TWO NEW ARTICLES WERE ADDED TODAY
Saturday, November 29, 2014
UP NEXT: THE WEDGEFIELD DRAINAGE PROJECT. THE EQUIPMENT HAS BEEN HERE FOR AT LEAST 3 DAYS. DE MARCHI SAID THE CONTRACT CALLED FOR THE WORK TO BE DONE BY THE END OF NOVEMBER. ISN'T THAT A SUNDAY? GARRISON WANTED ASSURANCE THAT THIS STAGE WOULD BE THE END. I DON'T THINK SO. THE BOARD IS HIDING SOMETHING. THAT'S WHY THEY CALLED A MEETING ON NOVEMBER 21ST, AND CHANGED THE PLANS THEY HAD APPROVED DURING THE OCTOBER MEETING. CAN THEY EVER DEVELOP A REAL PLAN????
Friday, November 28, 2014
THE GATE HOUSE - THE SECOND PART OF THE WPA NOVEMBER 21ST OPEN BOARD MEETING. WE CALLED IT THE GATE HOUSE FIX WHEN THE BOARD AWARDED A CONTRACT TO THE WPA PRESIDENT'S BUSINESS. TODAY, YOUR BOARD'S PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING METHODS CAN ONLY BE CALLED AN UNETHICAL MESS, AND WITH THE STATE OF OUR GATE HOUSE, IT CAN ONLY BE CALLED THE GATE HOUSE MESS!
The Wedgefield Examiner attended the WPA November 21st Open Board Meeting. The following information has been provided by my notes, to the best of my ability. Verify the information for yourself, by going to the WPA website. The board's tape of the meeting should be posted. All comments will be printed in red and identified as such.
Eight of the nine board members were present at the meeting. John Walton was absent. Originally, the agenda for the meeting was posted on the WPA website, as The Wedgefield Drainage Project. At the last minute, the gate house was added to the agenda on the website. The Wedgefield Drainage Project was discussed in the first part of the meeting, and a article was posted on the blog regarding the project, earlier.
Once again, your board does not have three bids. They have two. Mc Millin, mentions the fact that 3 were contacted, and they only got two bids. President Walton says that it is desirable to have three bids, because your board would like to insure that costs are reasonable????? Once again, as your board did earlier in the meeting regarding the Wedgefield Drainage Project, they make a motion, to proceed with less than three bids, because they are under $3,000. Garrison wants to know for the record, that bona fide attempts were made. Someone says the one bid, DeMarchi's old bosses bid, is only good for 45 days. DeMarchi says, he talked to him in the last few days, and he'll extend the time period.
McMillin says that he spoke out against this project in the past. He says the gate house has water damage, and mold. They proceed through the bids. It appears the specs provided to the contractors, are in stages, and require the contractor bid on each stage. The prices are reviewed. One of the contractors is DeMarchi's old boss. Anderson says the pricing on at least one bid is ridiculous. Some board members ask to see the specs provided to the contractors. Johnson even asks if the same scope of work was provided to every contractor.
Garrison asks DeMarchi, regarding the bid from his former boss, whether that bidder owns lots here, and is in arrears on his assessments????? DeMarchi says that he doesn't, a partnership owns the lots, that they are trying to collect on. Garrison asks DeMarchi, if his former boss is one of the partners???? DeMarchi fesses up and says he is a partner. Garrison says he doesn't want to be awarding contracts to a party that they are trying to collect assessments on.
Ebert wants to know what we are going to be using the gate house for. Some one says they won't be manning it. Ebert wants to know if they should tear it down????? Garrison says it is part of the landscape. McMillin says due to the roof, as he sees it, it has structural defects. Someone says they bet the work is expensive and MAYBE THEY SHOULD DO IT IN HOUSE!!!!!!!. Johnson says there should be a SCOPE OF WORK THEY CAN ALL AGREE ON?????? Some begin to suggest we do this. Others suggest we do that. Cline says they need to decide what we are getting bids on. Garrison says they need to reject both bids. McMillin seconds it. Johnson says he is willing to look at it with a couple of people. DeMarchi wants to know what Johnson objects to in the specs????? Garrison says in the least they should get the windows in. Doors and door jams come into the discussion.
At one point McMillin says water has been running down the inside wall for about three years. They mention mold in the walls, and mold under the carpeting. McMillin wants to prop up a wall and replace the original wood with treated wood. Some say that doesn't have to be done. McMillin says he'll get volunteers to do it. DeMarchi jabs someone verbally saying that they let it go for about 4 years.
In the end there is no settlement on our poor condition gate house. President Walton pounds the gaveland closes the meeting, AND DOESN'T EVEN OPEN IT UP TO RESIDENT COMMENTS, as he usually does.
COMMENTS:
First, the gatehouse and associated brick walls, are the beauty in the entrance to Wedgefield. If the gate house were to be neglected to the point that tearing it down, or letting it deteriorate to the point that some on the board have (long timers), it is a disgrace. We are almost to the point that the TV show Myrtle Manor, should be contacting us to film here. How can your board allow cement benches, fountains, and some of their other ridiculous projects, mismanage an ASSET to this degree, without anyone saying THIS IS A PROBLEM? There is far more than one problem, and many others, with this cohesive, know it all board.
They lack any kind of planning, let alone solid planning. They lack any kind of solid, professional procurement of vendors, spec development, real sealed bids, or awarding of contract process. Everyone of these board members fail in their duty of honest review of information, prior to a vote. Remember, they were sending the specs around the table the night of the meeting, written it appears, by DeMarchi. Who at that board table is a licensed commercial contractor in the state of SC? I don't believe that we have such a person on that board.
