Total Pageviews

Friday, April 17, 2015

A RESIDENT WRITES THE WEDGEFIELD EXAMINER REGARDING INDIVIDUAL BOARD MEMBER CLAIMS THAT NO ONE READS THE BLOG

The Wedgefield Examiner, over time, has had declarations, from, and outside the board table, that no one reads The Wedgefield Examiner.  I've had board member, DeMarchi, call it "trash", at the end of a board meeting.  A resident, tied to the board, sitting with Concerned Citizens, who rallied around a website they developed (in the past and still exists), claimed the blog, was harming property values.  Yet, he had his Concerned Citizen team, cheering him on. Board member, McMillin, claimed in a writing to the Georgetown Times, that his family was offended, by what the blogger wrote (The Wedgefield Examiner), about him, and rationalized that that is why his family member made the disgusting HUGE SIGN, with my address on it, that he hung on his house.  How would anyone know, if no one, especially board members read it?  Why, if the board, doesn't read it, did I get a letter from the office this month, regarding an article that I had written, if they don't read it?  Why is this board, so concerned about it, that individual board members, keep speaking out, and acting on it, if no one reads it?

I attend meetings, listen to and transcribe their very own meeting tapes, AND ALWAYS refer you to the tapes to listen to their own MISGUIDED, SELF PROMOTING (AT TIMES), WORDS.  Trust me, in my humble opinion, if I violated truth, they'd have their hand picked attorney, on my door step.  These words, are my words, and do not reflect the opinion of the letter writer.  He/she, has their own question and opinion.  I've removed, as always, the identity of the writer.  If you are skeptical, it is not as McMillin, once claimed, my friend, JD, who he claimed, couldn't get over the dredging.  My claim is, that this board, it could appear, can't get over themselves, and their own words.  

As you read the resident letter, you may note that your board often leaves numbers out.  The board has their own stream of communications, where they could validate their options, and in the case of the Wedgefield Wragg (every member receives it), they  could provide you, critical numerical information.  For instance why, when you review the Wragg, didn't the Drainage Report, which discussed The Pond Project, tell us how much of our money, the board spent on it?  Why weren't we told how much the new landscaping vendor, was contracted for, in the Grounds Report?  Why, when 2015 assessments were discussed in the Treasurer's Report, weren't we told the total amount outstanding?  Why, when we were provided a Legal Report, that discusses what will happen to us, if we don't pay our assessments on time, weren't we updated with what is happening with the lawsuit against the canal lot owner, who refused to pay their dredging assessment, and YOUR BOARD VOTED TO SETTLE IT, AFTER GREAT LEGAL EXPENSE, AND HAVEN'T REPORTED THE TOTAL COST, OR THE FINAL SETTLEMENT?  Forget about numbers in the Wragg for a minute.  Your board, failed to post the proposed changes to the policy manual, immediately following first reading, during the MARCH meeting.  We, as residents, are suppose to have them published, in a timely manner on the WPA website, following first reading, so that we can write and comment, before they vote, at the following meeting.  Since the board failed to do that, wouldn't you think that they would have taken the time, first, to publish a COMPLIANCE REPORT (They didn't publish one.), and use the one vehicle - the Wragg, that every resident receives, to post the proposed changes?????  That failure, could appear to be just more of their cover up.   Here is the resident letter.

REMOVED NAME

Madeline Claveloux 
Subject:Re: the challenge that no one reads your Blog?
Priority:NormalDate:Wednesday, April 8, 2015 6:47 PMSize:4 KB
Hi Madeline
I suggest you ask the WPA “Very Important People” (VIP) 
how many people access the WPA website monthly for any 
reason!
And how many those members access the “passworded” areas.
I asked long ago, if there was a counter (internal or external) 
and none existed! 
Dave Hastings said “NO” at that time. And I still believe that 
is still the case.
Nor do we know how many people uses the Marina!  Same 
situation, no counter!
We do know that 12 children showed up at the recent Easter egg 
hunt!  



Thursday, April 9, 2015

TWO NEW ARTICLES WERE ADDED ON THE 8TH AND 9TH. NEXT, HOW MUCH DID THE WORK ON THE POND JUST OUTSIDE THE GATE, COST US? HOW SOUND WAS THE BIDDING PROCESS?

NOTICE TO WEDGEFIELD CAR OWNERS, AND DO YOU KNOW THE DANGERS YOUR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN ARE CAUSING TO OTHER RESIDENTS, AND THEMSELVES?

