Two 5 minute speaker slots are available to the residents each month at WPA monthly meetings. It was a bit of a surprise for the speaker to be a board member's spouse. Why? It could appear that the spouse was sent to say what your board won't, or to give "self praise", during a time when there should be little. This very same person commented at the end of the May meeting that this very board had failed to answer her correspondence! What a surprise! True to form to all others, they haven't answered anyone officially in months. This was a poor time to attempt to correct someone else, when your board, her spouse included, would proceed to ignore our governing documents, blatantly deny the rights of another board member to access information prior to the meeting and at the board table, and attempt to deny information to the residents regarding the sale of a WPA asset.
We'll start with what the speaker had to say. I'll do my best to relate what happened. I encourage you to go to The Wedgefield Times and listen to the tape yourself. MY COMMENTS WILL BE IN RED .
The speaker begins to discuss an unnamed person, or entity, who is providing negative commentary against the association and board, failing to denote the countless benefits of living here with a board that follows the covenants and bylaws, possibly hurting public perception and sales of property during a depressed market, potentially keeping volunteers from coming forward to run for board, and failing to recognize the OUTSTANDING ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THIS BOARD. She encourages residents to get involved to help each other with positive goals for the benefit of the entire community.
The speaker never identified the person or entity that is single handed in bringing this community down. It could appear this was a set up by some on the board in an attempt to set the stage and cast aspersions on someone, to deflect the ugliness that was about to occur at the board table. On the very same evening, if you reviewed all that took place you might come to the conclusion that your board bullied and denied access to information to one of their own, violated bylaws, ignored violations of The Code of Ethics, and ran over your right to information. So our speaker, your board treasurer's spouse, set herself above it all, left the scene immediately following her presentation, possibly in avoidance of what was to come.
Detailed articles on each of the reports will follow. How dare this person cast accusations, when your board continues their heavy handed rule of our community?
VIOLATION OF BY-LAWS:
Your board gave the Grounds Chair a pass for another year of the use of our assessments to subsidize private lot mowing. Here is the by-law: ARTICLE V, ASSESSMENTS AND PENALTIES, Section 4: Use of Assessments Revenues: "The funds derived from said assessments shall be used for the payment of common area maintenance expenses of the subdivision". Since when did a PRIVATE LOT, LEGALLY DEEDED TO PRIVATE RESIDENTS, become a common area maintenance expense? Your board knowingly voted 8-1 to do it. McBride voted no. This has been brought to the board table in the last year to year and a half. Where are the residents who "wouldn't pay one dollar" to what they viewed as canal lot maintenance? What have you been promised by this board that seems to cut side deals, "I'll vote for what you want, if you vote for what I want'.
The Water Amenities Chair announced that the old dock that they had pulled into the canals, against the vote of your board was sold. When McBride asked what it sold for he was stone walled by this board, all who appeared to have the information, but wouldn't relate it to a fellow board member, or the residents present. McBride also asked the treasurer what he had received as funds to WPA accounts for the sale. The very man whose spouse wants no negativity was prepared to let the question hang in the air. The Water Amenities Chair also announced that McBride was no longer on the Water Amenities Committee. RUMOR is that he emailed McBride from home and kicked him off the committee. A technical point, committee chairs must bring their proposed committee members to the board for approval. Why wasn't removal of a committee member, causes/reasons, brought to the board table? Could it be that your board knew and once again let a favored committee chair do their dirty work and turned their head?
This board member's spouse asked who would want to run for board because of this negative commentator. Who would want to run for board when they observed the board denying access to information to a fellow board member? Who would want to run for board when there isn't a code of ethics standard, that is FOLLOWED? McBride ran for board and won his seat fairly in an open election. He was elected at least three times. Were each of the others awarded super clearance that we weren't aware of? NO, but it could appear that eight of them have awarded it to themselves, and each other, in denial of our vote.
Last night your board voted 8-1 to give all the policy changes a speedy pass, after ignoring the 2011 bylaw. Listen to the tape, their song and dance around don't cover what they did. Once again McBride votes no. When he asks questions during discussion, he is told by our treasurer, "don't keep dredging ????? dead home, it is going to weigh you down". When he continues to question the treasurer says, "you wasted our time on two separate occasions". Listen to the tape to catch the nasty tone and arrogance. Really? The treasurer is the ultimate judge of what should be considered?
Perhaps, the treasurer's spouse would like to review the tape of the meeting, her condemnation of someone else, and explain why any of this is positive. As to that negative person or entity commentator, you can only document and report what happens. Sorry Mrs. treasurer. you are complaining about the commentary, rather than the actors at the board table.