How can the bids be truly sealed, when DeMarchi has obviously talked to his former boss? How can the bids be sealed, when they vote in advance to the supposed opening of the bids, to move forward, because someone knows the bids - 2, are under $3,000?
They keep putting out bids in stages. Some list all the stages and ask that the bidder bid on each stage. Others, they just put out this little bit, and later, that little bit. It all looks like they can't get bidders, because they abuse them. You abuse good credible bidders, keep them from bidding, because you allow it without question.
Remember, this project was awarded to President Walton, in conflict of a document every one on the board signed. It was urgent, 13 months ago. After President Walton gave the contract back, because after months of denying it, every board member who voted to give him the contract, was in conflict of interest, according to a document they all signed, as stated by our board attorney. Your board paid him (President Walton) for the windows he bought for the gate house and stored them, for months. Now, we are so poorly managed that we get to the board table and find out that once again, DeMarchi's OLD boss is bidding (He was the highest bidder when President Walton was awarded the contract.), and his partnership group, is so in arrears in assessments, that the board is taking dramatic steps to collect. YOUR BOARD TREASURER, is involved!!! Garrison, as Legal Chair, is no hero in this, when he asks if the bidder is the same guy that owes so much. He has played this snake like, winding game too often! Go back to the dock, and conflict of interest board meetings and listen to what he does when others question. This board appears to be afraid of each other, or lacks the ability to figure out how to get out of a card board box, let alone administer our association. I forget myself, they are counting on residents being the IDIOTS, that DeMarchi says he is tired of legistating for. Now, they are thinking about putting VOLUNTEERS in a mold infested building???? Hope the insurance company doesn't get wind of this.
NEXT THE BOARD MEMBER WITH THE VACANT LOT VIOLATION, HAS NOT ONLY, NOT CLEANED UP THE LOT, HE HAS ADDED MORE FURNITURE FOR HIS BON FIRES. YOU REMEMBER THE "NO BURNING, NO EXCEPTIONS" BOARD - EXCEPT IF IT IS ONE OF THEIR OWN???? REMEMBER, BOARD MEMBER CLINE SAID TAKE PICTURES AT THE ANNUAL MEETING. I WROTE THE BOARD AND IT WAS TURNED OVER TO ARC (JOHNSON), AND LET'S LOOK AT GIVING A CONTRACT TO MY EX BOSS, (COMPLIANCE) DE MARCHI!!!!!
Tuesday, November 25, 2014
Monday, November 24, 2014
YES, YOUR BOARD IS STILL FAILING TO SELF REGULATE, WHILE SOME ON THE BOARD BREAK OUR GOVERNING DOCUMENTS. IS THAT BECAUSE AS DeMarchi CALLED US, WE ARE IDIOTS, AND PROBABLY WON'T NOTICE? TODAY, IT IS JUST THE PICTURES. TOMORROW, OR SOON, IT COULD BE A LETTER TO A NEWSPAPER EDITORIAL, WITH PICTURES!
YOUR BOARD STILL HASN'T CORRECTED, SOME OF THEIR COHESIVE BOARD MEMBERS, WHO HAVE VIOLATED OUR GOVERNING DOCUMENTS. IF THE BOARD SENDS YOU COLLECTION NOTICES ON YOUR ASSESSMENTS, OR ANYTHING ELSE, TELL THEM YOU AREN''T CLEANING UP YOUR ACT, UNTIL THEY CLEAN UP THEIRS. REMEMBER, IT WOULD BE LIKE THE POT CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK, AND THIS TIME THE KETTLE IS IN ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBER'S LOTS. HERE IS THE VERY POT TO WRITE TO THEM ABOUT. IT IS IN BOARD MEMBER MC MILLIN'S VACANT LOT.
Sunday, November 23, 2014
YES, IT IS SUNDAY, OCTOBER 23, A NEW PICTURE HAS BEEN ADDED, THESE PICTURES WILL APPEAR UNTIL ARC AND COMPLIANCE GET THEIR FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS TO CLEAN UP THEIR OWN VIOLATIONS
STAY TUNED AS FAVORITISM TRUMPS GOOD GOVERNANCE IN WEDGEFIELD
BOARD MEMBER #1 - WILLIAM SCREVEN - CLOSE UP OF JUST ONE OF TWO OF THESE BEAUTIES - Board Member Cline, stated herself, at the Annual Meeting, that nothing could sit on vacant lots. That was before her fellow board member, announced it was his lot, while sitting near her at the board table.
BOARD MEMBER # 2 - John Green - This appears to violate # 11 of the Covenants
YOUR BOARD HAS IGNORED THIS SITUATION FOR MONTHS - Wedgefield Rd. Most of this cohesive board drive past this to get to the office. Didn't Compliance Chair DeMarchi, notice this?
Saturday, November 22, 2014
A REPORT ON THE BOARD'S NOVEMBER 21ST, OPEN BOARD MEETING LEADS TO MORE QUESTIONS THAN ANSWERS. THE PROJECT IS MORE EXPENSIVE THAN YOU WERE EVER TOLD, OR CAN BE TRACKED IN THE OFFICIAL MINUTES. IT COULD APPEAR THAT YOUR BOARD IS COVERING UP SOME THINGS
The Wedgefield Examiner will relate the details of the WPA November 21st, Open Board Meeting to the best of my ability. Please verify the information by going to the WPA website and listening to the tape of the meeting when it is put up. Notes of the meeting where taken to the best of my ability. COMMENTS WILL BE PRINTED IN RED AND NOTED AS SUCH.
