Property Owner Update

---

November 29, 2023

This letter is being sent to you because you responded to the petition request circulated last spring regarding a possible funding increase for road maintenance here in Hidden Meadows (San Diego Countywide Permanent Road Division # 1000, Zone # 102). The purpose of this letter is to:

   1) Recognize and thank you for responding to our petition request 

   2) Talk about the results of the petition drive

   3) Tell you what has been going on since the original petition deadline

   4) Comment on the letter you recently received from the County

   5) Talk about potential next steps

First, we want to thank everyone who responded. The process turned out to be an educational one for all involved and going forward the lessons learned will hopefully help build a solution that satisfies the whole community.

As for the petition itself, unfortunately, we fell short of the required number of signatures even after extending the process 60 days. This wasn’t that big of a surprise. We knew in advance that choosing the lower cost petition route which requires a positive answer from 50+% of all PRD members, instead of holding a vote which only requires a positive vote from 50+% of respondents, would give us a high bar to cross. But we didn’t think it made sense to spend $30K+ of PRD money for a vote at this early “data gathering” stage of the initiative (the petition expense was funded by contributions from committee members). And while we weren’t surprised by the petition return rate, we did learn a lesson from the distribution of the returns.

PRD 102 is comprised of 432 property parcels. Of those 432, approximately 170 are located inside the gated Rimrock community. Rimrock voluntarily agreed to become part the PRD in 1983 in order to resolve access issues for the project. PRD roads provide the only alternate fire egress for the community (3 routes) as well as the primary access for many of the residents.

When we reviewed the results of the petition drive, we found an almost 40% positive return from “non-Rimrock” members while only receiving responses from 5 of the 170 Rimrock members. Admittedly 40% was short of the 51% we were looking for, but the difference was a number we feel we could work on going forward. However, almost 0% participation from a faction that represents 40% of the total membership is a bit harder obstacle to conquer.

We talked with Rimrock representatives and they informed us that that they feel they are not getting a fair deal out of the current arrangement. Further, they are actively pushing all Rimrock residents to resist any attempt to fix the current PRD and instead seek its dissolution. Their argument is based on the premise that they only use a small portion of PRD roads yet pay for a full share. And while that line of thinking has some merit it ignores the fact that 70% of all PRD members use the same amount or less of PRD roads as the Rimrock residents.

Along with our Rimrock counterpart we met with management from San Diego County Public Works to see if there was any way we might address some of the Rimrock concerns. The answer we got was that short of dissolving the PRD and replacing it with some sort of new PRD(s), a process likely to take multiple years, cost upward of $100K, and require considerable community support, there was nothing we could change.

While all of this remains an option the issues that motivated us to launch the original request for an increase have not gone away. If anything, the financial situation has deteriorated a bit. Recently we were forced to make $70,000 in emergency repairs which, added to the cost of some needed road maintenance, reduced non-committed funds at the end of last fiscal year to $60,000, an amount barely sufficient to provide an emergency reserve. Because of that, the County determined that no preventive maintenance will be scheduled in the upcoming year, further deferring needed work, and contributing to long-term issues.

On a related matter, you recently received a letter from the County DPW talking about some changes in the PRD program. Over two years ago County Supervisor Jim Desmond made a request to the DPW. At that time, Supervisor Desmond had become aware of issues with the long-term financial viability of many PRD’s and asked DPW to review and report upon the problem. The study the DPW conducted confirmed that in many PRD’s current funding levels would not be sufficient to fund the work needed over the long term.

The letter you received appears to be a part of the DPW’s response to projected PRD funding shortfalls. They couldn’t figure out a way to lower costs and they aren’t prepared to advocate increases to assessments. Instead, their solution is enhancements for the current “loan program” (as described in the letter). Admittedly, loans can be a useful tool in emergencies, but the DPW doesn’t have an explanation of how the loans will be repaid given existing revenues already don’t cover existing costs, and we don’t have an explanation either. Which is why we launched the petition drive hoping PRD 102 members would appreciate a proactive strategy. Unfortunately, while we found a good many neighbors like yourself “get it” and are willing to pay a small price now to avoid major costs later, an even greater number of residents refused to accept that logic or even worse, are actively working to destroy the limited solution we now have in place.

As for next steps, our options are somewhat limited and fit into the category of “doing the best with what we’ve got”. We will continue to manage our limited funds to achieve maximum results. We will continue to talk with the folks in Rimrock to see if there is any way to enlist their participation. We will lobby the County to see if we can get them to help with outreach that might lead to a positive vote for an increase. And we will ask you to talk with your neighbors to make sure they at least understand the financial situation before making up their minds one way or the other. Eventually we hope to take another run at reaching agreement on an assessment increase.

If anyone on this distribution has any ideas or suggestions about a different way to address the problem, they would be greatly appreciated. Please email us at HiddenMeadowsPRD@yahoo.com. If you have any questions, you can send them to the same email address.

