The upcoming August 20th board meeting could prove to be a landmark meeting in the future of Wedgefield Plantation Association. Why? The first ever in the history of the association Reserve Study has been completed. Has your board accepted the findings? Will they vote to accept and implement the study? We probably won't have any indication in advance of the meeting. If you review the agenda that should be posted one week prior to the meeting, if it is as usual, it appears that your board changes the date of the previous agenda, and posts the same outline month after month. There isn't any detail, subjects to be covered under committee reports, etc. You might sometimes wonder whether the individual board members review it, or submit info to be included. Watch for the agenda to be posted next Tuesday. In regard to the Reserve Study, the question arises as to whether they have all reviewed it and are prepared to discuss, vote - to accept all, or portions of it. Have each of the board members who serve as committee chairs taken the portions that include their committee work to their committees for review, discussion, and recommendations?
If you attended the July board meeting, you'd be aware that our treasurer was ready to approve a 2014 budget, in denial of the reserve figures set in the study. McBride wanted to discuss some portions and was put on hold until the August meeting.
Have you read the Reserve Study? If you have you may have noticed the positives and the flaws. You may have noticed that the study contractor refers to "information provided by THE BOARD", yet we have shown you that the entire board was never included in what was sent, or what was said to the contractor. Some of the information provided by the board is unfounded and untrue. Now, at the August meeting, would be the time for individual board members to ask that the Reserve Study discussion and vote be brought to the board table. Will they indicate areas of acceptance or rejection? This is an important mile stone and should be discussed in the presence of the membership.
There are mixed feelings about the study because of the board's (those who called themselves the entire board) broad statements, lack of professional engineering studies, etc. It is a flawed study. It could be helpful as it lays out a plan for our roads, landing, etc. If followed, that alone would remove future complications of individual board member favored projects. The study constantly reminds the board to seek professional guidance for all projects, including certified professionals for our financial assets, as the plan is implemented.
If the study isn't discussed and manufactured information pulled out, we may be left with the board weapons of "precedent" and "for the record, or it is a matter of record". Do you think the individual board members you elected, or will elect again would do that? Precedent has been voiced from some of these current board members regularly and often not to our benefit. "For the record" could be pulled out for the segments they would like to highlight in the event of a lawsuit. Hopefully board discussion will pull segments that are not true from the document. Look at the record.
*Our chair of drainage has stated on the record that ditch maintenance is the responsibility of the lot owner. There are individual records in the office where residents were billed through Individual Assessment for ditch maintenance. Yet, this same chair claims (now that he has his own road to deal with) that there is a precedent for the association covering the expense of ditch maintenance.
*There is a precedent of repairing roads without engineering support and utilizing unlicensed and uninsured contractors. Will your board now and in the future fall back on that precedent, ignoring the study recommendations?
*There is a precedent of this board violating our governing documents and their own board votes. Think about the now 4 month drama of the landing dock. What about the fact that the Water Amenities chair wouldn't answer a question at the board table, presented by another board member, as to how much the dock was sold for? The treasurer also tried to avoid answering it. Think about the fact that the board has approved a grounds contract that leaves our assessment dollars being used to pay for almost 50% of the costs of moving 22 private lots. How is that general benefit? Will it become precedent? Your board sat by while our treasurer advised me that I would need to follow state law to view documents, rather than our governing documents. This board hadn't applied that rule to another resident. Could you be next? This board lacks continuity in governance. They are capable of bringing any portion of the study document forward when it is convenient to what they want to do next.
*If you are a canal lot owner you really need to spend time with the study to see the twists and turns of what was said to be the "BOARD PROVIDED INFORMATION" before that portion of the study becomes "on the record, or the record", in some lawsuit up the road. There will be a separate article on that portion of the study later.
Do you think this is a lot about nothing? I hope not. If you do it may be because you don't attend meetings, read the documents, and watch this board at work. Failure to look at the study now and what parts your board approves, or discusses in the presence of the membership, could lead to LONG TERM RAMIFICATIONS, that we wouldn't want for our community. Do yourself a favor and read the document and then write and ask a board member how much time they have spent reviewing the document - the once in our history document, and whether there are sections they want brought to the board table now. We elect INDIVIDUAL board members hoping they will use their INDIVIDUAL life experience, education, and values, and to stand up to enforce our governing documents, and vote in the best interests of Wedgefield Plantation Association, rather than vote with a herd mentality. Attend the August board meeting and see just how important this study is to your board. Could all be a moot point if they don't put it on the agenda? Remember they ignored even publishing, or governing according to a 2011 by-law.
UPCOMING ARTICLES:
*Another Way To Fill A Board Seat Without Involving The Membership
*The Reserve Study And Canal Lot Owners - It Isn't That Complicated But It Is Important