The board posted a sign near the front gate, and a message on the WPA website, announcing the meeting. The initial posting on the website stated that the agenda was the Wedgefield Drainage Project. Later, the gate house was added to the agenda on the website.
The meeting was called to order by President Walton at 7:00 PM. Board members in attendance were: President Walton, Ebert, Cline, DeMarchi, McMillin, Garrison, Johnson, and Anderson. John Walton was absent.
DeMarchi starts out saying that scope of work had been sent to 3 contractors, but that they only had one bid. The board then began to talk about the fact that if the bid was under $3,000, that they could make a motion to waive the requirement of 3 bids. Garrison asked whether multiple attempts had been made to secure 3 bids. DeMarchi said the only reason the bidding contractor had agreed to bid, was that he was already in the area. A motion was made and passed to waive the requirement of three bids.
COMMENTS: First, the board never tells us why we are there for yet another change of plans on the Wedgefield Drainage Project. This is important for a number of reasons. Remember, this time DeMarchi is bringing the project to the table, again, after he has declared it completed, at least twice. Last month, McMillin, brought some half baked plan to the table calling it the Canal Project, that resulted in the board approving up to $2,500 to remove the stuff from the canal, bring in top soil, level/grade, and sod - with volunteers. That was suppose to finish this project once and for all. What really prompted the President to call this meeting? Do you really think that board members sat around the week before Thanksgiving, and said, "you know fellow board members, we who claim to have all expertise, and money saving knowledge, ought to rethink this?" Listen, DeMarchi says, "he's tired of legislating for IDIOTS who break the rules", obviously on their own, they would just charge forward as they have been. I happened to know that some have written DHEC and the Army Corp. of Engineers about this project, and their genuine concerns for lack of engineering, and the environment of our canals. I haven't heard that they've received answers, but your board didn't just pull this new plan of action out of a magical hat, for no reason. We have a right to know. My suggestion would be, that you write the board immediately, and ask them whether they have had anyone from DHEC, the Army Corp. of Engineers, or any other governmental agency, contact the board, since the October 2014 Board Meeting regarding this project, and if so, ask that they detail the type of contact, and if written, that they provide you with a copy. It is about time that they acknowledged the problems with THEIR PLANNING, OR LACK OF, for us - idiots. If you have written authorities, and haven't heard from them, send a copy of your correspondence and a cover letter, to a higher authority, until you get a response.
We'll head back to the meeting. A motion is made, seconded by Ebert, to approve the bid of $1,900.00. It is stated that DHEC will allow removal of no more than 25 yards out of the canal. The vendor would remove the material, haul it away, bring in top soil, and level ,and grade it. No one at the board table asks why we are doing this, versus what was approved in October. Cline says it seems reasonable. Garrison asks how much we've spent in total on this project? Someone asks how much was allocated to the project? DeMarchi says he doesn't know exactly how much we have spent, but suggests that it is less than $28,000, and probably around $24,000. Go to the tape, but my scribbling indicates that DeMarchi says that either $34,000, or $36,000, had been allocated to it. Garrison asks if this is really going to be the end of the project? DeMarchi says it should be, as long as they get the sod, which isn't included in the bid. Garrison comes back again saying things like it has gone on and on. He mentions one bulk head and then another was added, and he would like it to be over, and completed. He then asks if he is being told that this will be the end? McMillin jumps in saying he believes the sod cutting season may be over by the time the vendor does this project. DeMarchi has claimed that it will be done in November, and that the contractor will probably start on Monday. They talk a little more about sod. McMillin agrees to check with the sod vendor on Monday, because DeMarchi does not believe the sod cutting season is over. They don't add the cost of the sod to the motion.
Garrison asks if everyone is in agreement that something washed into the canals. DeMarchi goes back to his previous vague attempts at claiming that it was in there already. Someone disagrees. Someone says that Ryan Campbell put gravel in there. Garrison wants to know what the vendor does with the stuff he is to haul away. Cline asks something about more being washed away. DeMarchi says that it should stay. Johnson says something about the project taking a couple of tries to get it right, but it could have cost more with engineering.(???????) Ebert wants to know if the vendor has a permit to cart the stuff away, and where they are taking it? Someone says that they don't know. McMillin says that when they drag that stuff out that it is going to be wet. He wants to know if the vendor will let it sit up here, because it could leak mud and water, as it is being hauled out of here. DeMarchi says something about if the vendor is hauling it, and if it drips, he might be fined - that's possible.
In the end, the board approves this bid.
COMMENTS:
Residents, DeMarchi is Treasurer, Compliance Chair, and Drainage Chair. I suggest you write him and get some answers. Why? First, he appears to have poor regard for the intelligence of some, if not all residents -"legislating for idiots". He also appears to have high regard for himself at the same time. He's an expert at everything from drainage, to accounting, and everything else. Second, if he is such an expert, such a great legislator, why weren't the residents ever told up front, how much he had allocated to this expensive project, without engineering, and proper planning and bidding? WHY DON'T HIS PUBLISHED NUMBERS REGARDING THIS PROJECT, ADD UP?
