Three Canyons Ranch Master Homeowners' Association
P. O. Box 970
Hereford, AZ  85615
Board Meeting Minutes

February 12, 2003

Members Signed In:
Tommy Stoner, Nancy and Paul Howard, Mike Roddey, Bill and May Sowards, Sandy and Winston Witwer, Christine Paris, Sue and Bob Schneider, Richard Pomroy, David Dueltgen, Ron Slyter, P.J. and Jim Picard, Liz Woods, David and Dorothy Brown, Ronnie Mestaz
Board Members Present:
Tom Pickering, Evans Guidroz, Jim Arndt, Rita Doyle, Jack Dempsey, Gene Mundt, Darryl Crowley, David Paris, Gerald Chouinard
Board Members Absent:
Jim Dobis, Gary Brock

Call to Order
Acceptance of January 8, 2003 Minutes
The minutes were unanimously accepted.

Acceptance of Agenda
The agenda was accepted with the addition of Quit Claim Deed status and Association Rules under Old Business, and Annual Meeting,  Postal Boxes and Statement from Gene Mundt under New Business..

Call to Membership
May Sowards asked how to go about receiving meeting minutes by USPS.  She was directed to see R. Doyle after the meeting.

President's Report
T. Pickering brought up the light issue again.  He explained that lights become beacons for illegals and also spoke of the astronomers in the area.  He recounted a story of 4 illegals coming to his door one early morning shortly after turning on his lights.  The illegals asked for money.    Lights should be shielded.  For further information regarding astronomers refer to the following website managed by Doug Snyder:  http://www.palominas.com/

Treasurer's Report
J. Dempsey reported the following account information:
Regular Fund                              $29,547.38
Capital Fund                               $61,625.65
Principal owed                            $282,500.01

Attorney's Report  (For the sake of clarity, this update was delivered at 7:15p and only that information reported before this meeting was adjourned, is included in these minutes.)
Ms. DoPadre has been clearing up ownership issues involving land developers and construction companies who have been swapping land between each other.  Multiple meetings have occurred to straighten out these ownership issues.
Status of Castle & Cook Documents Meeting with representatives of C&C was postponed due to an unexpectedly long jury trial.  A new meeting will be rescheduled and the President will be apprised of the outcome within 10 days.
Status of Quit Claim Deeds We are receiving calls from local owners who were given courtesy calls to come in to sign their deeds, the consensus is the owners are unwilling to sign the deeds until the Board has voted to waive the minimum acreage and density pursuant to the CC&R's.

Committee Reports
Master Design. D. Crowley reported the committee had met the previous Monday and had approved 4 new submissions for landscaping and fencing.

Governing Documents No activity as opinion from lawyer has not been received.

Election R. Slyter had no report at this time.

Gate J. Arndt reported the following:
East Gate No progress to report.
South Gate (Bloomfield gate) This gate was completely obliterated on 1/26/03.  J. Arndt made a motion that the gate at the southeast corner of Section 26 be abandoned and a new gate be installed at the northeast corner of Section 26 blocking access coming North on Calle Cielo Grande.  He gave the following as support for his motion:
1)       The current gate location is on the property of Richard Flanery and not on 3 Canyons common area, therefore, no additional funding can be spent on this gate.
2)       All residents of Section 26 have the benefit of ingress and egress over the South 30 feet of the North half, and the North 30 feet of the Southwest quarter of Section 26.  (Cochise County Record 960410887).  The Association has no authority to limit or restrict their enjoyment of this easement.
3)       By virtue of the Quit Claim deeds written for 3 Canyons Road, the property at the Northeast corner of Section 26 is or will be common area and the Association can properly allocate funding for a gate and any required fencing.
Seconded by R. Doyle.

