What’s Mine is Mine – What’s Yours is Mine

village-mapYou might recognize the map on the right. It’s White Mountain Vacation Village. Like most maps, it contains a legend at the bottom. The map includes every part of the Village. Nothing is missing. The light tan area is the common area. The green area labeled Festival Area is where the ponds reside along with the hiking trails. The Festival Area and the clubhouse belong to the developer. However, the Association leases both and as such, has exclusive use of those areas. The developer has never used any portion of the common area, Festival Area or clubhouse.

The developer owns property surrounding, and adjacent to, the Village. That property is not a part of the Village and has never been presented as such. The rodeo arena is not a part of the Village. Your dues do not help to maintain it. The amphitheater is not a part of the Village nor is it a dog park. The lease for the Festival Area and clubhouse does not include any of these areas. These areas are not on the map because they are not a part of the Village.

There is a sign on the gate that clearly states that past that point, entrance is for construction personnel only. If someone crosses that line, that person is trespassing. When you decide to take a walk in that area, you could be taking your life in your hands. There are construction workers driving around doing the things construction workers do. They are not expecting to see, nor are they looking for you or your pets.

There are signs posted in the Village Festival and common areas stating the area is for members only. There are no such signs in the area of the rodeo arena and amphitheater. The reason is because it isn’t affiliated with the Village. It’s private property. Be safe and cautious and heed the sign.

16 thoughts on “What’s Mine is Mine – What’s Yours is Mine

  1. Thank you for this explanation again. We owners do understand this. The root of past confusion is found in your original ads in Arizona’s White Mountains annual directory so you can see how rumors begin. This ad ran unedited for years so; is the Village truly 167 acres?


    1. Thanks to everyone who posted comments and questions. This has allowed for a more detailed understanding and explanation about the area collectively known as White Mountain Vacation Village. This project is a “Planned Unit Development” under City of Show Low Code, and does consist of 167 acres. The residential portion that has come to be known as the Village and that is the domain of White Mountain Vacation Village Residential Subdivision Association is the only part that is used and paid for by residents of the Village.


  2. When the pictures scroll on the website whitemountainvacationvillage.com, there is a picture of the arena. Should that be removed so it does not confuse people?


    1. No. When there is an event at the rodeo arena or the amphitheater, Village residents have convenient access and are invited to attend. This article was meant to clarify that the area is not a part of the common area nor or dues going toward maintenance of those areas. Some residents have been confused about that.


  3. I don’t use that area, but I think people who do were not intentionally violating the law. They should be aware of the boundaries,, but it was never clarified before. This could be done without a reprimanding tone


  4. Good information! Does the common area by the clubhouse including the ramada and land the clubhouse is on belong to the association? Can we get a idea of what the lease will cost for the festival area? Also the cost for use of the clubhouse till we take ownership of it?


    1. The common area surrounding the clubhouse (as well as the pavilion) is included in the clubhouse lease. The Association has exclusive use of this area. The only cost to the Association for use of the Festival Area is maintenance. You can get the cost for the use of the clubhouse from the budget which is posted on the Village website at http://wmvv.org/.


  5. Currently the developer’s workers with construction equipment access the rodeo arena, amphitheater and work areas via Vacation Village Drive. This creates the same “taking your life in your hands” on WMVV streets. As the homeowners in WMVV are responsible for the maintenance and safety of this road can the workers access via Vacation Village Drive be denied?


    1. It’s understandable to assume that all equipment and workers observed in the Village belong the “the developer”. The developer does have some equipment that is used to do maintenance on the roads or to get lots ready for use after they have been purchased. That equipment is stored in the developer’s construction yard which is in the vicinity of the rodeo arena. The workers are accessing the Village from that area and not the other way around. When you see the developer’s equipment in the Village, it’s because there’s work being done for residents of the Village.


  6. Are the construction workers trespassing when they pass one of the signs you refer to in your last paragraph as they travel upon Vacation Village Drive to go to and from their work area? Is there not another access for them from U.S. 260? How much of our road maintenance budget has gone to repair the wear and tear of the Developer’s heavy equipment? I suggest we deny their access to lessen damage to our roads and liability incurred from their hazardous activities .

    It has been explained to us that we CAN be denied the use of the clubhouse as was done several years ago when it was used by an outside group.

    Furthermore, the original brochure and sales talk that was given to us by Robert Livingstone indicated the rodeo grounds and amphitheater were a part of the package, regardless of what changes you make on the website 11 years later.


    1. Workers are only using Vacation Village Drive when they do work for residents or they do road maintenance in the Village. This is the case with all construction workers who use the road. The difference is that the other contractor’s storage area is not on the developer’s property.

      The clubhouse rules have evolved over time and for many years, no outside entity had been allowed to use the clubhouse. It can be reserved for private events by the developer and Village owners. However, the developer hasn’t used the clubhouse in over ten years.

      “Part of the package” simply means that when an event is being held at the rodeo arena or the amphitheater, Village residents have convenient access and are invited to attend. It doesn’t mean it is for use in the same way the common areas or clubhouse is for use. This is the reason those areas don’t appear on the Village map. This is also why dues are not used for maintenance of those areas.


  7. It seems to me that is has derived from an issue of workers being concerned about residents walking their dogs or walking the construction road for exercise. Dog owners are responsible for their own as well as residents being responsible for themselves. As long as everyone is aware of the possible dangers, I truly believe that “trespassing” is quite a strong word to use. As long as we are all aware that the property belongs to you and we take care of it accordingly what is the real issue.


    1. I agree. Trespassing is a strong word. It was used as a tongue-in-cheek attempt to make a point in an effort to tamp down yet another rumor. The current rumor is that Association dues are used to maintain that area and that the developer is using it without reimbursing the Association. Several residents have chastised the construction workers for going too fast. Others have asked when the developer was going to remove the equipment from the area.

      I am speaking as the Association president. I am not the developer. I am trying to look out for the best interests of Village residents. In my opinion, residents are better off seeing rumors dealt with swiftly and in writing. I really do appreciate all the comments that have appeared here. In the never-ending battle to combat the rumor mill, this has been helpful.


  8. Thank you.. However, what conclusion have you come to in regards to the residents walking their dogs or just walking the construction road for exercise?


  9. In that I’m not “the developer”, I can only speculate as the President of the RSA. The developer has posted signs. I would guess that if someone were to be injured when on that property, the developer (or the owner of any property anywhere), can point out in a court that permission has not been given to be there. I’m unaware of any cases where the developer has chastised anyone or taken any action against anyone found walking a dog on that property. If that is true, I can speculate that the developer doesn’t pay a great deal of attention to the matter other than to post signs. That is my conclusion … or would that be a non-conclusion?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s