Total Pageviews

Wednesday, April 25, 2018

RESIDENT MADELINE CLAVELOUX RECEIVES A RESPONSE FROM COMMUNITY LIAISON ANDERSON, INSISTING SHE COME TO THE OFFICE AND FILL OUT MCMILLIN'S MADE UP POLICY FORM. I'VE RESPONDED BACK.


*********************************************************************************
Do you have information, or an opinion - agree, or not, you can email The Wedgefield Examiner at wedgefieldexaminerthe@yahoo.com.  We'll remove your name to protect the innocent, and publish it.  P.S.  If you would like your name published, please note that on your email, otherwise we leave your name out.
******************************************************
Readers, I've provided everything in the order that it happened.  Please follow it, and keep abreast of just how bad things have gotten here.  If you have read the previous articles you won't have a problem.

HERE WAS MY LETTER TO THE BOARD:


April 22, 2018

TO:                WPA BOARD

FROM:          Madeline Y. Claveloux

RE:                 REQUEST TO REVIEW THE CORRESPONDENCE FILE
                        FROM SEPTEMBER 1, 2017 THROUGH MAY 1, 2018

CC:                 The Wedgefield Examiner

As a member in good standing, I am requesting to review the Correspondence File from September 1, 2017, through May 1, 2018. I would like to come to the WPA Office on Tuesday, May 1st., at 11:00am to review the files.  I am making the request under the terms of SC Non Profit Law, and the approved procedures noted in our governing documents.

Statement of Proper Purpose, as noted as a requirement in the above noted documents: In general, I am very concerned about the method of members securing a response from the board.  I have followed the three-month effort of a resident attempting to secure approval to review the spoil site records, and was astounded to see a response from our Board Secretary, adding additional unapproved requirements, prior to access to the records.  What was even more alarming was that the Board Secretary chastised the resident stating they were ignorant of policy – a policy that never existed, and therefore never was brought to the board table, motioned, discussed, published on the website for resident comment, or voted on at a second board meeting, and approved. 

I look forward to your response, and approval of my request.

HERE IS ANDERSON'S RESPONSE:
Date:Monday, April 23, 2018 11:54 AM
From:Adam Anderson <andersonbodyshop@gmail.com>
To:Michelle Blythe <wedgeassoc.com@frontier.com>, mclaveloux@sc.rr.com
Cc:Jacky & Judy Walton <jandjwalton24@yahoo.com>, Bob Garrison <mks09@earthlink.net>, Larry McMillin <yankeeretr@gmail.com>, Peggy Phillips <rppeggy@sc.rr.com>, John Walton <ptwbasket@aol.com>, Steve Vasey <svasey@hvc.rr.com>, Butch Williams <butch.williams@ipaper.com>, Keith Johnson <keith@sahbuilds.com>
Subject:Re: Fw: REQUEST TO BOARD - SEE ATTACHED
I am in receipt of your request to view the correspondence file. There is a correspondence request form in the office you will need to fill out and you make set an appointment up during regular office business hours to review the file at your convenience. 

Adam Anderson
Community Liaison 

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 9:03 AM, Michelle Blythe <wedgeassoc.com@frontier.com> wrote:
Michelle Blythe
Office Secretary
Wedgefield Plantation Association, Inc.
1956 Wedgefield Road
Georgetown, SC 29440
843.546.2718
843.546.4027 fax

