As I reviewed the file I found two documents that speak to our topic. The Board is responsible for governing our Association guided by our governing documents. I believe a good Board is informed and delivers their messages according to the documents, with consistency. Meaning, it doesn't matter who the resident is. The answer to the questions is the same regardless of who asks it.
The role of the Board can become more complicated because of the nature of boards and the ever swinging board member exit, whether through election or resignation. If one Board ignores a situation and doesn't deal with it, basically lets it stand, some will call it precedent even if it violates the governing documents. Additionally, lawsuits, attorney shopping, majority board member agenda, etc. can complicate it further. In fact it becomes a tug of war.
In most of life, chaos breads discontent. Give a few rebels a nod of approval by board members and we are off to the races. We've had two previous years, more but 2009 and 2010, brought a decision to dredge canals and individually assess canal lot owners, sued by a group who then led a charge to recall board members, and the firing and hiring of several lawyers - lawyer shopping for the attorney who could present a case for the ruling majority board.
As residents, when we made our property purchase we agreed to follow the governing documents and pay our assessments. We selected property in an HOA because we wanted stability in the areas that surround us. Now, with the chaos many just want what they want.
Here is one residents view of the canal dredging and assessments. I've removed their name and address.
----------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
The 2009 Board assessed canal owners according to the By-Laws, under ARTICLE V, ASSESSMENTS AND PENALTIES, Section 2: Individual Assessments: In addition, individual assessments may be levied by the Board. These relate to architectural review fees, lot maintenance, or any costs incurred, by The Association, in an effort to keep lots up to standards set in these By-Laws and in the deed "Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions." After the 2010 Recall the 2010 Board had a Concerned Citizen majority. Two of the new Board Members were suing the 2009 Board and all of its members individually. The chaos grew. They told people the assessment and the dredging itself were illegal. They fired the 2009 Board Attorney of Record, and lawyer shopped for a new one - Moran.
I've read his opinion and these people should be going to lien and foreclosure, according to our governing documents. When he displeased them with another opinion, they fired him, and hired a new one. Today, as I reviewed the correspondence file I read the opinion of Attorney Moody, written during the summer of 2011. He basically says what Moran said. I'm not copying it and presenting it here for you. Sometimes people, you have to take the initiative and go to the office and read it for yourself.
Today, I also read Moody's current opinion on liens and the assessment and he goes in the opposite direction. I wonder why? You'll have to go to the office and read that for yourself.
Everyone should remember that the lawsuit spoken about in this letter was settled, signed off in behalf of all of us (including this writer) by Zieske, Wilson, and Thomas. WAIT! Could this writer be part of the Morabit team? You know, let's sue the attorney and the law firm that gave the 2009 Board the opinion.
So now, we all want what we want and who is to stop us. I'd like a curb like the illegal one across the street. I'll have the white fence too! I'd like to quit paying any assessment levied by any Board, because I don't want to. If I have to live by whatever my neighbor constructs and pay when others just say no, then I'm not wanting to pay either.
THINK THIS IS FAR FETCHED? READ ON:
The area called the Arbors has come up again and again. It did again last month at the Board Meeting. Seems their homes lack the square footage to meet our ARC requirements. Yet, we already have paying members in homes with equal or less square footage. First, Moody said no, they don't meet standard. Then someone reminded the Board there are other homes that size. Then the Board said we better send it back for review. In the meantime, as I went through the file a group of 8 residents from the Arbors wrote the following, "We the undersigned homeowners of the Arbors do not want to become part of The Wedgefield Homeowner's Association." Looks to me like they believe they should just say no, like the writer above and it is a done deal. Looks like it works. When do you and I get to say, I don't want it. Their lots are in the PUD. Their property documents tell them they have to join us. The politics on the Arbors has been going on for years.
If these situations continue and you don't want to do what the Board says, say I'll sue, I'm not doing it, and get a whole lot of people to ride around in golf carts gathering signatures, calling the news paper, and revolting against the system, and TO HELL WITH THE GOVERNING DOCUMENTS AND BOARD AUTHORITY, you can have a curb, a fence, and you don't have to pay a thing!
FINALLY: IS THIS THE FAULT OF THIS BOARD? No, it isn't. These situations have a long history. As my grandmother use to say, "this has been a long time coming". It comes from divided sides on a Board (any board over a long period of time) rather than a Board that operates in the best interests of the community. The problems have gathered energy, size and speed over the last several years. It has become extremely political and it stymies our ability to move forward. Our Board needs to help halt it. Stop lawyer shopping and opinion shopping. Stop the intimidation of the threat of lawsuits, and govern by the book in the best interests of the community. Most of the Board are good conscientious people. The swelling calamity of Wedgefield rests on their shoulders. They have to have the strength to turn the tide.
Do you have an opinion? Email wedgefieldexaminer@yahoo.com. Be sure an note whether you would like your name used.
