I've transcribed the Legal Report from a tape of the meeting presented at the Wedgefield Times. As always, I've tried to the best of my ability. I encourage you to go to the tape, The Legal Report, which is about 17 minutes into the tape. Thank you Wedgefield Times for your "time" notations.
I'll transcribe Garrison's report. Listen to the report and try and see whether you gained any more answers regarding the canals, future options, and the attorney opinion on an item that couldn't be discussed, but you paid for.
TRANSCRIPTION: "A meeting was held between Legal and Adam Anderson's Water Amenities subcommittee July 16th, last night. The options discussed previously regarding possible future ways to fund canal maintenance."
Did you get what you paid for? I didn't. Approximately three months ago, Garrison wouldn't tell us what the question or situation was that he was requesting approval for to take to the attorney. RUMOR is that the opinion has been in for some time. Now he gives a vague report like the one transcribed above, and you still don't know anything, except that they met. Didn't he like the opinion? When does he think it would be good to tell you what the whole option is about? What about Anderson, sub committee chair? I won't even ask about McBride, because Anderson and Garrison didn't find it necessary to invite the CHAIR OF WATER AMENITIES TO THE LAST SUB COMMITTEE MEETING WITH LEGAL.
Residents, this silence, "I'll tell you when and if I want to" attitude, is enabled by your Board's misuse of the Confidentiality Agreement, and furthered by residents who just sit by and let it happen. Quite frankly, I'm surprised. After two lawsuits, a recall, a resident being assaulted in the WPA building, etc., all starting with the last canal dredging, you will sit back and trust Garrison to lead the way, but not inform you as to what "the way is"????.
I've printed an article on the "option". You'll have to go back and read it. Quite frankly, rather than do that, why aren't you attending meetings, writing for answers, and demanding that your Board stop the secret governance.
P.S. I categorize this report, as I did a portion of the Secretary's report - duck, duck, goose. It is contained in the following article.