HERE IS MY RESPONSE 
PLEASE PLACE A COPY IN THE CORRESPONDENCE FILE AND DISTRIBUTE TO THE BOARD
Board,
On April 22, 2018, I sent a request to review the Correspondence file.  My request was made in compliance, and according to the requirements of SC non profit law.  I have been denied approval of my request, and confirmation of the date of review - May 1, 2018, 11:00am, and noticed that I must come to the office, and fill out a Request to Review Documents form, that has never existed until now.  My letter meets all the requirements of SC non profit law.  I have filled out the form under the protest of discrimination against me as an individual member in good standing, who has met the legal requirements of SC non profit law, and exercised my rights under the by-laws.  Discrimination, as the WPA has no written policy that requires this "made up in the moment document requirement" by board secretary McMillin.  I resent the right hand of illegal involvement of the board's community liaison Anderson, who instead of enforcing what is legal and ethical, adds himself to McMillin's illegal folly.  My April 22nd letter was sent to the entire board.  Anderson's response was sent to the entire board.  Is the entire board now willing to be complicit in this harassment, and violation of SC non profit law, and our bylaws?  Where is legal and compliance in review of McMillin and Anderson's ridiculous attempts to develop "policy in the moment" because of their dislike of one or two residents?  I have never encountered such a demand in over 13 years of making requests to review documents, and having my requests granted.  No place in the current reorganized by McMillin Policy Manual does this document, or policy exist!

I expect to come to the office on May 1, at 11:00am and review the documents.  Additionally, I would appreciate a response to my questions posed above, with real legitimate answers from some responsible - not tinged by the ridiculousness of McMillin, and Anderson, officer of the board.  There should be no "playing with policy and law", when a member in good standing makes a legitimate, legal request regardless of whether they are in the board's favor, or not.

I am now making a request to speak utilizing one of the two five minute speaker opportunities allowed in our governing documents, at the May WPA board meeting.  The subject will be "Member Request To Review Records Delayed By Manufactured Policy, and Ultimately Harassment By The Board."

Thank you for your time.  The two attachments are presented under protest.

HERE IS THE FAKE FORM FILLED OUT AND ATTACHED TO MY EMAIL:
READERS, HERE IS THE STATE LAW, AS SENT TO ME BY THEN BOARD MEMBER DEMARCHI:
Please inform Ms. Claveloux of the following.  Since she wishes to follow all rules and regulations.  See highlighted items.  SC Title 33, Article 16 Code of Law.
SECTION 33‑16‑102. Inspection of records by shareholders. 
    (a) A shareholder of a corporation is entitled to inspect and copy, during regular business hours at the corporation's principal office, any of the records of the corporation described in Section 33‑16‑101(e) if he gives the corporation written notice of his demand at least five business days before the date on which he wishes to inspect and copy.  Shareholders holding at least one percent of any class of shares are entitled to conduct an inspection of the tax returns described in Section 33‑16‑101(e)(8) under the same conditions. 
    (b) A shareholder of a corporation is entitled to inspect and copy, during regular business hours at a reasonable location specified by the corporation, any of the following records of the corporation if the shareholder meets the requirements of subsection (c) and gives the corporation written notice of his demand at least five business days before the date on which he wishes to inspect and copy: 
       (1) excerpts from minutes of any meeting of the board of directors, records of any action of a committee of the board of directors while acting in place of the board of directors on behalf of the corporation, minutes of any meeting of the shareholders, and records of action taken by the shareholders or board of directors without a meeting, to the extent not subject to inspection under Section 33‑16‑102(a); 
       (2) accounting records of the corporation;  and 
       (3) the record of shareholders. 
    (c) A shareholder may inspect and copy the records described in subsection (b) only if: 
       (1) his demand is made in good faith and for a proper purpose; 
       (2) he describes with reasonable particularity his purpose and the records he desires to inspect;  and 
       (3) the records are directly connected with his purpose.
    (d) The right of inspection granted by this section may not be abolished or limited by a corporation's articles of incorporation or bylaws. 
    (e) This section does not affect: 
       (1) the right of a shareholder to inspect records under Section 33‑7‑200 or, if the shareholder is in litigation with the corporation, to the same extent as any other litigant; 
       (2) the power of a court, independently of Chapters 1 through 20 of this Title, to compel the production of corporate records for examination. 

HISTORY:  Derived from 1976 Code Section 33‑11‑250 [1962 Code Section 12‑16.25;  1962 (52) 1996;  1981 Act No. 146, Section 2;  Repealed, 1988 Act No. 444, Section 2], and Section 33‑11‑260 [1962 Code Section 12‑16.26;  1962 (52) 1996;  1981 Act No. 146, Section 2;  Repealed, 1988 Act No. 444, Section 2];  1988 Act No. 444, Section 2.  

