Rancho Santa Fe Association to consider operational changes for Art Jury next month

The Rancho Santa Fe Association is considering making changes to the Art Jury process, the way all development in the Covenant is reviewed and approved.

During the Jan. 8 session, the board was set to take action on new operating instructions for the Art Jury, along with a resolution on how Association-sponsored projects move through the process  but the items were tabled until next month. RSF Association board President David Gamboa said delaying the decision until  Feb. 5 allows more time for input from the community and the Art Jury, which added three new members this month.

The Art Jury was established almost 100 years ago in 1927 to oversee building, landscaping and grading permits by closely following the Protective Covenant (PC) bylaws, regulations and guidelines. Art Jurors appointed by the board volunteer hundreds of hours of their time over a three-year term, in monthly meetings reviewing projects and going on site visits.

Over the years, members have described the process as a gauntlet that can be lengthy and challenging to get through. Past Association boards have tried to make reforms for improved oversight, consistency in decisions, the criteria for serving volunteers and even changed its name for several years to the Covenant Design Review Committee.

The proposed changes would shift the authority for project review to the Association staff, as well as streamline the process for Association-driven projects like the clubhouse remodel, offering a tighter timeline and eliminating appeals. Gamboa said the changes are one attempt to make the “customer-facing process with development in Rancho Santa Fe better.”

The board received 12 emails regarding the proposals, along with several member comments at the board meeting in opposition.

“The resolution before you attempts to bypass the PC by collapsing the separation of powers between the board and the Art Jury,” said Kelli Hillard, a former Art Juror. “The Covenant is clear, the Art Jury exists to provide fair, independent design review. That independence is not accidental, it’s foundational. Under this proposal, the Art Jury’s authority would be stripped and transferred to paid staff who then report to the board and, in some cases, monitor the compliance of the Art Jury. That should concern every homeowner in the community.”

Hilliard said it is asking a lot to expect staff to have that same independence when their decisions could cause backlash and impact their jobs. She also said the proposed change for the staff reporting to the Association board instead of the Art Jury president, could limit deliberation.

“Board members have claimed that the Art Jury holds too much power but this resolution doesn’t rebalance that power, it concentrates unchecked decision-making within the board,” Hilliard said.

In addition to opposing the proposed new operating instructions, former Association director Phil Trubey also expressed concerns about exempting Association-sponsored projects from Art Jury review, equating it to “rules for me but not for thee.” He said he was frustrated that the board would be willing to expend political capital on making changes that are unnecessary and controversial.

“You have the best-aligned board I have ever seen…all seven of you are aligned and pulling in the same direction. You’re pro-development, pro-amenity creation. There’s no disruptors on your board,” Trubey said. “But if you take those actions, you decide to rile up the community and roll the dice on having non-aligned board members be elected in less than six months. Or worse, I’ve even heard people talk about a board recall.”

Former Art Juror Beth Nelson said she is well-aware of complaints of Art Jury mistreatment from community members, acknowledging that it’s a difficult task to deny a project because it doesn’t meet the aesthetic standards of the community, the PC or the residential design guidelines. However, as an Art Juror she also heard a lot from residents asking her to responsibly do her job to protect them from neighboring projects that could impact their property value, privacy or way of life, such as a pickleball court next door, the removal of mature trees that help with screening a neighbors home, or an “oversized spec home” with windows that would look into their bedrooms if built.

“As jurors, I felt our job was not just to move every project through with a rubber stamp to keep applicants happy and minimize complaints to the board, which would have been easy, but to be the voice of all the Covenant neighbors, preserving and protecting the Ranch, which is hard,” Nelson said. “Without a good functioning Art Jury committed to upholding the PC, regulations and residential design guidelines, I truly believe the Ranch would be unrecognizable in five to 10 years.”

The board did not discuss the tabled items but during board member comments at the close of the meeting, Gamboa reiterated that everyone on the board is committed to transparency and is open to receiving feedback on the proposed changes or any board business.

“We agree there are no kings, and we try to do the best possible job to manage this complicated organization,” Gamboa said.

On the agenda that day, the board approved the schedule and election inspector for the upcoming 2026 board election. Two seats are up for election, including those held by Gamboa and Vice President Jeff Simmons.