I'll do the math for you, on the premise that our official approved minutes, should indicate in the least, expense related motions. Therefore, you as a resident, could track how much was spent on this expensive, fault ridden, project, or any project. You can go to the WPA website, and follow the figures presented below, through the Drainage Report section of the minutes, each month. I cut and pasted the Drainage Reports in a article entitled, "More of the October Grounds Report. Why Did The Almost Two Year Wedgefield Drainage Project, Directed By Drainage Chair DeMarchi, Become The Canal Project, Directed By Grounds Chair McMillin?", published on November 9, 2014. You can review the Drainage Report figures there. HERE ARE THE FIGURES AND THE DATE THEY APPEARED IN THE MINUTES.
June/2013, $650.00, Earthworks
November/2013 $9,870.00, J.C. Landscaping
December/2013, $100.00, for grass seed
April/2014, $1,750.00 Marine Towing
April/2014, $300.00, for fill dirt
TOTAL APPROVED IN THE MINUTES = $11,670.00 (Note, even if you add in the $2,500 that was approved in October 2014, which they changed at the Open Board Meeting, it would all only total $15,170.00. How did we get to an approved amount of less than $28,000 but more than $24,000? Write and ask the board. NOTE: I'll remind you again, that I have provided all the above information to the best of my ability, having attended the Open Board Meeting, and used the approved WPA Minutes, and I've asked you, to verify the information for yourself, from the tape of the meeting, and the minutes.
I attend a lot of the meetings, and listen to the tapes and transcribe them. Another red flag went up when this board motioned to get past the fact that they didn't have three bids, but it was under $3,000. I don't recall them doing that in the past. It is just one more item to consider, when you evaluate how we may be being jerked around. There have been more than a few times when they didn't have three bidders.
I really question this board's procurement and contracting practices, and their failure to use engineering services. Go to the tape and listen to board member Johnson's - we didn't use engineering, it took a few tries, but I think we did OK. I am so concerned that I'm going to write the board, and suggest that they develop a new committee, or sub committee, that would develop a standard for requests for proposals, document the credentials of the board member or individual writing the scope of work, or specs, document attempts at securing bids, receive the bids, and hold them - un opened, for the meeting they are to be voted on. I'm so sincere, that should the board accept the recommendation, I will volunteer to sit on the committee - if I'm approved (fat chance), and I'll even sign the confidentiality agreement, for that volunteer job only!
In the meantime if you've written authorities regarding this project, send it to higher authority. If you're a resident, question the board, as advised above.
I went to the Wedgefield Drainage Project today, and took more pictures, with a measuring tape. While the board argues the silting has stopped, and I don't believe it, nothing was said at the board table that would fix these dangerous holes - caused by silting, or not.
The board posted a sign near the front gate, and a message on the WPA website, announcing the meeting. The initial posting on the website stated that the agenda was the Wedgefield Drainage Project. Later, the gate house was added to the agenda on the website.
The meeting was called to order by President Walton at 7:00 PM. Board members in attendance were: President Walton, Ebert, Cline, DeMarchi, McMillin, Garrison, Johnson, and Anderson. John Walton was absent.
DeMarchi starts out saying that scope of work had been sent to 3 contractors, but that they only had one bid. The board then began to talk about the fact that if the bid was under $3,000, that they could make a motion to waive the requirement of 3 bids. Garrison asked whether multiple attempts had been made to secure 3 bids. DeMarchi said the only reason the bidding contractor had agreed to bid, was that he was already in the area. A motion was made and passed to waive the requirement of three bids.
COMMENTS: First, the board never tells us why we are there for yet another change of plans on the Wedgefield Drainage Project. This is important for a number of reasons. Remember, this time DeMarchi is bringing the project to the table, again, after he has declared it completed, at least twice. Last month, McMillin, brought some half baked plan to the table calling it the Canal Project, that resulted in the board approving up to $2,500 to remove the stuff from the canal, bring in top soil, level/grade, and sod - with volunteers. That was suppose to finish this project once and for all. What really prompted the President to call this meeting? Do you really think that board members sat around the week before Thanksgiving, and said, "you know fellow board members, we who claim to have all expertise, and money saving knowledge, ought to rethink this?" Listen, DeMarchi says, "he's tired of legislating for IDIOTS who break the rules", obviously on their own, they would just charge forward as they have been. I happened to know that some have written DHEC and the Army Corp. of Engineers about this project, and their genuine concerns for lack of engineering, and the environment of our canals. I haven't heard that they've received answers, but your board didn't just pull this new plan of action out of a magical hat, for no reason. We have a right to know. My suggestion would be, that you write the board immediately, and ask them whether they have had anyone from DHEC, the Army Corp. of Engineers, or any other governmental agency, contact the board, since the October 2014 Board Meeting regarding this project, and if so, ask that they detail the type of contact, and if written, that they provide you with a copy. It is about time that they acknowledged the problems with THEIR PLANNING, OR LACK OF, for us - idiots. If you have written authorities, and haven't heard from them, send a copy of your correspondence and a cover letter, to a higher authority, until you get a response.
We'll head back to the meeting. A motion is made, seconded by Ebert, to approve the bid of $1,900.00. It is stated that DHEC will allow removal of no more than 25 yards out of the canal. The vendor would remove the material, haul it away, bring in top soil, and level ,and grade it. No one at the board table asks why we are doing this, versus what was approved in October. Cline says it seems reasonable. Garrison asks how much we've spent in total on this project? Someone asks how much was allocated to the project? DeMarchi says he doesn't know exactly how much we have spent, but suggests that it is less than $28,000, and probably around $24,000. Go to the tape, but my scribbling indicates that DeMarchi says that either $34,000, or $36,000, had been allocated to it. Garrison asks if this is really going to be the end of the project? DeMarchi says it should be, as long as they get the sod, which isn't included in the bid. Garrison comes back again saying things like it has gone on and on. He mentions one bulk head and then another was added, and he would like it to be over, and completed. He then asks if he is being told that this will be the end? McMillin jumps in saying he believes the sod cutting season may be over by the time the vendor does this project. DeMarchi has claimed that it will be done in November, and that the contractor will probably start on Monday. They talk a little more about sod. McMillin agrees to check with the sod vendor on Monday, because DeMarchi does not believe the sod cutting season is over. They don't add the cost of the sod to the motion.
