I have alerted Justin Traud.  He mentioned in the past that he may be given more responsibility with respect to RV parking.  He's the only one that I think will respond. 

Edit:  The first response:

Of course he wasn't told.  We have pointed out before, we don't actually have a board of nine representing our interests.  This hurts renters and homeowners alike.

This interference/jamming impacts more people, more extensively, outside of the Edgewood HOA property than within it.

I find it puzzling that the Board has chosen to involve neighboring communities in this dispute.

This is a clear violation of federal law, and the board was made aware of that fact many months ago. That is why they turned off the offending equipment (only partially) back in ~April.

One thing is for sure.  The Board can kiss any fantasy about a lawsuit—or violations for that matter, goodbye.  The board is clearly acting in bad faith.  They have acted in bad faith in everything they have done. 

Talk about noxious offenses.

Now we have at least two significant legal issues affecting large numbers of people beyond the direct participants, and statements are contributing to debate on a topic of even greater widespread public interest.

This is a public forum.

Radiofrequency interference with medical devices. A technical information statement [National Library of Medicine]

This is the first email I sent to Russell Skutley once I discovered the camera system was the cause of the RFI problems at the Edgewood HOA Citrus Heights:

I mentioned the FCC complaint because I already had an experience with Russ regarding a very electrically-dirty battery charger for a golf cart.  He was hesitant and slow to act, and it required a large effort on my part simply to get him to unplug it.

Russell Skutley actually wasn't particularly responsive on the Battery Charger RFI issue we had suffered previously.  I had to force that issue to get it resolved.  I was hoping for the best here.

Russ never would meet regarding this or any other issue.

Perhaps I could have helped you solve the problem?

Pat Burden never replied to this email.

There are very few emails posted from Russ, because he very rarely replied.

You don't have a functional HOA.  You have a clown show, and I'm becoming more and more convinced these clowns are ripping you off.  You really need to fix this.

"Would Edgewood homeowners want you to enlist my help, simply not resolve the problem, or pay consultants/contractors?  Should I ask them?"

That, my friends, was the spark.  After that, I began to introduce myself to my neighbors.  The revelations followed.

I want to point out that radio works with photons like light and can be transmitted with unusual or unpredictable radiation patterns.  An electronic device may work fine at the clubhouse or RV parking lot but not work on my second story.

A device may work today but not tomorrow.

It took me quite a while to zero in on the source of the RFI with my detection equipment, primarily because the radiation pattern is significantly vertical, or almost straight up, with "lobes" probably around 40 degrees, skimming my house.  I couldn't see the RFI while walking or driving close to the surface and close to the sources.

This is a real problem that's affecting us at this moment, every second, every day.

Additionally, there is no question as to what is causing the RFI (interference).  When power is removed from the camera system, the RFI stops.

As seen earlier in this thread, I messaged the Board regarding the return of the RFI.  I have received no further communication other than what I have already posted.

I emailed MSI Integration / Mr. Security Camera of Sacramento, the outfit that sold and installed the cameras to the Association.  I alerted them to the seriousness of the issue.  I have received no response.

In my detailed reporting to the FCC, I want to make it very clear that I tried all possible avenues in an attempt to resolve this issue prior to seeking the involvement of a Federal regulatory agency.

I believe an argument can easily be made that this powerful RFI is targeted harassment. 

From the October 28, 2024 issue of The Edgewood Voice.

This appears to be the Board's response to the RFI complaints.

An FCC report, investigation and fines can potentially be very costly to the Association.  Because of this, I have been hesitant to file, and encourage others, to file an FCC complaint.

I have been attempting to resolve this damaging RFI problem with the only Board member that occasionally reponds (Justin Traud):

It is unfortunate that I feel the need to remind these people to be truthful. 

I'll update with his response.

edit: I had hoped Justin was an ally, as he indicated as such early on.  His actions suggest otherwise.

Justin Traud, Board Member of The Edgewood HOA in Citrus Heights, blocked me.  This is not the first time an Edgewood resident has been blocked by this Board.

Zero communication.

His only replies threatened to sever communication, then he blocked me.

He did say I would hear from his lawyer.  For what?  God only knows.

He did say that he felt 'insulted.'  I guess that's a crime?

I feel quite insulted myself, as a matter of fact.

We may have another Cease & Desist to post.

Justin Traud is welcome to respond here, in this public forum.  He must identify himself.

We are still on birdcageheights.com.  You don't have to worry about your valuable and famous trademark being tarnished or otherwise diluted.  Unless the URL was never the real issue.

Strong opponents respond strongly.  Weak opponents remain silent.

Justin Traud keeps an attorney on retainer?  How much does GP Landscaping pay?

I responded by asking for his attorney's info.

I suspect I will not hear about this again.  I would be embarrassed.

Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16 applies to Justin as well.

Justin, we don't need attorneys my man.  We can just talk.

Stop threatening to sever communication over every perceived slight.  That isn't helpful.  You're going to need some thicker skin if you want to serve on an HOA Board.

Folks, this entire Board must be recalled.

There just ain't a good one among 'em.

Justin Truad, as an esteemed Board member of Edgewood Homeowners Association in Citrus Heights, CA, you should consider that while I am a private citizen, you are a public figure within the scope of this Association.  Keep that in mind, sir.

We can talk about you all we want, and the world over can read about it.

Don't like that?  Resign.

Only then may we remove you from the conversation, as a courtesy.  Until then, you are very much part of this conversation.  Even if you won't participate in the dialogue.  Legally, you are a public figure for life within the scope of this Association and its issues.

Your public and internet-accessible association with the Edgewood Homeowners Association is only a problem for you because of this Association Board's proven malfeasance.  Normally, I would think being on a Homeowner Association Board would be a positive association.  Association Board member would likely be something I'd put on my resume.  I look forward to having a conversation with your attorney about this.  I am assuming this is the reasoning behind the legal threat.

This is all really quite remarkable.  I am strongly suspecting that something is going on that we don't know about.

As always, everyone is welcome to reply and discuss.

(a) The Legislature finds and declares that there has been a disturbing increase in lawsuits brought primarily to chill the valid exercise of the constitutional rights of freedom of speech and petition for the redress of grievances. The Legislature finds and declares that it is in the public interest to encourage continued participation in matters of public significance, and that this participation should not be chilled through abuse of the judicial process. § 425.16

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

The law throughout the United States “suggests that private board members can become limited purpose public figures. See Agar v. Judy, 151 A.3d 456, 478 (Del. Ch. 2017) (‘When individuals seek to serve as directors of an organization, they meet the second rationale for public figure status.); Gulrajaney, 885 A.2d at 504-05 (rejecting the plaintiff’s argument that his status as a condominium association board candidate did not make him a limited purpose public figure because the association was ‘a private development with a private governing body’).” By voluntarily participating in the election process to the board, Plaintiffs had joined in an “activity calculated to lead to public scrutiny;” Kaman & Cusimano, LLC.

1. For a Board Member to have a viable claim for defamation the Board member must recognize that the courts view them as limited public figures, which means they MUST be able to allege and prove that.
   • The defendant published a false and defamatory statement about the plaintiff, and
   • The statement was made with actual malice, i.e., with knowledge the statements were false or with what amounts to conscious disregard of their falsity.

McCoy v. Johnson, No. 1 CA-CV 21-0676, (Ariz. Ct. App. Dec. 8, 2022) Kaman & Cusimano, LLC.