Tuesday, April 24, 2018

OUR RESIDENT WRITER HAS ONE MORE THING TO SAY TO THE BOARD REGARDING NEW REQUIREMENTS TO VIEW RECORDS, OR EVEN GET ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD


*********************************************************************************
Do you have information, or an opinion - agree, or not, you can email The Wedgefield Examiner at wedgefieldexaminerthe@yahoo.com.  We'll remove your name to protect the innocent, and publish it.  P.S.  If you would like your name published, please note that on your email, otherwise we leave your name out.
******************************************************
Readers, scroll down to the article posted earlier today, and then you will understand the resident writer's email, sent to The Wedgefield Examiner a few minutes ago.  HERE IS THE EMAIL:
Date:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 10:17 AM
From:constance downs 
To:wedgeassoc.com@frontier.com <wedgeassoc.com@frontier.com>
Subject:Re: Fw: Fw: Posting on website Message from Constance Downs
Michelle,

I'm sorry to bother you again.   Would you please forward this email to all board members and place a copy in the correspondence file? Thank you.  I appreciate it.

Adam,

I'm so sorry you feel the need to act in such an immature manner.  And I'm more sorry your fellow board members sit by and let this inappropriate behavior continue without speaking out for resident rights.   This is abuse and bullying at its best and all are guilty by association.   It's behavior like this that deters residents from attending board meetings.   It's responses like yours that leave residents to be suspect of board business.   And it's poor communication and harassment toward community members that materializes into lawsuits.     You may want to rethink your tactics as the Community Chair of the Board.  

Have a good day.
*************************************************
THIS HEAVY HANDEDNESS OF MC MILLIN, AND ANDERSON SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWED BY THE REST OF THE BOARD.  WHERE IS THE BOARD'S SELF DISCIPLINE OF BOARD MEMBERS WHO CREATE THESE KIND OF ISSUES?  WE'LL SEE!  I'VE WAITED BEFORE WHEN MC MILLIN WAS INVOLVED, AND THE BOARD DID NOTHING, AND TRIED TO COVER UP MC MILLIN'S INTENTIONS.


DON'T ALLOW THIS KIND OF HEAVY HANDED DISCRIMINATION AGAINST SOME RESIDENTS HARM OUR GOVERNANCE ANYMORE!


THE WEDGEFIELD EXAMINER HAS ADDED THREE NEW ARTICLES IN THE LAST 24 HOURS. A FOURTH IS IN DEVELOPMENT, AS I HAVE HEARD FROM COMMUNITY LIAISON ANDERSON, AND I HAVE A RESPONSE.


RESIDENT SENDS THE WEDGEFIELD EXAMINER AN EMAIL ABOUT THE NEW SIGN


*********************************************************************************
Do you have information, or an opinion - agree, or not, you can email The Wedgefield Examiner at wedgefieldexaminerthe@yahoo.com.  We'll remove your name to protect the innocent, and publish it.  P.S.  If you would like your name published, please note that on your email, otherwise we leave your name out.
******************************************************
HERE IS THE RESIDENT EMAIL:
"Great to see the new flashing billboard at the gatehouse.  Will blend well with the cheesy Xmas lights.  Getting to look more like a trailer court each day."

MORE NONSENSE REGARDING CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BOARD, A FAKE DOCUMENT REQUIREMENT PULLED OUT OF THIN AIR TO REVIEW WPA RECORDS, AND NOW OUR COMMUNITY LIAISON TELLS A RESIDENT THEY HAVE TO GO TO THE OFFICE AND FILL OUT THE FAKE FORM TO EVEN GET ANSWERS TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS!!!!! LOOKS LIKE HARASSMENT TO ME!