Garrison asks if everyone is in agreement that something washed into the canals. DeMarchi goes back to his previous vague attempts at claiming that it was in there already. Someone disagrees. Someone says that Ryan Campbell put gravel in there. Garrison wants to know what the vendor does with the stuff he is to haul away. Cline asks something about more being washed away. DeMarchi says that it should stay. Johnson says something about the project taking a couple of tries to get it right, but it could have cost more with engineering.(???????) Ebert wants to know if the vendor has a permit to cart the stuff away, and where they are taking it? Someone says that they don't know. McMillin says that when they drag that stuff out that it is going to be wet. He wants to know if the vendor will let it sit up here, because it could leak mud and water, as it is being hauled out of here. DeMarchi says something about if the vendor is hauling it, and if it drips, he might be fined - that's possible.
In the end, the board approves this bid.
COMMENTS:
Residents, DeMarchi is Treasurer, Compliance Chair, and Drainage Chair. I suggest you write him and get some answers. Why? First, he appears to have poor regard for the intelligence of some, if not all residents -"legislating for idiots". He also appears to have high regard for himself at the same time. He's an expert at everything from drainage, to accounting, and everything else. Second, if he is such an expert, such a great legislator, why weren't the residents ever told up front, how much he had allocated to this expensive project, without engineering, and proper planning and bidding? WHY DON'T HIS PUBLISHED NUMBERS REGARDING THIS PROJECT, ADD UP?
I'll do the math for you, on the premise that our official approved minutes, should indicate in the least, expense related motions. Therefore, you as a resident, could track how much was spent on this expensive, fault ridden, project, or any project. You can go to the WPA website, and follow the figures presented below, through the Drainage Report section of the minutes, each month. I cut and pasted the Drainage Reports in a article entitled, "More of the October Grounds Report. Why Did The Almost Two Year Wedgefield Drainage Project, Directed By Drainage Chair DeMarchi, Become The Canal Project, Directed By Grounds Chair McMillin?", published on November 9, 2014. You can review the Drainage Report figures there. HERE ARE THE FIGURES AND THE DATE THEY APPEARED IN THE MINUTES.
June/2013, $650.00, Earthworks
November/2013 $9,870.00, J.C. Landscaping
December/2013, $100.00, for grass seed
April/2014, $1,750.00 Marine Towing
April/2014, $300.00, for fill dirt
TOTAL APPROVED IN THE MINUTES = $11,670.00 (Note, even if you add in the $2,500 that was approved in October 2014, which they changed at the Open Board Meeting, it would all only total $15,170.00. How did we get to an approved amount of less than $28,000 but more than $24,000? Write and ask the board. NOTE: I'll remind you again, that I have provided all the above information to the best of my ability, having attended the Open Board Meeting, and used the approved WPA Minutes, and I've asked you, to verify the information for yourself, from the tape of the meeting, and the minutes.
I attend a lot of the meetings, and listen to the tapes and transcribe them. Another red flag went up when this board motioned to get past the fact that they didn't have three bids, but it was under $3,000. I don't recall them doing that in the past. It is just one more item to consider, when you evaluate how we may be being jerked around. There have been more than a few times when they didn't have three bidders.
I really question this board's procurement and contracting practices, and their failure to use engineering services. Go to the tape and listen to board member Johnson's - we didn't use engineering, it took a few tries, but I think we did OK. I am so concerned that I'm going to write the board, and suggest that they develop a new committee, or sub committee, that would develop a standard for requests for proposals, document the credentials of the board member or individual writing the scope of work, or specs, document attempts at securing bids, receive the bids, and hold them - un opened, for the meeting they are to be voted on. I'm so sincere, that should the board accept the recommendation, I will volunteer to sit on the committee - if I'm approved (fat chance), and I'll even sign the confidentiality agreement, for that volunteer job only!
In the meantime if you've written authorities regarding this project, send it to higher authority. If you're a resident, question the board, as advised above.
I went to the Wedgefield Drainage Project today, and took more pictures, with a measuring tape. While the board argues the silting has stopped, and I don't believe it, nothing was said at the board table that would fix these dangerous holes - caused by silting, or not.
3 PICTURES OF HOLE # 1
Hole # 1 = about 16 inches wide - minimum
Hole # 1 = about 9 inches wide - minimum
Hole # 1 = about 29 inches deep at the very least
2 PICTURES OF HOLE # 2
Hole # 2 = about 32 inches deep, actually deeper but tape gets caught
Hole # 2 = a running distance of about 26 inches
AS PROMISED, THESE PICTURES WILL APPEAR EVERYDAY UNTIL YOUR BOARD TELLS US WHAT THEY HAVE DONE TO CORRECT THESE BOARD MEMBER VIOLATIONS WHICH APPEAR TO VIOLATE OUR COVENANTS AND GOVERNING DOCUMENTS. NEXT A REPORT ON THE BOARD'S OPEN MEETING INVOLVING YET ANOTHER PROPOSAL TO FIX THE WEDGEFIELD DRAINAGE PROJECT. THE MEETING LEFT MORE QUESTIONS - SERIOUS QUESTIONS, THAN ANSWERS. THE PROJECT IS MORE EXPENSIVE THAN YOU EVER WERE TOLD, OR CAN BE TRACKED IN THE OFFICIAL MINUTES. IT COULD APPEAR THAT YOUR BOARD IS COVERING UP SOME THINGS.