Discussion:
- T. Pickering asked about advantages to this proposed plan:  R. Doyle said the location would be more visible and perhaps less likely to be vandalized.  J. Picard said he does not speak for all residents of Section 26, but the vast majority would prefer the gate's relocation.
- D. Crowley voiced his concern that the problem would then become a Siesta Way issue and illegal traffic would channel through there.  J. Picard and R. Pomroy stated that Tom Tesky gave permission to some to use his property as a thru-way, but that Siesta Way is not a continuous easement.  J. Picard said if the gate were relocated to the proposed site, this thru-way could be barricaded off. 
- T. Pickering asked if there was any other access to 3 Canyons.  The answer was no.  Bloomfield is gated at the West end and no other thru-ways exist. 
- J. Picard said the new proposal was especially important since significant funds would be required to replace the gate.  He added a cattle gate (which was what the Bloomfield gate was) would not be sufficient as a means for restricting access.
- E. Guidroz said if a lease agreement was obtained from Mr. Flanery, money could be spent to replace the gate at its original site.  J. Arndt countered with the fact that Section 26 has legal access and it never should have been gated.
- R. Pomroy said that with the exception of the Vorans, Section 26 residents do not have legal access to Calle Cielo Grande.
- T. Stoner suggested having the gate on common area and  tire spikes added to control exit and entry.
- J.  Arndt suggested various design ideas be considered if motion was approved. 
G. Chouinard said if there was an advantage to this suggestion to let's go ahead with it, and asked if anyone could think of any disadvantages.  Other than possible traffic on Siesta Way, if not properly barricaded, no one could think of any. 
- B. Pickering asked what would keep this gate from being vandalized. The fact that it would be in a more visible location and perhaps stronger because of the ability to spend funds to get a proper gate were cited.
- J. Dempsey said he hated the idea of "letting the bad guys win". 
- R. Pomroy said to do the gate properly, easements would need to be obtained from adjoining property owners so fencing could be placed to insure that the new gate could not be circumvented.
- D. Crowley suggested that wording of the motion be changed so these ideas could be further explored.  D. Paris suggested the motion be changed to "Explore the feasibility of replacing the Bloomfield gate to a new location at Calle Cielo Grande and 3 Canyons Road on the Northeast corner of Section 26".  J. Arndt restated his motion as above.  R. Doyle seconded.  Passed unanimously.

West Gate Cable has been installed and the Road committee has been notified that paving can proceed.  The Control box which contains the key pad entry represents a real threat to people accessing the panel at night.  There would be some legal exposure to the Board for having public property unlighted at night.  J. Arndt made a motion that the Board approve an expenditure not to exceed $2,000.00 for lights (similar to those in front of the West gate) to be installed in the area were the control box is located.  J. Dempsey seconded.

Discussion:

J. Dempsey asked if J. Arndt was planning to get more bids.  J. Arndt reported he had obtained 3 different bids and this was the cheapest. 
G. Mundt asked if this would be a capital or regular budget expense.  It would be capital.
P.J. Picard asked how much had been spent on the West gate to date.  The answer was approximately $40,000.00.
R. Slyter said that in addition to lights, the trees in the area of the control box would need to be trimmed.
J. Arndt asked if he should get bids on tree trimming?
L. Woods suggested organizing a community work day where volunteers could do tree trimming and clean up of the area.  This would save considerable funds.  J. Arndt agreed to organize this event.
P.J. Picard added that a community work day might be a step toward establishing more positive relationships with our neighbors within the Association.
M. Sowards expressed her displeasure with 3 Canyons and said she was unable to sell her property because of the reputation 3 Canyons had.  She said she still did not know what benefit she derived from being part of a homeowner's association and said that when she asked this question before, she was told she would have help in suing her neighbor.  R. Doyle who remembered Ms. Sowards asking this question at a previous board meeting stated that was not the response she received from a Board member.  D. Paris explained he had been shown two different areas when he was looking to buy land.  One area was protected by CC&R's the other was not.  He described the difference between the two in an effort to show Ms. Sowards benefits were derived by the protection afforded homeowner's under CC&R's.

The motion was approved unanimously.

J. Arndt said there were two maintenance items that required expenditure approval, the emergency battery back-up for the right entrance gate (the West gate is comprised of 4 separate gates), and a damaged security cable.  He made a motion that both items be replaced for under $400.  J. Arndt would submit half of these expenditures to Castle & Cooke for reimbursement. Seconded by J. Dempsey.  Motion was approved unanimously.
S. Boillot asked if the Association was insured for damage to the gate.  Yes.
R. Slyter asked if half the cost of the lights could be submitted to Castle & Cooke?  No, because the lights would not be considered "maintenance."
S. Boillot added that the lights would be on C&C property, shouldn't they bear some of the cost?  J. Arndt said he would consider adding half the costs of the lights to C&C. 
T. Pickering reiterated the agreement with C&C which states that repairs will be made within 5 days of written notification to C&C.
J. Arndt told of his hours up at the west gate and the many motorists from the Rio Rancho II area who stopped by to inquire about access, to voice their displeasure at the gate, and some who threatened to sue once the gate was operable.  J. Arndt said there was lots of confusion resulting from outright lies being told by real estate agents who claimed some of these people would have access to a paved 3 Canyons Road.  J. Arndt made a motion that the Association adopt the following rule: 3 Canyons Ranch Master Homeowner's Association will allow all residents of Rio Rancho Estates full access of 3 Canyons Road, west gate, and the future east gate upon payment of $240 annually to cover Capitol expenses and maintenance costs.

