A freelance news gathering service

Part of an award winning journalism team

Providing an interactive investigative news site designed to inform & elicit communication focusing on matters impacting Crooked River Ranch matters & beyond



11/02/23, 9:59 AM



On October 18, 2023, Ranch Matters (RM) published a story titled: “WHATEVER FLAG”as part of a series of reports regarding the Ranch Board of Directors removing the restrictions barring flying the PRIDE/RAINBOW/DIVERSITY FLAG at their October 2, Work Session meeting.


As reported, Ranch Manager Judy Lapora tried to explain rather duplicitously, the motive behind removing the restrictions barring flying said flag. Lapora: “…there were SOME PEOPLE that felt it was an inappropriate restriction on people being able to have a HAPPY GAY FLAG or a PRIDE FLAG or WHATEVER FLAG.”



VIDEO 1       VIDEO 2

VIDEO 3       VIDEO 4



What wasn’t covered in the aforementioned report is what triggered the flag rule discussion that led to the Board changing the flag rules for “SOME PEOPLE.”


During Public Input, there was a revealing exchange between resident Carol Orr, the Board and Lapora regarding the above flag rule modification. Orr was asking for clarification and read the following:


Last week I received an unsigned letter, dated 10/3 from the CC&R Committee regarding my Pride/Rainbow Flag question. File Number 23-24.


For the record, last June I asked, is the Pride/Diversity Flag an approved CC&R Flag?


In July, the CC&R Committee agreed to investigate and a short time later declared the flag to be in violation of the CC&R’s. Interestingly, somewhere between July and October 2nd Work Session meeting, the validity decision was overturned and the flag in question became an approved flag.


The following day, 10/3, I received the letter I described earlier, closing the issue. The letter included two words that I would ask you, Ms. Vickery (President Kari Vickery) to explain-CORRECTED SATISFACTORILY?”



President Kari Vickery responded: “Carol, I haven’t seen that letter.”


Orr moved on: “How did the flag in question go from VALID to INVALID, anybody know that?”


Vickery: “I believe recently we reviewed the Sign and Flag Policy & Procedure in a Board meeting at our Work Session and we made a change to that Sign/Flag Policy & Procedure.”


Vickery: “Carol, I guess the issue here is you’re asking us for answers for information we don’t have here in front of us, nor have we seen. We don’t sit on the CC&R Committee, we don’t meet with them.”


Orr: “There’s a liaison on the CC&R Committee, is there not?”

Vickery: “The liaison doesn’t attend every meeting…”


*NOTE: President Kari Vickery is the CC&R Committee LIAISON and interestingly she failed to mention it.


Orr ended her remarks:


“Has a precedent been set?” “Is this a case of SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT.”


Was Vickery’s admission that her Board changed the flag rule from NOT an approved flag to an approved flag a Red Flag?


Apparently, management and the Board wanted the Pride Flag to fly on the Ranch and they needed to correct the policy to serve their personal agenda and remedied the situation satisfactorily by lifting the prohibition.


Curiously, the Board of Directors took advantage of changing the rules-legislating at a Work Session meeting, where legislative activity is supposedly limited in scope, according to Policy.


Public input also is limited, if even allowed, at Work Session meetings.

*Note: The October 2nd Work Session AGENDA only reflected the following and nothing specifically addressing changing flag rules regarding the Pride Flag: “d Flag Guidelines Discussion.”



At the August 7, 2023, Board of Directors Work Session meeting, CC&R Chair Stephanie Proffitt addressed the Board regarding revisions/modifications related to the CC&R’s and Policy & Procedures Handbook, but failed to mention the flag rule issue.


Why did she deliberately avoid talking about it?


Neither the AGENDA or the MINUTES for the October 2 meeting reflect the language that was changed to allow/approve the Pride flag.


The following is the secret language that was added at the Oct 2 meeting: “decorative flags that are not vulgar or political, flags supporting diversity and inclusion.”


How would anybody have known that the Pride Flag rule was changed-under the radar, so to speak.


Ranch management along with the Board took great pains to hide it from the membership.


As the discussion continued, some Board members attempted to shift the focus from the above in an attempt to portray Ms. Orr as a bigot regarding the Pride flag.


Director Julia Randall asked Orr: “In what way does the pride flag hurt you?’


Orr redirected their attention and stated, “Let’s stick to the premise of my question.” Orr added: “It’s not whether I agree or disagree with the Pride Flag, I’m questioning what appeared to be a disingenuous process. I’ve made my point.”


As Orr concluded her comments, CC&R Chairperson Stephanie Proffitt called Ms. Orr a “NUT CASE.” Carol Orr responded, “excuse me” and Proffitt repeated “YOUR A NUT CASE.”


Proffitt sat silently during the above discussion and should have been the one person to weigh in and explain the reasoning behind the sudden rule change.


It was her Committee that sent Orr the 10/3 unsigned letter with the two questionable words,

“Corrected Satisfactorily.”


It was Proffitt’s Committee that sent Orr another unsigned letter on 7/3 that confirmed the flag violation.


“The CC&R Committee has investigated your complaint and has found it to be VALID. We have contacted the property owner and will be continuing our efforts to work with the owner to ABATE the Problem. Our efforts will follow the prescribed enforcement procedures.”


Ranch residents Carol Orr and Kevin Fiet provided their Post-Meeting statements in the ATTACHED VIDEOS.

Carol Orr’s

Video Statement


Kevin Fiet’s

Video Statement



RM reached out to Ranch Director Kelly Davis for a comment. Director Davis: “I voted for it at the 10/2 meeting because I am for FREEDOM-freedom of the press, freedom of speech, freedom for expression.”

Davis: “Do what you want with your property as long there is no hazard or harm to the membership as a whole.”





Verified by MonsterInsights