If you would like to be kept in the loop as new developments arise, please submit your email contact information to HiddenMeadowsPRD@yahoo.com and we will keep you updated (and promise not to submit you to a barrage of junk mail). You can also find updates at www.hiddenmeadowsprd.com .

Sorry to be so long-winded, but there was a lot to talk about.

Thanks again for your support and interest in the PRD.

The PRD Committee

**************************************************************************************************April 21,2023

To Our Neighbors in Hidden Meadows / Rim Rock

This letter is being sent to you from the PRD 102 Road Committee because you own property located in San Diego Countywide Permanent Road Division # 1000, Zone # 102. The purpose of this letter is to:

· Request your signature on the attached petition which calls for an increase to your annual assessment for road maintenance

· Explain to you why the increase is necessary

· Tell you why you should sign indicating your approval for the increase

Currently most property owners pay $150 per year (see note re: benefit units at the end of this letter). If the increase is approved that charge will increase to $300 per year for the average property owner.

In summary, the cost of road maintenance has increased while our funding has not, our roads are getting older and need more repair, and the recent heavy rains have caused emergency repair issues that will nearly exhaust our reserves. At the current assessment rate which provides $45K net annually to maintain 6+ miles of roadway, the best scenario we are looking at will be a gradual and continued deterioration of the roads within the community.

PRD 102 maintains 19 roads within Hidden Meadows, totaling 6.24 miles of public easement (see map enclosed). Per California law (CA Civil Code Section 845) you are obligated to pay for the cost of repairs for those private/public roads where you have and exercise easement rights. How this ends up being done can take many forms. Homeowners associations, road maintenance agreements, and lawsuits are some of the most common arrangements employed to accomplish this.

In Hidden Meadows we are fortunate to be able to participate in a program established by San Diego County specifically to help property owners with the often-difficult task of private road management (the Permanent Road Division program - PRD). While the PRD program may have some downside, it is able to accomplish some things much better than the alternatives…

· All maintenance decisions are made by experienced, objective, outside professionals (not a Board with personal involvement)

· Timely collection of 100% of homeowner assessments is ensured

· Assessments CANNOT be increased without members approval

The last change to the assessment was 20 years ago. Currently, it provides a total of $62K in annual revenue. Of that amount the County takes approx. $17K for insurance/project mgmt./admin./misc. leaving only $45K annually for the actual work on over 6 miles of roadway. We tried to address the growing problem almost 6 years ago by asking property owners to vote on an increase. Unfortunately, the measure was defeated, mainly due to a lack of interest, which was probably our fault. Maybe we didn’t do as good a job as we should have at communicating the issue, but there really isn’t that much to say. It should be a no-brainer that you can’t operate reasonably in year 2023 on a year 2000 budget, and that $45K per year is not going to maintain 6 miles of roadway at today’s prices.

Unfortunately, we are now at a point where the discussion is not about nice to haves. It’s about whether or not the PRD continues to exist with any degree of effectiveness. That’s not going to happen without additional funding. Nobody wants to pay more for anything but it seems short-sided to expose property valuations in the million dollar range to negative impact for the sake of (average) $150 per year ($12.50 per month).

While we have the option of calling for an election on this matter, we chose the petition route both to expedite the process and to avoid the $20+K fee the county would charge to hold the election. Furthermore, no PRD money is being used to prepare or circulate the petition. All funding for the effort comes from private contributions made by property owners who believe this is the right thing for the community.

Please sign the enclosed form indicating your support and return it as soon as possible (but no later than May 5). You can use the enclosed stamped return envelope or mail your petition to:

PRD 102 Committee

28961 Mountain Meadow Road

Escondido, CA 92026

Please make sure to print your NAME, the DATE, and the PROPERTY ADDRESS on the form along with your SIGNATURE. If you own more than one property in the PRD you must sign one time for EACH PROPERTY (multiple lines are provided). 

If you would like further information you can go to our website www.HiddenMeadowsPRD.com. If you have any questions, you can email us at HiddenMeadowsPRD@yahoo.com.

PLEASE SIGN AND RETURN YOUR PETITION TODAY. FORGETTING TO SIGN AND MAIL IS THE SAME AS A “NO” VOTE.

ASK YOUR FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS TO SIGN AND SUBMIT THEIR PETITION AS WELL.

The PRD 102 Committee

Ron Piritz – Chair

Charlie Marks

Chris Nelson

Steve Robertson

Paul Schoos

NOTE ON EBU’s

PRD costs are apportioned to property owners within the PRD using a methodology that assigns what are called equivalent benefit units (EBUs) to each parcel as a simple metric to measure the relative benefit to be received. In PRD 102 …

· each parcel containing less than 3 acres is assigned one unit of benefit

· each parcel containing at least 3 acres, but less than 11 acres is assigned two units of benefit

· each parcel which contains 11 acres or greater is assigned three units of benefit

· once a parcel is improved it is assigned one additional unit of benefit