First, the board reported at the March meeting, that six cars in the condo area, had been entered, and electronics, etc., stolen.  The cars, it was reported, had all been left unlocked by the owners.  It appears, that if you lock your cars, you may be left alone, no windows, etc., were broken, for entry.  Just something to consider.

Last weekend, Easter weekend, we, and our children, and probably grandchildren, were out and about the plantation, enjoying the holiday weekend, and spring like weather.  When you hand over your car, or golf cart to young people, do you have any idea how they are using the privilege once they leave your immediate area?  In the case of golf carts, are you sure they are old enough to be both legal and safe?  Two instances, observed during the weekend, cause question.

The first occurred on Wedgefield Rd, around the intersection with Francis Parker.  I was driving out of the plantation toward the circle.  The golf cart had been moving slowly, and jerking, and swaying from the very edge of the road, to over the middle.  There was a young female at the wheel, who appeared to be in the 10 + year old range, a passenger in the front, and two in the back.  Some were young males.  The problems presented by her driving kept me focused on her.  The boys in the back, appeared to be yelling at her, to alert her that there was a car behind her, and pointing at us. She appeared to pull over in an effort to stop, hitting the grass area.  As we slowly began to try and go around her, she swayed into the middle again, and almost into our car.  It appeared as we went around her, that her erratic driving was caused by the fact that her legs may have been two short to comfortably reach the pedal.  She kept trying to move forward on the seat enough, to reach the pedals, apparently causing her to unintentionally move her hands on the wheel.  My husband wanted me to stop the car, so he could get out and ask them where they lived, and follow them home.  I was not willing.  I have witnessed to often, children driving golf carts, who endanger themselves, those of us unfortunate enough to be near them when you allow them to take these unsupervised joy rides with their friends, and our property.  If an accident had occurred, who would you have blamed?  The driver of the heavy car, or the young children, in the much smaller, open, easy to tip over, golf cart?  Please evaluate, who you allow to leave your yard, in your golf cart.

The second situation occurred on Easter weekend, after 6:00 PM.  I was out on my back porch with a cup of coffee.  I heard the acceleration of a car motor, and looked up across the canal, where the sound was coming from.  At the same time you could hear loud laughter, and yelling.  It appeared that the dark green SUV, had either come out of a yard, or off the circle, at the end of Pine Grove Lane, as it quickly accelerated.  The laughter, and yelling came from two males, who were laying down, and riding, holding on the rails, ON THE ROOF OF THE SUV.  The windows in the front of the vehicle were open, and it appeared that there was a passenger, in the front, with the driver.  They slowed abruptly for the curve that takes you from Pine Grove Lane, unto William Screven, and then rapidly accelerated, as the road straightened.  By the time I was able to run through the house to the front yard, I was unable to get their license number, or I would have called the police, and reported them.  The area I just described has many, many, dog walkers, some quite elderly.  We also have some very young, well supervised children, who ride their very small bikes, with their parents.  None of them would have had a chance, when that vehicle accelerated, after coming off that circle, or the curve.  Do you know who owns this SUV, and allowed irresponsible youth to drive it, endangering all of us, and the two males, riding on the roof?  What makes this OK?


Wednesday, April 8, 2015

LETTER FROM THE WPA OFFICE, REGARDING FAILURE TO POST PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE POLICY MANUAL, FOR RESIDENT REVIEW AND COMMENT


The following appeared in my email inbox, on April 6th.  The first reading of the proposed changes took place during the March 17th board meeting.  The WPA Board updated their official web page with the proposed changes, on April 6th, the day the email was sent to me.   I did not write the board.  I did publish an article regarding the board's failure, once again, to follow the policy manual, on April 1st.  Quite frankly,  the board tells me that no one reads The Wedgefield Examiner, so why bother to notify the blog.  The board should be notifying all of us, that they will delay a vote at the April meeting, because they haven't followed the policy manual.

Kathy Phelan <wedgeassoc.com@frontier.com>
wedgefieldexaminerthe@yahoo.com
Madeline Claveloux <mclaveloux@sc.rr.com>
Subject: Policy Changes
Priority: Normal Date: Monday, April 6, 2015 9:24 AM Size: 2 MB
Attachments: Changes to policy 3-24-2015.pdf (2211.9 KB)
Mrs. Claveloux,

Just for the record I did post the 1st reading Policy Changes on the website the day after the March board meeting and then accidently deleted it by me when I was working on the site. My apologies for the inconvenience. I'm not perfect and accidents do happen.