The picture provided above was selected by The Wedgefield Examiner and not the resident writer.  My words:  This is nothing more than harassment, brought to you out of thin air by board secretary McMillin, condoned by community liaison Anderson, and since the entire board was copied, the blind eye of board members failing to provide FAIR, LEGAL, GOVERNANCE.
*********************************************************************************
Do you have information, or an opinion - agree, or not, you can email The Wedgefield Examiner at wedgefieldexaminerthe@yahoo.com.  We'll remove your name to protect the innocent, and publish it.  P.S.  If you would like your name published, please note that on your email, otherwise we leave your name out.

******************************************************
Readers, a few days ago I published an email that this resident writer had sent to the board requesting document review.  In the email, she noted the records she would like to review, and stated proper purpose for the review.  She had met all the requirements of our bylaws, and SC non profit law regarding review of records.  Board secretary McMillin, after no answer from the board for three months, sent her an email informing her she was ignorant of policy, and the requirement to come to the office to fill out a form and then, and only then, would he address her in writing.  This form NEVER EXISTED UNTIL THAT TIME, and even if you believe it did, it only addresses file review.  The undaunted resident then writes the board via email, and asks that some questions be answered, and again, like never before, she is instructed that she must come to the office and fill out the form for file review!  We'll start at the beginning of this request with her email.  Here is her email:

On Sunday, April 22, 2018 7:57 PM, constance downs <constancedowns559@msn.com> wrote:


Michelle,
Please send a copy of this email message to all board members and place a copy in the correspondence file?   And would you please send me a confirmation that you received this message and forwarded it to all members?  
Thank You.
Board Members;
I read the following message on the HOA website and have several questions.  I would appreciate it if someone responded to ALL these questions thoroughly and in a timely manner.     My questions are in BOLD.  Thank you.  I appreciate your cooperation.   
Canal dredging update
We had a meeting with canal lot owners on March 6th to bring everyone up to date on the canal dredging project. 
We are asking for voluntary contributions of $4000 per canal lot to go with the reserve funding the WPA has set aside for dredging per our agreement.  
  • Please tell me where I can find this agreement in writing.  I would like to read and review the conditions. 
  • I want to know the date of this agreement. 
  • Who was present during this meeting? 
  • Who developed and wrote this plan?
  • Who was in agreement of the plan? 
  • Who opposed? 
  • Who signed this plan? 
  • and when and how the residents of Wedgefield were informed of this agreement.   I have been to nearly all board meetings and keep detailed notes.  I don't recall this specific agreement being discussed or coming up for a vote.  I read the minutes on the HOA website and there is nothing documented regarding this agreement.  Perhaps I'm overlooking the obvious?  
The meeting was well received and the fundraising has been going well. As of this writing we have raised $117,300 towards our goal of $200,000.  Last Tuesday, John Walton announced that he collected $126,300 toward the dredging project.   
  • Which number is accurate?  
  • And who set the goal of $200,000?
Other questions:   The last dredge cost well over a million dollars.  
  • How much money did the HOA promise to contribute toward the 2018 dredging project?  
  • Who came up with this number?
  • What other reserves will be exhausted to pay for the dredge?  As of February 28, 2018, the canal reserve had a balance of $146,518.25. 
If canal lot owners have a goal of $200,000 and are contributing $4,000 each, (a number I believe is $1,000 lower than the last dredging contribution of $5,000 per lot owner), that means there are 50 canal lot owners.   I recall a number of 81 canal lot owners.   Where can I find the correct number of canal lot owners?   
I am NOT opposed to the HOA contributing to the dredging project as long as it's reasonable and ALL residents, (both canal lot owners and non-canal lot owners) are well aware of this "agreement" and have had a chance to voice any concerns and ask relevant questions.      Thank you again for your cooperation.  
The existing permit expires late this year so we need to get everyone's contribution in as soon as possible. If we can reach our goal by mid May we will be able to get this project done this winter! So please get your contributions in if you haven't already. You can drop them by the office, give it to any committee member or mail it to... 
Wedgefield Waterfront Property Owners   
Thanks for your support
The Water Amenities Committee
*********************************************************************************
HERE IS COMMUNITY LIAISON ANDERSON'S ANSWER.  NOTE, HE HAS SENT IT TO THE ENTIRE BOARD.
----- Original message------
From: Adam Anderson 
Date: Mon, Apr 23, 2018 11:58 AM
To: Michelle Blythe;constance downs;
Cc: Jacky & Judy Walton;Bob Garrison;Peggy Phillips;John Walton;Steve Vasey;Butch Williams;Keith Johnson;
Subject:Re: Fw: Posting on website Message from Constance Downs

There is a correspondence request form in the office that you will need to fill out. As soon as you are able to do so I will get you the answers to your questions.

