Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

This is a good question, somewhat akin to asking the cop, "Everyone on this freeway was speeding, why did you pick on me?"

I think the focus on central properties and trails is justifiable and legal provided it is being done for a substantial and defensible reason, and not arbitrarily or because the governing committee members' properties are benefitted.

Beyond this rather general statement, however, other legal questions may arise or exist. For example, the law of easements generally places a significant maintenance burden on the party or parties that hold the easement and benefit from it, rather than requiring the owner of the property upon which the easement lies to keep the easement maintained. Also, what do you mean by "horribly out of compliance"? Are the trails outside the easement boundaries? Is the non-compliance a maintenance issue? Does it have to do with the use being made of the easement areas by the easement holders, or by the owners of the land upon which the easements lie?

In sum, I think the governing committee may be acting properly, but there simply isn't enough information provided to do a complete analysis.