomfortableness that I may have caused you and anybody else on this board. It was never my intention.”

Carrillo then shook hands with O’Hern and proceeded to shake hands with the other directors, with the exception of Bechtold, who was not present at the meeting.

During his Nominating Committee report, O’Hern announced that only the two incumbents, Director Reimers and Van Doren, had applied for the upcoming vacancies. Since the election will not be contested, O’Hern declared the Nominating Committee dissolved.

After the meeting, Adams was asked about the Annual Meeting and Election scheduled for Nov. 21. 

He acknowledged the potential challenge of receiving enough ballots to meet the 40% quorum required, given the uncontested election. Without sufficient votes, the new directors cannot be sworn in.

However, Adams pointed out that a recently passed law allows the board to schedule another meeting if the quorum isn’t met, at which only 20 percent of the membership would be required.