Adam Anderson
Community Liaison
*****************************************************************************
HERE IS HER EMAIL RESPONSE TO ANDERSON, AND THE ENTIRE BOARD:
From: constance downs <constancedowns559@msn.com>
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2018 2:02 PM
To: wedgeassoc.com@frontier.com
Subject: Fw: Fw: Posting on website Message from Constance Downs

Hi Michelle,

Please forward a copy of my response to Adam Anderson to all the board members.   I realized he responded to my message via his personal address and didn't catch it until I sent my message.  I'm resending my response to him via the board address to expedite an appropriate response.  Thank you. 

Please confirm receipt of this message and that all board members received it.  Thanks so much. 

Connie




From: constance downs <constancedowns559@msn.com>
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2018 12:26 PM
To: Adam Anderson
Subject: Re: Fw: Posting on website Message from Constance Downs

Adam, 
Where is the form in the policy book? I will print it off my computer. What section?  Date of implementation? 
I also plan on requesting review of the correspondence file so I can see how other residents have filled out these forms.

Sent from my LG Mobile
****************************************************************************
Readers, the following comments are those of The Wedgefield Examiner.  I have not asked the resident writer to agree, or condone what I am about to write.  

We have reached the height of disfunction in our governance.  The punitive, secret, against all policy - SC non profit law, our bylaws have been violated, and real communication shut down by a few on the board who must have something they are afraid to have revealed in records regarding the current dredging effort, and the illegal path toward dredging including the spoil site.  This action by McMillin and Anderson - both canal committee members, should be an indication of how far some will go, while shutting out the eyes of residents.  If you don't care about the dredging and spoil site, you should care about open, above board, governance.  

Think about it.  During the April board meeting I'm told that vice president/legal chair Garrison reported that members were not to call or email board members through the board members' private phone, or email addresses.  Good move, except that message has been repeated over and over by this board, and yet they continue individually to serve favored members who contact them privately.  I'd dare to say that we have a resident lawsuit against this board for their unpredictable, favored treatment of certain residents, and hidden abuse of those residents that they would like to shut up, and for sure not ask questions, and seek answers through review of records.  Let's see whether the balance of the board reads the emails, takes notice of McMillin's homemade document requirements/demands, and questions Anderson's willful following down this illegal path.  Don't hold your breath.  By the way, if you do write the board with questions, see if you receive notice that you can't just send an email anymore, you have to go to the office and fill out McMillin's homemade form.  Own property, but don't live here, or only live here part time?  Well, get in your car, or hop a plane, and come fill out McMillin's form, or community liaison Anderson won't answer you.  Better yet, you should be storming the board email with the resident writer's questions!  "Where is the form in the policy book? I will print it off my computer. What section?  Date of implementation? "

NOW, AND FOR A LONG TIME, YOUR BOARD HAS BEEN HIDING, AND WE CAN'T BE HEARD. 

Monday, April 23, 2018

THE WPA APRIL MEETING - THE CANAL REPORT.


*********************************************************************************
Do you have information, or an opinion - agree, or not, you can email The Wedgefield Examiner at wedgefieldexaminerthe@yahoo.com.  We'll remove your name to protect the innocent, and publish it.  P.S.  If you would like your name published, please note that on your email, otherwise we leave your name out.
******************************************************
Readers, articles are going to have to be quick, and short.  I've verified information about the April WPA board meeting by talking to a couple of the mere nine members who attended the meeting.  Today, we'll quickly deal with the water amenities report, as it relates to the canals, and dredging.

