Report 2 of 8 · the linchpin documents
The KEY finding: parking rights come from UNIT OWNERSHIP / CC&Rs — not the easement. The dispute timeline · the August board agenda · the verify-list.
✅ FOUND IT. The recorded Reciprocal Grant of Easement and the recorded CC&Rs (Declaration, Doc #19635855, recorded 10/31/2007, 65 pp) are both in your files. You are not missing the linchpin document.
The recorded easement says, verbatim: "Parking rights by the dominant tenement are not included in this grant of easement." The easement is an access / ingress-egress / loading-dock right — NOT a parking right.
Your parking right comes from UNIT OWNERSHIP — your undivided interest in the Common Area parking under the CC&Rs (§1.39: Parking Area for owners + their tenants/employees/customers/invitees; §3.2.A: parking of motor vehicles in the Parking Areas). Lead with unit-owner common-area rights on parking; use the easement for access/dock/gate. Conflating them is the mistake that weakens your position.
Walk into August with
(1) the recorded easement, (2) the CC&Rs §1.39 + §8.5 parking language, (3) Scott Cooley's right-of-way history — framed as: "My customers park under my unit's common-area rights; the loading dock sits where it does because of a recorded reciprocal grant that traded a right-of-way to my land for truck/dock access."
Source: 10_EASEMENT_PARKING.md §1.
Instrument: RECIPROCAL GRANT OF EASEMENT · requested by South of Tenth Business Center Unit Owners Assn · prepared by Michael W. Thomas (Roseville) · affects APN 477-21-075 · parties: the Association ↔ the Scott Cooley 1999 Separate Property Trust (your land's chain).
"100 feet vs all common areas" — resolved
The 100' figure is in Exhibit B (Trust→HOA strip). The "entire common area parking lot" is in Exhibit A (HOA→Trust) — your access right runs over the whole HOA common drive/lot, not just a lane. Net: broad access, but not a parking right anywhere, and not the neighborhood/city streets.
Where your PARKING right actually lives — the CC&Rs
Source: 10_EASEMENT_PARKING.md §1A–1E. Easement recording stamp NOT visible on scan — verify.
Lead complainant Jessie Duong (also runs 10th St Cannabis, the "pot club") reopened it June 2026 over the loading dock: she says it belongs on your land, not the HOA's shared lot, and that you "opened 7 spaces for the baseball field" while consuming one shared HOA space. Manager Melanie Ferreira put it on the August board agenda (6/22).
Timeline (document- and email-anchored)
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 10/31/2007 | CC&Rs recorded (Doc #19635855); reciprocal easement executed |
| ~Apr 2025 | First friction — food vendor (4 spaces) promoting the cannabis store; HOA shuts it down |
| Jun 18, 2025 | Robert Tang demand letter — trespass/nuisance/zoning; comply by Jul 18 |
| Sep–Oct 2025 | Jessie's "OFFICIAL and FINAL reminder"; altercations + threats (on video) |
| Fall 2025 | Scordelis engaged for this dispute |
| Jun 17–22, 2026 | Current loading-dock flare-up → August board agenda |
Three live questions
Scott Cooley's history (your best framing): the dock/easement was "long ago a trade for a right of way to your lot next door in return for a loading-dock / semi-truck access." Supporting evidence: hundreds of timestamped videos show the lot is not at capacity; Terry Hu confirms the dock tenant won't use it.
Source: 10_EASEMENT_PARKING.md §2 · 02_HOA_PARKING.md.
Source: 10_EASEMENT_PARKING.md §4 (Unresolved/Needs Action).
Parking adequacy HELPS the rezone — and it's one of your stronger cards — but only from the right source. The "7 spaces" are, to the City, evidence you're adding capacity, not straining it. The recorded easement is the backbone of the integrated two-parcel site argument (it legally welds 477-21-075 to the HOA building/Common Area).
⚠️ The soft spot
The easement's "no parking in the HOA lot" line means you cannot claim the HOA lot as your land's parking supply. Your land's parking must stand on its own (the spaces you built) + your unit's common-area allotment. Don't overstate the easement as a parking solution in the rezone packet — it's an access solution. The same items (containers, turf, gate, dock) recur in all three fights — resolving them cleanly serves both; sloppily hurts both.
Source: 10_EASEMENT_PARKING.md §3.
🚩 Not found / gaps
Source: 10_EASEMENT_PARKING.md file index + gaps.