HERE ARE THE PICTURES
BOARD MEMBER # 1 - ON WILLIAM SCREVEN
BOARD MEMBER # 2 - ON JOHN GREEN
THE BOARD HAVE BEEN IGNORING THIS FOR MONTHS - WEDGEFIELD RD.
YOUR BOARD IS ASLEEP - LIKE THAT GROUND HOG, AT LEAST EYES CLOSED AT THE LEGISLATIVE DESK, FAILING TO UPHOLD OUR GOVERNING DOCUMENTS THEMSELVES, WHILE ONE OF THE OFFICERS CALL US - THE RESIDENTS, IDIOTS.
THE PICTURES WILL BE POSTED EVERY DAY, UNTIL WE HAVE ANSWERS, OR THESE MESSES ARE CLEANED UP. ONE MIGHT UNDERSTAND HOW THEY COULD BE TOO BUSY CLEANING UP, AND POSSIBLY HIDING THEIR OTHER MESSES TO HANDLE THIS.
Friday, November 21, 2014
AS PROMISED - HOW CAN BOARD MEMBERS CLAIM THAT THEY LEGISLATE IN OUR BEST INTERESTS WHEN THEY DON'T ADHERE TO OUR GOVERNING DOCUMENTS ON THEIR OWN PROPERTIES?
What prompted this question and article?
During October, the Wedgefield Examiner posted articles regarding the WPA board's published policy on burning. Twice in 2014, the board published in the Wragg, NO BURNING, NO EXCEPTIONS. Prior to the October 2014 board meeting, invitations were sent out to members of a club in Wedgefield for bon fire at board member McMillin's vacant lot. What happens to residents if a board member decides to do what they've told you, you can't? They stage, out of the blue, a discussion on burning, at the board table. It still doesn't legitimize McMillin's burning, because policy has to be heard twice, and that won't be until December, but they do bring the topic up, prior to his burning.
With that completed, what does he do next? In fact, early in the last week of October, he staged his lot with two ugly, big pots, a swing, and a pile of wood. The bon fire which was scheduled for November 1st, was rescheduled and held on November 2nd, burning included.
Next we get to the WPA Annual Meeting. The only meeting that residents are allowed to speak at, during the meeting. A resident, not me, not known to me, stands and questions burning being allowed, when the board said, "no burning". I stand and remind the board that it is in the Wragg twice, and states 'NO EXCEPTIONS". Board member Cline, states that they never intended to curb recreational burning. I respond that they better define it, because there are two ugly pots on a vacant lot, on my street. Cline says there shouldn't be anything allowed sitting on a vacant lot, and advises me to take pictures. Board member McMillin, says not to bother, it is his lot. He further tells the group that he had it set up for a club, and they had a lot of fun, but he has been too busy to remove it. Not one board member says, "you better clean it up McMillin." No, they all sit back.
The meeting was held on November 15th. One would assume that an ethical board member would have gone home and removed it. Not him, it appears he thinks because he is a board member it gets to stay. It is all still there today.
On November 17th, I took a ride through the association, and found that we have another board member that appears to be breaking a covenant. I took pictures there. I also took pictures of the vacant lot on Wedgefield Road, with the tractor, and pile of debris. Note: the tractor vacant lot owner was notified by the board in the fall of 2009 that he couldn't do that, and removed it. I guess when you are in Rome, you do what the Romans do, especially if you have a board that won't follow the rules. On November 17, 2014, as advised by board member Cline, I sent a letter to the board entitled "Violations of WPA Regulations," included pictures.
HERE IS THE LETTER"
"WPA Board
Please distribute to the board and place a copy in the correspondence file.
During the annual meeting I sited a vacant lot owner's violation. I was advised by board member, Cline to take pictures and send them in. She further stated that vacant lots are not to have anything on them. The following pictures are detailed with addresses.
Additionally, I have provided pictures regarding # 11 of the Covenants.
Please advise of the steps you have taken to rectify these situations.
1) Lot adjacent to XX William Screven. You'll note the burning pots (?), flag pole, and trailer. (Note - Board Member)
During October, the Wedgefield Examiner posted articles regarding the WPA board's published policy on burning. Twice in 2014, the board published in the Wragg, NO BURNING, NO EXCEPTIONS. Prior to the October 2014 board meeting, invitations were sent out to members of a club in Wedgefield for bon fire at board member McMillin's vacant lot. What happens to residents if a board member decides to do what they've told you, you can't? They stage, out of the blue, a discussion on burning, at the board table. It still doesn't legitimize McMillin's burning, because policy has to be heard twice, and that won't be until December, but they do bring the topic up, prior to his burning.
With that completed, what does he do next? In fact, early in the last week of October, he staged his lot with two ugly, big pots, a swing, and a pile of wood. The bon fire which was scheduled for November 1st, was rescheduled and held on November 2nd, burning included.
