May 2022 Press Release

{PRESS RELEASE} JUDGE RULES TO PROTECT RIGHTS OF THOUSANDS OF LANDOWNERS IN LOBATO vs TAYLOR

On May 17 2022 JUDGE Kenneth M. Plotz made his final ruling in the Lobato vs Taylor hearing held September 27-28, 2021. That case was brought by landowners with grazing, firewood gathering, and timber gathering rights to the Cielo Vista mountain ranch. They felt that the owner William Harrison was unilaterally placing restrictions on their rights, was treating the rights holders as 2nd class citizens or as trespassers, and was using excessive drone and camera surveillance to intimidate them. This despite the fact that the rights holders rights are dominant to Mr. Harrison's servient rights.

Judge Plotz agreed that the rights holders were indeed being treated in a demeaning manner. He also felt there was an unfair imbalance of power and the Ranch owner was using this power to impose his own rules and restrictions on how the rights holders could exercise their rights. He then gave both parties 90 days to try to come up with a mutually agreed set of rules governing their interactions. An agreement could not be reached and the rights holders felt that Mr. Harrison took advantage of this process to try to impose even more restrictive rules. Judge Plotz then decided to make a few broad findings and rulings and to appoint a independent master (usually a retired judge or attorney) to resolve future individual disputes. The master would be paid for by Cielo Vista Ranch. These broad rulings go a long way toward satisfactorily addressing the concerns of the rights holders:

1. He validated the rights holders concerns about 2nd class citizen status by finding that they were indeed being treated in a demeaning manner.

2. He corrected the imbalance of power by ruling that it was unacceptable for CVR to unilaterally impose its own rules on rights holders and by appointing a independent master to settle future individual disputes.

3. He ruled that the ranch could not limit grazing.

4. He ruled that the ranch could not limit firewood gathering.

5. He ruled that the ranch could not prohibit scouting for firewood. Therefore rights holders can no longer be considered trespassers simply for scouting.

6. He ruled that CVR could not unilaterally decide if rights holders were engaging in commercial operations.

7. He ruled that drone and camera surveillance was an acceptable way of monitoring the ranch.

Other than concerns over excessive surveillance, it appears that this ruling is a major victory for the rights holders because it takes away the ranches ability to impose its own restrictions or to treat the rights holders as 2nd class citizens. The rights holders can now exercise their rights without fear of being blocked, being escorted to the gate, treated like a criminal or otherwise being demeaned. The rights holders, as long as they are engaging in the legitimate exercise of their rights, can now ignore any attempts by the ranch to impose rules that are not already stipulated on a court document. Their rights are dominant to Mr. Harrison's servient estate. Rights holders are still not able to hunt, fish, or picnic /camp for recreational purposes.

CVR has filed an appeal and the attorneys are convening to oppose the appeal. They are also trying to clarify a few matters mostly having to do with the process of how the master will be utilized. Once the status of the appeal is known they hold a community meeting to update and answer the community’s questions. In the meantime Anyone with rights to the ranch should notify the land rights council if CVR attempts to continue to impose unilateral rules or prohibit scouting for firewood or timber.