R. Doyle seconded.

Discussion:
G. Chouinard questioned whether this would be legal and said we would need an opinion from counsel.
J. Arndt said the CC&R's covered usage fees and this could fall under that provision.
E. Guidroz asked which Rio Rancho Jim was referring to.  Rio Rancho II.
T. Pickering said this would be precedent setting and was perhaps premature since we did not have the east and west gates operating and, therefore, did not know what kind of problems we would encounter.
J. Dempsey considered whether the $240 made sense as compared to the assessments paid by 3 Canyons homeowners.
T. Stoner said the Board should look into rules concerning toll roads before any agreement is reached with Rio Rancho II.
R. Slyter said the original intent when 3 Canyons was developed was only to allow access to the East for Rio Rancho residents.  He believes that giving access codes to residents outside of 3 Canyons would result in those codes being compromised.  He hoped this issue would go no further than this discussion and never be brought up again.
J. Picard said with the exit loop installed at the west gate it becomes a one-way gate allowing egress only.
T. Pickering explained the original intention was to have a code required for egress as well as ingress, but that arrangement had problems of its own. 

The subject of the county taking over the road came up again and the following was mentioned:
R. Slyter said that the county did not have the funds to take over 3 Canyons.
T. Pickering said he remembers Pat Call, County Supervisor saying exactly that.
R. Pomroy said before 3 Canyons was improved, the county was approached to see if they were interested in taking over the road.  The county would have required many upgrades to 3 Canyons that were cost prohibitive.  He said in the condition it is in now, perhaps they would consider it.

J. Picard said when the west gate was operational, he expected someone with a large 4X4 to ram it.
P.J. Picard suggested that only clickers be given to Rio Rancho II residents and not access codes. 
G. Chouinard asked whether clickers could  be homelinked.  Yes, it was believed they could be.
The vote was J. Arndt for, J. Dempsey abstained, and the remaining board members opposed.

Old Business

Association rules - J. Arndt asked that wording of one Association rule be changed from "One membership is equal to one acre of land and 100 square foot of residence" to "One membership is allotted for each full acre of land plus one membership is allotted for each full 100 square feet of dwelling space.  No fractional memberships are allowed."

Passed unanimously.

Quit Claim deed status T. Pickering said he believed the deeds had all gone out and that the attorney was now waiting for the signed copies to be returned.

R. Doyle said she spoke to a  neighbor who was building on the corner of Deer Ridge Trail and 3 Canyons Road.  She asked them if they had received a Quit Claim deed from the attorney and the answer was no.  She then contacted several other parties with property fronting 3 Canyons Road and none of the 8 people she called had received deeds.  R. Slyter and M. Roddey who were in attendance and have land fronting 3 Canyons reported they had not received deeds either.  R. Doyle read the minutes of the December meeting where the attorney's report states "Status of Quit Claim deeds - The majority of deeds should be received over the next month.  January 2003 minutes will provide number of deeds received and number outstanding."  The January attorney's report did not provide those numbers.  R. Doyle said it appeared that the Association had been misinformed.  

E. Guidroz and G. Chouinard, both of whom have large parcels of  land fronting 3 Canyons Road, said they received phone calls to come in to sign a Quit Claim deed, but did not receive deeds in the mail.  R. Doyle said the November minutes state: "The deeds will be mailed over the next week after confirmation of changes due to recent ownership transfers".  This information was obtained directly from the attorney's report and yet it appears no mailing of deeds had occurred.  R. Doyle expressed her concern over this matter and others concerning the administrative work being performed by the attorney's office at a cost to the Association of $775/month.  R.  Doyle reported the membership list was terribly outdated and did not even include address changes that she had forwarded to the attorney's office via email several months ago.  She questioned whether the Association was getting their money's worth.  R. Doyle suggested the Association look into a homeowners management service that did nothing but this kind of work.  She said that Winterhaven used a firm in Tucson, but had a representative who lived in Sierra Vista.  He would be willing to attend monthly Board meetings and perform assignments as directed.

T. Pickering stated the attorney was not in attendance to defend his position and suggested the secretary send a letter to the attorney citing these specific examples.