Next we get to the WPA Annual Meeting. The only meeting that residents are allowed to speak at, during the meeting. A resident, not me, not known to me, stands and questions burning being allowed, when the board said, "no burning". I stand and remind the board that it is in the Wragg twice, and states 'NO EXCEPTIONS". Board member Cline, states that they never intended to curb recreational burning. I respond that they better define it, because there are two ugly pots on a vacant lot, on my street. Cline says there shouldn't be anything allowed sitting on a vacant lot, and advises me to take pictures. Board member McMillin, says not to bother, it is his lot. He further tells the group that he had it set up for a club, and they had a lot of fun, but he has been too busy to remove it. Not one board member says, "you better clean it up McMillin." No, they all sit back.
The meeting was held on November 15th. One would assume that an ethical board member would have gone home and removed it. Not him, it appears he thinks because he is a board member it gets to stay. It is all still there today.
On November 17th, I took a ride through the association, and found that we have another board member that appears to be breaking a covenant. I took pictures there. I also took pictures of the vacant lot on Wedgefield Road, with the tractor, and pile of debris. Note: the tractor vacant lot owner was notified by the board in the fall of 2009 that he couldn't do that, and removed it. I guess when you are in Rome, you do what the Romans do, especially if you have a board that won't follow the rules. On November 17, 2014, as advised by board member Cline, I sent a letter to the board entitled "Violations of WPA Regulations," included pictures.
HERE IS THE LETTER"
"WPA Board
Please distribute to the board and place a copy in the correspondence file.
During the annual meeting I sited a vacant lot owner's violation. I was advised by board member, Cline to take pictures and send them in. She further stated that vacant lots are not to have anything on them. The following pictures are detailed with addresses.
Additionally, I have provided pictures regarding # 11 of the Covenants.
Please advise of the steps you have taken to rectify these situations.
1) Lot adjacent to XX William Screven. You'll note the burning pots (?), flag pole, and trailer. (Note - Board Member)
2) Vacant lot adjacent to XXXX Wedgefield Rd. The tractor and debris pile have been there for months.
3) Resident home owner has had these signs up for months. This appears to violate #11 of the Covenants. The address is XX John Green Lane. (Note - Board Member)
On November 18, I receive this from the board: "I am in receipt of your letter and photos of the various ARC and covenant violations. They have been passed along to the ARC and compliance committees for review. Thank you for your concern and interest in Wedgefield Plantation." I do thank our Community Liaison for his quick response. I do not trust the method, or the time it will take for any real corrections. As noted, two of the properties involved are board member properties. The first one with the burning pots, what we ended up with as noted above, is that, that offender comes to the board table to bring up new policy for us, because he wants to burn now, and we live under "no burning, no exceptions", but we'll get legislated for his burning transgression, under current policy. In regard to his lot, he has had equipment stored there for long periods of time. He has dumped loads of dirt near the road and let weeds grow two feet high on them, for almost a year, in the past. More of I'll regulate you, but you'll follow my rules, whether, I do or not.
As to the board member with the signs. It looks like a used boat lot, but the signs are the probable violations. This board member reminded residents at the Annual Meeting, that if you don't have your marina car and boat trailer stickers up, he'll have your car towed. We have to follow the rules. He probably won't. This board member may have even attended McMillin's bon fire.
I intend to post these pictures every day, until we have a remedy. Think that is drama, on what could be viewed small stuff? I don't. There has been a lot of rule making for us, and failure not only for the board in general to follow our governing documents, but for them to ignore sound business practice in requests for proposals, contracting, etc. Remember, they often state they have the expertise, obviously they think they are above it all, and with a wink, and a nod to each other, can call it cohesive. At the same time one of their own, dares to say, "You get tired of legislating against the idiots in this place. THEY BREAK EVERY RULE."
Your board's poor use of our governing documents, and sound use of principle, leaves them doing what they want to, against us - termed idiots, while we must obey, and pay for their poor planning contracting, etc. We are left with these miserable messes in the meantime.
Thursday, November 20, 2014
NEXT: HOW CAN BOARD MEMBERS CLAIM THAT THEY LEGISLATE IN OUR BEST INTERESTS WHEN THEY DON'T ADHERE TO OUR GOVERNING DOCUMENTS ON THEIR OWN PROPERTIES? WE HAVE THE PICTURES.
The Wedgefield Examiner will post this article by noon on Friday, November 21st. We'll provide pictures. There will probably be more questions than answers. Can we trust a board that sits back, as a current board member, states the following in a meeting: Treasurer/Compliance Chair, DeMarchi, October 2014, YOU GET TIRED OF LEGISLATING AGAINST THE IDIOTS IN THIS PLACE, THEY BREAK EVERY RULE."
What does your board do when those who break the rules, are fellow board members?
Wedgefield Examiner Wonder Dog Brady says, "Stay tuned"
What does your board do when those who break the rules, are fellow board members?
Wedgefield Examiner Wonder Dog Brady says, "Stay tuned"
Wednesday, November 19, 2014
YOUR WPA BOARD HAS CALLED A MEETING REGARDING THE WEDGEFIELD DRAINAGE PROJECT
The WPA has posted a sign near the front gate, and on their website. It reads:
"An OPEN meeting has been called for Friday, November 21, 2014 at 7:00pm at the WPA office. The AGENDA: The Wedgefield Drainage Project" Whether you plan on attending, or not, take time to drive over and take a close look at this projects. Perhaps, you will have questions for the board the evening of the meeting.
It could be that they have to deal with some of this:
"An OPEN meeting has been called for Friday, November 21, 2014 at 7:00pm at the WPA office. The AGENDA: The Wedgefield Drainage Project" Whether you plan on attending, or not, take time to drive over and take a close look at this projects. Perhaps, you will have questions for the board the evening of the meeting.
