THE NUMBERS:
*214 votes were cast - slightly over 1/3 of the total residents voted
*The candidates, though uncontested (3 board slots & 3 candidates) received the following votes out of the 214 cast: Garrison - 164, Keith Johnson -194, Jacky Walton -169. That must mean that each of the following numbers represent the number of residents who took the time to write in "NO" next to the individual candidate names: Garrison - 50 NO, Johnson - 20 - NO, Walton - 45 - NO. A recommendation follows in the article for those who took the time to take this extra step and send a message to the individual candidates.
*By-Law Amendment # 1, restricting the power of the board to enter into loans, etc., above $15,000 passed. 142 votes were required to pass. 151 voted in favor, 63 opposed.
*By-Law Amendment # 2, requiring that the board contract the services of a certified Public Accountant failed. 142 votes were required to pass. 127 voted in favor, 87 opposed.
THE CONCERNS:
First, slightly over 1/3 of the total residents voted. This is down from over 50% in 2012. This board that fails to answer residents, fails to provide review of records for review by residents, recently failed to post meeting tapes on the WPA website for 10 months, failed to appropriately file and include the last by-law amendment for over two years and failed to live by it in the interim, fails to acknowledge actual costs of our "accounting function", forces us to pay for services to individual lot owners out of general funds, finds accounting records in private individual resident homes, fails to hold to their own votes, accepts poor contracting and individual board member self interest projects, contracts - conflict of interest - with not only a board member (self gain) but contracts with our president for services, abuses certain board members who question and fail to capitulate to their poor standards, appoints individual board members with poor records to chair positions etc., HAS CREATED THIS APATHY. Residents must be left feeling that they won't be heard and there is no road to good governance, or exit from bad governance.
Some residents have stated that they didn't bother to vote because they couldn't vote for these guys. When advised to at least make a statement on principle and write "NO" next to their names, they said they couldn't because there were people on the election committee who would note how they voted. They said they golf with some of those members, or certain board members would find out how they voted and those board members help them in their homes, with their boats, yards, etc. They need them. The question is one of principle. Why would you want people in your life helping you, who violate your principles and standards, for a game of golf, cards, social group, or work on your home projects? Where is individual integrity of principle? If you feel retaliation might occur, why wouldn't you want to make things better at the heart of your day to day life - your HOME and your neighborhood? Even in these circumstances, why are you willing to sit by and watch them not only abuse individual board members - your former friends at the board table, and assist them in pulling them from social circles in our near (here) and greater community (outside the gates)?
Does that sound hard? Look at a simple, relevant example, of how far the individual CURRENT board members have fallen in principle and decency, let alone good governance, and integrity of action and word. In 2011 there was a recall effort, under the state law used in the 2010 recall. We won't take the time now to go into detail. The basic fact is that SIX of the CURRENT BOARD were so appalled by the behavior and governance of five of the 2011 board, Garrison being one of them up for recall, that they signed petitions to call for a special meeting and REMOVE them, solicited signatures from other residents, and helped with the planning. Yet, five of the six who have tenure of 1- 4 years, have supported Garrison in votes, kept quiet while he called a questioning board member moronic, and overall attempted to make an elected board member look like a fool. I'd hate be one of you who might call them friend and expect that they would do the right thing in a desperate situation. They were elected for governance, nothing else. That is the only reason. What reason could you possibly give for allowing Garrison to be legal chair, vote to appoint one of his cohorts who authored letters to residents telling them not to pay their assessments - starve a board - to a committee, and then allow him month after month to come to the board table without written legal opinion, and vote his recommendation?
Some say, I'm not the kind to stand up and argue a point? While that is somewhat gutless, all it would take, whether board member or resident, is the bravery to do the right thing, by simply voting "NO", when it went against principle, good business practice, consistency, and the best interests of Wedgefield. Your board was elected to do the right thing. If they don't have the bravery to at least vote "NO" when needed, they need to resign. YOU NEED TO QUIT STANDING BY AND WATCHING THE DETERIORATION OF OUR HOMES AND COMMUNITY.
RECOMMENDATION TO THOSE WHO WERE BRAVE ENOUGH TO WRITE "NO" BY CANDIDATE NAMES: Get to the meetings, write the board even if they don't answer your questions, write and tell the board you will be coming to the office to review records because it is your right and THEY shouldn't have to go to a private residence to find all the records. When you find board votes and behaviors that are objectionable, ask to speak at a meeting and address your concern, it becomes part of the record. VOTE EVERY YEAR WITH YOUR CONSCIENCE AND DON'T BE AFRAID WHO WILL SEE HOW YOU VOTED. Don't call people friends easily. Right now it could appear that you don't mind being part of the destruction of other people you ONCE called friend, as you sit by in silence afraid of retaliation. Don't say "I just want peace", and let people abuse those you use to call friend. Friend or not, why would you allow it to happen to anyone? I don't know of anyone who is so financially desperate that they need the free services, or social club and gatherings, that they need to sit by and watch this kind of behavior, at the expense of other of their friends or neighbors. Don't you want your friends and neighbors to have principle?
ON PRINCIPLE AND FOR THE RECORD:
Does it hurt to find out that people you formerly called "friend", worked along side in promotion of good governance, will stand by and let others you both called "mutual friends" turn on you and hurt you? Yes, it does. I'm not special, but I'm old enough to know what my principles are and I won't give them up. It would hurt me in the long term, and I couldn't live with the lack of integrity. Have I lost some of what I use to call "friends"? Not really, because I misjudged them and didn't realize how little principle they had, and how willing they were to sit back and let our home and community be harmed by "special interests". In the end, I'd want to hold to principle, character, and moral values, and call people friends who don't give them up for what one of my friends said, "is just politics".
FOR THE RECORD IS IMPORTANT. I have been sued and put through a long legal tangled process. One of the things that stands out is "THE RECORD". Our minutes are sanitized, our association records often closed to us, our very meeting tapes kept off the WPA website for months, etc., so I will continue to transcribe tapes, gather information to the best of my ability, and make it available - FOR THE RECORD.
ADDED 11/21/13:
I posted the article above on the 20th. This morning a reader sent me the following:
"When you are in the final days of your life, what will you want? Will you hug that college degree in the walnut frame? Will you ask to be carried to the garage so you can sit in your car? Will you find comfort rereading your financial statement? Of course no, what will matter then will be PEOPLE. If relationships will matter then, shouldn't they matter now?" - Max Lucado