J. Dempsey stated he thought the service had gone down hill since the contract for administrative services had been signed with Cardinal & Stachel.  He said he had requested information from M. DoPadre in November and told her he needed it right away.  He has not received that information yet.  He suggested Board members send their complaints to the secretary for inclusion in the letter that is to be drafted.
J. Arndt believes committee members have been negatively impacted by the lack of current and accurate membership data.

New Business
Changes to CC&R's The governing document committee has submitted changes in wording to Master Declaration 20.1  They are awaiting the attorney's ruling.  T. Pickering addressed the issue of  a 50% return of votes, but J. Picard said it was the fact that a non-vote was now counting as a "no" vote that was the issue.  G. Chouinard asked about a party not receiving notice of a vote.  T. Pickering said that discussions with the attorney resulted in the opinion that the 1st class mailing of ballots was acceptable.

G. Mundt thought you had to have a 51% return of ballots to stay within state law.

D. Dueltgen asked if voting could take place at the annual meeting.  The answer is that the CC&R's require a full-membership mailing.

Notification to owners with parcels not meeting 4 or 8 acre minimums - The letter addressing this issue has not yet been seen by the attorney.

Bloomfield gate replacement - covered under committee reports - gate.

Annual Meeting - The annual meeting will be held on July 26, 2003 at the Pueblo del Sol Country Club.  The date of July 19 was not available.  The meeting will start at 12:00 noon.
Discussion :
D. Dueltgen said that more sign-in people needed to be in place to prevent the long lines that resulted at last year's annual meeting.

T. Stoner said the Election committee proposes the following recommendation:  That the meeting be held no sooner than 16 days after the assessments are due.

Gene Mundt was advised by counsel to make the following statement for the record:  He will be acting on behalf of San Pedro Development to act as the Architectural Design committee for the Wildhorse subdivision.  Wildhorse has more stringent CC&R's than does 3 Canyons and therefore has its own review process.

Postal Boxes N. Howard gave a presentation regarding the placement of postal boxes within 3 Canyons.  Since the post office must own the property on which cluster boxes are located, the likelihood that a property owner would deed a portion of the land to the USPS is nil.  (It has been tried unsuccessfully.)  Also, the postal workers are unionized and as such cannot make deliveries on private roads.  For the immediate future, mail delivery within 3 Canyons seems very unlikely.

The attorney's report arrived at 7:15 p and the subjects noted in the attorney's report on Page 1 were covered briefly at this point during the meeting.

M. Roddey asked about CC&R's and the fence setbacks.

T. Stoner researched the CC&R's and the Board does not have the right to override acreage minimums; that requires a vote of the membership and possibly a variance.

N. Howard (who has property fronting 3 Canyons Road) asked if she should wait to hear about the Quit-Claim.  T. Pickering answered yes.

Call to Membership
D. Brown asked if Castle & Cooke would give use of their property for cluster boxes.  The answer was no since there was still the matter of a private road and the postal workers not being allowed to deliver on private roads.

J. Dempsey asked what about the turn out area that houses the control panel/key pad.  Castle & Cooke owns that land and would not give it to the USPS.  G. Chouinard asked if the postal service had to own or could they lease the land.  N. Howard said they required a deed to the land.

T. Stoner mentioned that people would be wise to check with their insurance carrier to insure they are on record.  Apparently, a post office address, as opposed to a physical street address for mail delivery can occasionally cause problems and affect your ISO rating.
J. Picard mentioned he had sent a letter to T. Pickering on January 9 regarding the subject of constructive resignation of a board member and had not received a response.  He asked that the letter be included in these minutes.  That request was denied.  T. Pickering said he had recently got back his key to the mail box, and had not been told about the letter. 
The members in attendance were asked if they preferred this new location for our monthly meetings, and the response was overwhelmingly "yes."

The minutes are no longer distributed through US mail.  They will be posted on the website at az3canyons.com.  To receive via email, contact J. Arndt at Arndt8620@aol.com.  To receive a mailed copy, send $15 to the Association to cover the cost of the mailing for one year.
The meeting adjourned at 7:40pm.

The next Board meeting will be held on March 12, 2003 at the La Purisma Retreat Center.  Take Hwy 92 S to Stoneridge Road (approximately 2 miles south of the 3 Canyons entrance) on the right.  It's the first building on the left and has a blue roof.

Rita C. Doyle

Secretary

Last updated: 27 February 2003 by REW.