It could be that they have to deal with some of this:
Tuesday, November 18, 2014
THE WEDGEFIELD DRAINAGE PROJECT, NEWLY NAMED - CANAL PROJECT: OUR BOARD APPEARS TO WANT TO TRY AND COVER UP THEIR POOR PLANNING, LACK OF PROFESSIONAL MANAGEMENT, AND QUICK FIX SOLUTIONS, WITH SOD. ARE WE LEFT WITH GOOD MONEY BEING SPENT FOR ONE MISERABLE MISTAKE AFTER ANOTHER? HAS THE BOARD LEFT US WITH A DANGEROUS SITUATION? YOU NEED TO FIND OUT BECAUSE THEY ARE ALREADY PLANNING ANOTHER DRAINAGE/BULK HEAD/POND PROJECT.
The Wedgefield Examiner will move to articles regarding the WPA Annual Meeting in the next few days. The Wedgefield Drainage Project is too critical to leave sitting on the side line, while your board moves forward in attempting to cover all of their mistakes on this project, with sod. In the mean time, before they resolve the issues of this project, they had another similar project on the table, in October - the drainage, bulk head project on the pond near Wedgefield Rd, outside our main gate.
You'll have to go back and read the transcription of the Grounds Report from the October WPA board meeting. Read your board's words. I won't reprint, or repeat it all. Yesterday, I took a ride to the site of the Wedgefield Drainage Project and took pictures. The pictures reveal their lies, and this miserable mess, that we are told is ready for sod. Review the pictures and see if you believe that we should throw money to sod and cover up, before we resolve the issues. If we do cover it with sod, the problems won't stay hidden. What would it take to fix this miserable mess? Some real professionals, not their home made remedies, and out right lies.
You'll have to go back and read the transcription of the Grounds Report from the October WPA board meeting. Read your board's words. I won't reprint, or repeat it all. Yesterday, I took a ride to the site of the Wedgefield Drainage Project and took pictures. The pictures reveal their lies, and this miserable mess, that we are told is ready for sod. Review the pictures and see if you believe that we should throw money to sod and cover up, before we resolve the issues. If we do cover it with sod, the problems won't stay hidden. What would it take to fix this miserable mess? Some real professionals, not their home made remedies, and out right lies.
THE FIRST UNTRUTHFUL STATEMENT: DeMarchi says, "The erosion has stopped." It hasn't.
De Marchi says that he has stopped it. He says, "The erosion was behind the wing wall, and I PUT TWO LOADS OF CONCRETE in there." We don't know who told him that he could dump concrete in there, Was it his own brain storm? When did the board or anyone else give him approval to alter the project, or expend the funds? It isn't in the minutes, and I haven't heard discussion of it on tape. The erosion has not stopped. Here is a picture verifying the cement.
Someone, we don't know who has dumped large rocks in there. It hasn't stopped the erosion. If you look down some of these areas, they are deeper and wider than the picture can show. One if not more than that, go down to a depth of at least 6 feet. There is still wash out. This is dangerous, an accident waiting to happen. Your board has said this is a place where you could be near the water, even fish. With the current conditions, and sod won't fix it, some unsuspecting person could break a leg. A small child could fall in and be seriously injured.
Board member Walton said, "The problem is that it is starting to grow vegetation where it filled in. If we don't get that water vegetation out o there, we can no longer dredge up to there. Won't let you dredge where water vegetation is growing." Walton said there was vegetation there (on top of the silt pile they want to remove.) Note, the picture at the top of the page. The vegetation has been removed, possibly illegally breaking environmental regulations. What did they do with the vegetation roots included? They dumped it on the site.
Shouldn't we expect that our board would follow the guidelines of the reserve study that we all paid for? The study repeatedly advises the board to seek engineering services, hire a professional firm to manage the bid process, and to over see the contract. The board failed to do that on this project. We don't even know who advised the board to put the wing wall in. It was added after DeMarchi told us the project was completed and that the necessary reports had been sent to the army core of engineers. There was only one bid - again, on the wing wall fix - not! Now we are told by board member McMillin that he will save us money, and use volunteers to sod and cover - temporary - this mess. How much have we saved on this poorly administrated project, with these self proclaimed experts? Nothing! As recent as the October meeting, the board voted to spend another $2,500 to sod this, Why? The May 2014 WPA minutes state, DeMarchi reported that the additional wing wall and grading are complete on the Wedgefield Drainage project. Seeding was completed, but may require additional seeding, but the association lawn crew should start to mow by the end of May."
WILL YOU WRITE ENVIROMENTAL AUTHORITES AND PUT A STOP TO THIS?
WILL YOU VISIT THE SITE AND TAKE A CLOSE LOOK AND CONFIRM FOR YOURSELF THAT THIS BOARD DOES NOT HAVE THE EXPERTISE TO MANAGE THESE PROJECTS, AND INSIST THAT THEY BRING PROFESSIONALS IN TO DETERMINE HOW TO SAFELY AND LEGALLY BRING THIS PROJECT TO A CLOSE? WILL YOU INSIST THAT THEY BRING PROFESSIONALS INTO ENGINEER, SEND OUT REAL REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS, SECURE REAL COMPETITIVE BIDS, AND OVERSEE THE CONTRACTS - PERFORMANCE BASED CONTRACTS?
The one recent project that we had that met all of those requirements, was roads. Do you realize that they paid a professional firm to request bids, verify bidders qualifications, and follow the project for $2,500? Your board just approved $2,500 to try and cover the mistakes on this project.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)