Thursday, February 19, 2009

Nellie Gail ARC Info, the real deal...

I would appreciate you taking a few seconds to review this matter for the good of yourself, and the entire community

Some of you may have received a document, hand delivered to your door, that is truly a work of fantasy.
While some facts are true, most of it is constructed to manipulate you.

Here are the facts:

  • The revised ARC guidelines restore your property rights that were taken away in 2005. Prior to 2005, the guidelines read Recreational uses shall be limited to landscaped areas; swimming pools; children’s play areas; single story recreational, storage or agricultural buildings; horse stables and corrals; tennis and sports courts.”

  • From 1996-2005 ARC projects were supposed to be judged on their own merit. The new document reverts to those same values. You still can not build on more than 35% of your pad to maintain open space. Read the new document yourself.

  • These new revisions ARE NOT in conflict with the CC&R's. Dig out your copy and read them. They clearly state "other uses." That would imply the listed uses were not all that was approved, but were specifically mentioned so that they COULD NOT BE ELIMINATED, not that they were the only uses.
  • The HOA is currently under threat of being sued, because people who bought their homes prior to 2005 with the expectation of being able to enjoy their property in compliance with the guidelines that WERE in place, are now no longer able to. This comes from Association Attorneys.

  • I am for property rights. Many of us spent millions of dollars on these properties and should have the right to enjoy them, within reason. I want my property rights restored, responsibly, back to the way it was in 2005. in this economy we should encourage investment in our properties to keep our home values stable and have them increase.

The question I have for you is: Are these changes reasonable to YOU?

What ever your opinion, please send an email to your board of directors through:

Don't let this very vocal minority continue to take away your rights.

- and pass this along to your friends so their opinion can be heard as well.

Rebecca Zomorodian

To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson

Revised Guidelines may be found here:
Nellie Gail Ranch ARC Proposed Guidelines - or I would be happy to email you a copy.

Here are the current Guidelines - you may want to compare.

More information on this issue can be found at:

From the web site: "That’s all it took! Creation of an ad-hoc committee one meeting, approval of their recommendations the next and POOF - 30 years of precedents for property rights are gone! 5 individuals with an agenda took control of every homeowner’s back yard without the input of a single resident. As a result of the new Architectural Guidelines, the current Board now mandates that any use of "Open Space" be limited exclusively to equestrian or agricultural use . Any other use is prohibited. This action was taken against the explicit recommendation of the retained Landscape Architect at that time, Daniel Stewart, who expressed his concern ofdisastrous implicationsof the revisions in a letter submitted to the board (see Daniel Stewart Letter page - a must read).

After this letter surfaced during an Architectural Appeal to the Board, Mr. Stewart was informed his services were no longer required at Nellie Gail. Don't believe the position that the 2005 Board was simply acting on the recommendation of our legal council when they changed our Architectural Guidelines. The minutes clearly show that legal approval was sought after the fact."

(This email was copied with permission)


Anonymous said...

So technically a barn on any space would no longer be Open Space?

Open space
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Open space may refer to:

In urban planning and conservation ethics:

* Landscape, areas of land sans human-built structures.
* Open space reserve, areas of protected or conserved land on which development is indefinitely set aside.
* Urban open space, urban areas of protected or conserved land on which development is indefinitely set aside.
* Greenway (landscape), a linear chain of open space reserves or a recreational corridor through the same.
* Public space, areas left open for the use of the public, such as a piazza, plaza, park, and courtyard

Anonymous said...

It needs to be said that the very same people who chastised James Vaughn for not using his name
- and for allowing posts to be recorded here anonymously -
have sent to documents to your home numerous times ALL WITHOUT THEIR NAME.

Anonymous said...

From the Nellie Gail for Property Rights Web Site:
Restore Property Rights to ALL

Nellie Gail Ranch Residents
The revisions made to the August 2005 Architectural Guidelines were based on a new and deliberately biased interpretation of our CCR's. The following information outlines the historical interpretation of our CCR's to demonstrate how out of step the current interpretation is. It is a little dry but important information.

The authors of the original Nellie Gail CC&R's could not have known what specific types of recreation would be popular 30 years later but they clearly contemplated and allowed for Open Space areas to include a variety of uses. They made this clear by creating 4 separate and distinct categories for uses within Open Space areas.

Section 12 page 35 of the CC&R's:
"That portion of each Lot, other than the graded pad for residential construction, is hereby designated a natural or open space area and shall be subject to certain additional restrictions limiting the use thereof. Those areas shall be limited to the following uses:

1. Equestrian - including barns, stables, corrals, and similar facilities in connection therewith.
2. Agricultural - including animal husbandry (subject to County regulation), gardening, orchards, pastures, hothouses, greenhouses, etc., subject to the County Building Code.
3. Fire Hazard Reduction Regions
4. Other similar Open Space uses"

The only reason for creating a separate and distinct "Other similar Open Space uses" category was to include recreational uses other than Equestrian or Agricultural. It is Obvious that the authors realized many homeowners would participate in non-equestrian recreation and included this language to support their pursuits.

This logical interpretation of the CCR's has been in place throughout the 30 year history of Nellie Gail. In fact, the 1996 Architectural Guidelines provide express approval of a variety of uses in Open Space areas:

Page 1, paragraph 1 under the heading "NATURAL/OPEN SPACE"

Natural/open space areas are designated for equestrian, agricultural and limited recreational uses.

Page 2, paragraph 2 under the heading "NATURAL/OPEN SPACE"

Recreational uses shall be limited to landscaped areas; swimming pools; children's play areas; single story recreational, storage or agricultural buildings; horse stables and corrals; tennis and sports courts."

At some point early on in 2005 the Board felt they had enough of non-equestrian use of Open Space and decided to develop a new interpretation of the CC&R's. They blended the 4 separate and distinct categories for use of Open Space into a single sentence. "Natural/open space areas are designated for equestrian, agricultural, fire hazard reduction regions and other similar open space uses."

The intent is to have the reader interpret the "Similar open space uses" as being tied to "equestrian" or "agricultural" uses when in fact the authors of the CC&R's clearly intended the category to be independent of the others.

Feeling comfortable that they could successfully manipulate the interpretation of the CC&R language, the 2005 Board members took action to restrict our Property Rights (see "How We Lost our Rights" page).