I have also attached a copy for your review.

Kathy Phelan
Office Secretary
Wedgefield Plantation Association
1956 Wedgefield Road
Georgetown, SC 29440
843-546-2718
843-546-4027
Email: wedgeassoc.com@frontier.com

First, whether our paid staff put it up, and deleted it by mistake, this is Garrison's responsibility, to see that it is there.  After all, he holds two titles, as it relates to following our governing documents.  He has been named Compliance Chair, and Legal Chair, a ridiculous move by our President, who has the privilege of appointing the chairs.  It looks like a conflict of interest to sound governance.  Our paid staff, is often made the fall guy, for this board's ridiculous moves.

You'll need to go to the WPA website, and view the proposed numerous changes for yourself.  When I wrote the article on April 1st, I was concerned about those changes centering on signs and fires.  Today, as I reviewed the changes, it left me with a firm conviction that they were driven by this board's need to cover for board members, who were violating our governing documents, as they stood, prior to these accommodations.


HERE IS WHAT WEDGEFIELD RESIDENTS WERE TOLD IN THE WRAGG, PRIOR TO MC MILLIN'S DESIRE TO BURN


"NO DUMPING 
NO BURNING 
NO EXCEPTIONS"
Here is the proposed change.  I was right when I thought it included "POTS".  The following is a direct quote from the WPA website.

"COMPLIANCE-BURNING
SECTION V

COVENANTS
3. COVENANT #7 OUTSIDE BURNING
Relating to Covenant # 7 (noxious or offensive activity) as pertaining to outside burning, the following restrictions and definitions shall apply:

1) Open burning of trash or yard debris shall be prohibited at all times.  Trash will be defined as garbage, paper products, styrofoam or any similar materials.  Yard debris will include leaves, branches, clippings or outdoor dead plant materials.

2) Contained fires in firepits, burn barrels or pots used for recreational purposes or cooking, outdoor fireplaces and grills shall be permitted."

The board mentions Covenant # 7.  Here it is.

"No noxious or offensive activity shall be carried on upon any lot, nor shall anything be done thereon tending cause embarrassment, discomfort, annoyance or nuisance to the neighborhood.  There shall not maintained plants or animals, or thing of any sort whose normal activities or existence is in any way noxious, dangerous, unsightly, unpleasant or of a nature as may diminish or destroy the enjoyment of the other property in the neighborhood by the owners."

Your board can't change the Covenants.  They can be assisted, through sound judgement, through a procedure, change, or adapt the policy manual, in an effort to provide sound governance.  The proposed fire policy, appears to violate the very heart of the intent of Covenant #7, to accommodate McMillin.  Here is the evidence.

Intended to "embarrass, cause discomfort, annoyance, and nuisance", as it has an individual resident's house number painted on it. "As may diminish or destroy the enjoyment of the other property in the neighborhood by the owners thereof".  Read covenant # 7.

"or thing off any sort whose normal activities or existence is in any way noxious, dangerous, unsightly " - Covenant # 7


Violates Covenant #7, as noted in the other two displays.  For one board member who wanted to burn, when we were told,

"NO DUMPING 
NO BURNING 
NO EXCEPTIONS" 

This board, who likes to speak to their cohesiveness, is about to vote to violate not only Covenant #7, but their responsibility to sound governance, in the general benefit of the association, to accommodate, one stubborn, self serving board member's wishes, in my not so humble opinion.  If they are left to their usual devices - "we'll vote for his project, then he'll vote for mine", our association will continue on the decline, that they are constantly accelerating.  Later, if some one of sound judgement, tries to take it back, they'll call all of this precedent.

We don't have time to cover the signage proposed changes, but you'll note that they have been violated in the pictures presented above.




















LATER TODAY: 1. THE WPA OFFIICE WRITES TO ME, REGARDING THEIR FAILURE TO POST THE PROPOSED POLICY CHANGES. WHY DID THEY WRITE? I DON'T KNOW. I DIDN'T WRITE TO THEM, AND THEY ALL CLAIM THAT NO ONE READS THE WEDGEFIELD EXAMINER! 2. WE HAVE SOME DANGEROUS ACTIVITY OCCURRING ON OUR WEDGEFIELD ROADS. DO THESE YOUTH, COME FROM YOUR HOUSEHOLD?

WONDER DOG BRADY, SAYS, "STAY TUNED"

Wednesday, April 1, 2015

PART III, OF THE WPA MARCH MEETING: IS OUR WPA COMPLIANCE COMMITTEE IGNORING THE VERY POLICY MANUAL, THAT THEY CHANGE AGAIN, AND AGAIN, TO SUIT THEIR OWN INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND WANTS?