It was reported that a little over $126,000 has been collected to date.  The deadline for collection is May 1st., or the 15th, depending on what individuals heard, or read.  $126,000 at $4,000 per lot, would indicate that approximately 30 of the 79 lot owners have voluntarily committed financially to the dredging.  What is keeping lot owners from making a commitment?  No one has told us.  I wonder if the committee should consider holding a meeting for all members to attend, with the agenda item of discussion being "what are your concerns if you haven't contributed".  I'd be interested in hearing lot owners' reasons.  I'm sure everyone of the lot owners would like to see the canals dredged.  

I would like to see them dredged, and would pay whatever the price, as long as:

*The association assessed me.  They can lay the expense on me, under our current governing documents.

*There must be a plan for the future - not a last dredge as this short sighted committee has suggested.  We are one storm away from the benefit life of a dredge, being silted in and left standing with the conditions of today.  Have any of you bothered to ask the board what their intentions are regarding the canal reserve, after this dredging?  If they have an answer that is favorable ask them to put it in writing, and somewhere in policy

*I don't see how I can participate in the current dredge as the path to this point has been one illegal, twisted tale.  I'm a Wedgefield resident first, and a canal owner second, and I can't participate in something that harms my overallcommunity yesterday, today, and far into the future, because we are setting harmful, illegal precedent for the future governance of Wedgefield's governance.

Sunday, April 22, 2018

LETTER TO THE BOARD REQUESTING REVIEW OF THE CORRESPONDENCE FILE

*********************************************************************************
Do you have information, or an opinion - agree, or not, you can email The Wedgefield Examiner at wedgefieldexaminerthe@yahoo.com.  We'll remove your name to protect the innocent, and publish it.  P.S.  If you would like your name published, please note that on your email, otherwise we leave your name out.
******************************************************
Readers, if you have been following the blog you'll know that this was a necessary step.  I don't have a lot of time to go over all the detail again.  Please go back and read:

"Thursday, April 12, 2018


A RESIDENT WRITES THE BOARD MULTIPLE TIMES, TO REVIEW THE SPOIL SITE RECORDS. THEY DON'T ANSWER FOR MONTHS, PRETEND THEY HAVE, AND THEN SECRETARY MC MILLIN WRITES AND TELLS HER THAT SHE IS IGNORANT ABOUT PROCEDURE, AND A FORM, THAT NEVER EXISTED UNTIL HE APPARENTLY MADE IT UP, AND DRAFTED IT HIMSELF!"


I was unable to attend the April WPA board meeting, but have talked to two residents who did attend the meeting.  Your board did not report this resident's letters to the board under the community liaison report, or discuss the board secretary's sudden addition of a requirement necessary to review records - a requirement that did not exist under SC non profit law, or our governing documents.  HERE IS MY LETTER TO THE BOARD:


April 22, 2018

TO:                WPA BOARD

FROM:          Madeline Y. Claveloux

RE:                 REQUEST TO REVIEW THE CORRESPONDENCE FILE
                        FROM SEPTEMBER 1, 2017 THROUGH MAY 1, 2018

CC:                 The Wedgefield Examiner

As a member in good standing, I am requesting to review the Correspondence File from September 1, 2017, through May 1, 2018. I would like to come to the WPA Office on Tuesday, May 1st., at 11:00am to review the files.  I am making the request under the terms of SC Non Profit Law, and the approved procedures noted in our governing documents.

Statement of Proper Purpose, as noted as a requirement in the above noted documents: In general, I am very concerned about the method of members securing a response from the board.  I have followed the three-month effort of a resident attempting to secure approval to review the spoil site records, and was astounded to see a response from our Board Secretary, adding additional unapproved requirements, prior to access to the records.  What was even more alarming was that the Board Secretary chastised the resident stating they were ignorant of policy – a policy that never existed, and therefore never was brought to the board table, motioned, discussed, published on the website for resident comment, or voted on at a second board meeting, and approved.

I look forward to your response, and approval of my request.