BACKGROUND
Please review the previous article, "Where's The Beef?" Much of what Wilson, Thomas, Walters, Zieske, and Pietkewicz are promising you in their "campaign literature", is based on their interpretation of a court hearing on October 3rd. They are making promises about how they will proceed when infact, we don't have a final written ruling/order. In fact, Thomas made a motion at the October Meeting to start spending our assessment dollars to drag the association into potential legal procedings. Since the Concerned Citizen element of the Board voted to approve Thomas' motion, wouldn't you like to know, that they had all the "legal facts of the ruling?
I sent the following request for information to the Board:
From: mclaveloux@sc.rr.com [mclaveloux@sc.rr.com]
Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2011 10:57 AM
To: Wedgefield Office
Subject: CONFIRMATION OF A DOCUMENT'S EXISTENCE
Please forward to the Board and place a copy in the correspondence file.
Board,
ATTENTION: Johnny Huggins, Legal Chair
My request requires a simple yes or no. Does the Board have a copy of an order
from the Oct. 3rd. court hearing? You may have voted on a premature motion by
Thomas, during the October meeting, to start a process, based on the October 3rd
court case. Candiates currently serving on the Board running for re-election,
are making statements about what was determined on October 3rd, and what steps
the Board should take, based on the ruling. I have checked the court website,
made some phone calls, and still no one has seen the order. As a resident, I
would like a response from you, since so many of you are candidates. Just a
simple yes or no will answer my questions.
Please respond as soon as possible.
Madeline Y. Claveloux
Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2011 10:57 AM
To: Wedgefield Office
Subject: CONFIRMATION OF A DOCUMENT'S EXISTENCE
Please forward to the Board and place a copy in the correspondence file.
Board,
ATTENTION: Johnny Huggins, Legal Chair
My request requires a simple yes or no. Does the Board have a copy of an order
from the Oct. 3rd. court hearing? You may have voted on a premature motion by
Thomas, during the October meeting, to start a process, based on the October 3rd
court case. Candiates currently serving on the Board running for re-election,
are making statements about what was determined on October 3rd, and what steps
the Board should take, based on the ruling. I have checked the court website,
made some phone calls, and still no one has seen the order. As a resident, I
would like a response from you, since so many of you are candidates. Just a
simple yes or no will answer my questions.
Please respond as soon as possible.
Madeline Y. Claveloux
The only Board Member to respond was McBride:
---- John McBride <> wrote:
> I have not seen any final court order signed by the Judge. Until the Judge
signs an order there is no resolution to the law suit.
Kind Regards, John McBride
> I have not seen any final court order signed by the Judge. Until the Judge
signs an order there is no resolution to the law suit.
Kind Regards, John McBride
I have sent the following response to the Board:Kathy, please send to the Board and place a copy in the correspondence file.
Board,
First, thank you John McBride for answering a resident question. To the rest of
you currently serving on the Board and running for re-election, how can you make
promises to get money back, project potential legal options, etc.. when you lack
legal confirmation and the detail associated with a signed court order/ruling?
I posted information at http://thewedgefieldexaminer.blogspot.com over the
weekend. I'll add this information as an update.
Madeline Y. Claveloux
VOTERS: Remember that McBride answered and give him your support. MOST IMPORTANT: Remember Wilson, Thomas, Walters, Zieske, and Pietkewicz are just making promises to use your assessment dollars to drag you into more lawsuits!
________________________________