Compliance Chair, Garrison presented at least two policy manual changes, during the March meeting.  The changes were in regard to burning, and signs.  I was at the meeting, and I took notes, but I searched the WPA website today, and couldn't find them.  Here is what the policy manual states, regarding changes:


4.02 A motion to change the Policy Manual must be presented at an open Board meeting, posted on the WPA website for resident comments, and NOT voted on until the following Board meeting. 
I'm not surprised that they weren't listed.  I checked the obvious places on the site:  Home Page, Information from the Board Page, the Approved Policy Manual (note:  There is a grid listing all of the changes, on this page.)  We had this problem before, with many of the current board members.  They just kept voting changes for months, without publishing them, and giving residents the opportunity to comment.  When it was brought to their attention, they mass reproved them in one meeting.

Here is a Wedgefield knock, knock joke.  Knock, Knock, What happens to a resident who writes the board, regarding transgressions BY BOARD MEMBERS, of the governing documents?  Sorry, but true, you get a new policy to accommodate, the offending board members' transgressions.

When board member, McMillin wanted to burn in an ugly pot, on his vacant lot, after he had sent invitations to the "burn", he went to the board table, and tried to change the policy, before the party, despite the fact that there weren't any complaints in the correspondence file, and no mention of problems during the board meetings.   Board member, DeMarchi, declared that "he was tired of legislating for idiots, who break all the rules".  Just another addition to the knock, knock, joke.  Here is what we had all been told,  in the July 2014 Wedgefield Wragg, previous to McMillin, bringing the change to the table.


"NO DUMPING 
NO BURNING 
NO EXCEPTIONS"
During the time that we were awaiting the board's changes in behalf of board member McMillin, he held several "burns" in his ugly pot.  In fact, it still sits there with wood in it, ready to go today.  Since I was at the board meeting, I heard the first reading, and I believe the word "pot" is contained in it.  I can't verify it for you, because your board hasn't followed the policy manual, that they are changing again, in behalf of a fellow board member's whims, and haven't published it, for our review.  Remember, the old saying, "a chicken in every pot"?  If your board passes this change to the policy manual, we'll change the saying to "a pot in every Wedgefield yard"!

WOULDN'T YOU LOVE THIS NEXT TO YOU?
IT COULD BE COMING TO A YARD NEAR YOU, THANKS TO A VOTE BY THIS BOARD!


The board also had a first reading, for a policy manual change, regarding signs.  I had written the board, regarding board member, Walton's signs on boats, that were making his street look like a used boat yard.  Again, I can't provide the specific change in language, because your board has not posted it.  Here is the picture, I had sent to the board.


After I wrote the board, it could appear, that board member, McMillin, had decided to punish a resident who had the audacity, to write the board, about transgressions by a board member.  He then placed the following signs it his yard, and on his vacant (not really) lot.

One, might think that he is testing just how far this board will allow him to go, as he violates policy, and strikes back at residents, who speak out.  It doesn't appear that he was concerned about this board sanctioning fellow board members, because the next sign, was crude, rude, and disgusting.  HERE IT IS:


I'm so use to the cover up game this board plays, that I didn't bother to write the board.  Your board, covered it up at the board table, I believe calling it a Christmas display.  It wasn't.  McMillin  lives on William Screven, as I do, and the painting has my house number painted on it, and was crafted by one of his family members.  I always tell you when something is a rumor.  The rumor is that several members of this board, met with   McMillin about this sign, for almost 3 hours, and he refused to take it down.  No self discipline, or honesty from this board.  In fact, in the case of the Santa SIGN, nothing but a cover up, from this gutless board. If it were anything else, and this board found this sign so appropriate, and unoffensive, perhaps they will ask McMillins' family artist, to paint one of these SIGNS, with Santa crapping on a house with their address on it, and hang it on their WEDGEFIELD PLANTATION ASSOCIATION HOME, in their pride, of their governance, in behalf of residents.  Other wise board, you truly are governing in a self service, to each other, gutless, ruthless, manor, and doing a poor job of covering it up.  Who are the IDIOTS, board member, DeMarchi?

Where is Legal Chair/COMPLIANCE CHAIR (conflict), Garrison?  Why hasn't he seen to the publishing of these proposed changes, to our policy manual? Is it because he is aware that they are as self serving to individual board members, as they are?