Brady is Back To Announce 7,000 Hits To The Blog

TRUSTED SLUETH BRADY ANNOUNCES 7,000 HITS TO THE BLOG

That's right, as of today we have had 7,000 viewings of the blog.  Thank you for checking in.  We have much to report on from the June 19th meeting.  Be sure and visit over the next few days.

LETTER TO THE BOARD REGARDING ITEMS DISCUSSED DURING THE JUNE MEETING

After last nights meeting I thought I'd seek answers directly from the source.  I'll cover other topics later but these items were important to me.  They might be to you too!  HERE'S MY LETTER:

June 20, 2012

TO: WPA BOARD c/o Mr. LaFrance, William Douglas

FROM: Madeline Y. Claveloux

RE: Request for Copy

Clarification and Provision of Information

Objection & Clarification

Request for Copy of Archival Documentation

Request for Copy

I am requesting a copy of Attorney Moody’s legal opinion regarding the confidentiality statement. Please let me know when I can pick it up at the office.

Provision of Information

I was surprised, and am skeptical about the statement made that committee members are indemnified through the Board’s insurance. Please provide a copy of the section of the Board’s Insurance policy, or quote the section’s specific language, regarding this coverage.

Clarification

I believe I heard Legal Chair Bob Garrison state that committee members and Board Members could be removed if they violated the Confidentiality Agreement. I credit myself with a clear understanding and thorough knowledge of our governing documents.

Please provide the section and language in our governing documents that would allow removal of a Board Member under those circumstances. My reading indicates that unless a Board Member has not paid their assessment, has committed a crime against the association and been found guilty, that there is no avenue to remove a Board Member short of a recall.

The answer is important, as we have had several Board Members publicly violate the Confidentiality Agreement. Jude Davis mentioned the very public disclosure in the Wragg earlier this year. At last months meeting the payment status of Mr. Grey was discussed openly at the Board Meeting. What will happen to these Board Members?

Who will enforce the policy?

Request for Archival Documentation

During the June Meeting it was stated that the Confidentiality Agreement has been in place for many years. It wasn’t mandatory that it be signed but it was in the Policy Manual.. As a former Board Member I have numerous old copies of the Policy Manual and can’t find it. Please provide a properly dated copy of this section of the Policy Manual.

　

Objection & Clarification

At least as of yesterday, I was a member of the Water Amenities Committee, assigned to the Canal subcommittee. I have not signed the Confidentiality Agreement on the advice of my attorney. I have not hidden the fact that I have not signed it. In fact I made Board Members McBride, Garrison, and Anderson aware of the fact. I have been allowed to attend meetings with the promise of my silence on the items discussed. I have kept my word.

I am considering signing the Confidentiality Agreement, after the items listed above have been provided, against my attorney’s advice. I am in agreement that any contact Board Member, or committee member has with individual resident financial information, should be held confidential. In fact, the document relates only to confidentiality of that information. I believe I could sign and agree to that. However, if I did sign it and were allowed to sit on committees that is the ONLY information I would find it necessary to hold confidential. The rest would be at my discretion.

It appears this Board has taken an agreement utilized for the sole purpose of protecting individual residents, and used it as a broad brush to silence and hide information from the residents. They are destroying the best attributes of the committee process. It appears that they are afraid of residents having and discussing information.

My verbal agreement went against every principle I ever had as I worked with and on committees and Boards, over 25 years in the non profit arena. Any appearance of secrecy at this point in our history will come back to bite this Board. How insulting to the residents intelligence, for Garrison to make a motion to spend Association funds, on seeking advice regarding a “secret option” for the canals! Most of us don’t spend money until we know what we are buying. Right now, we are contributing to a secret.

Board, please provide the information requested above so I can make a good decision for myself. If the Board has made a decision as to whether I will be allowed to remain on the committee, please be decent and professional enough to notify me.

THE JUNE 19TH BOARD MEETING IS OVER - FINALLY

The June 19th WPA monthly Board Meeting started promptly at 7:00 PM and ended at approximately 9:30 PM.  Yes, it was a long meeting!  I'll be writing more over the next 3-4 days.  For tonight, in brief, no one else was, we should all have some concerns about what some of our youth are doing, I have a compliment for a Board Member I never thought I would, I have to write a letter to the management company for concrete information, I may have to resign from a committee, and there is a curb in Wedgefield whose removal is stalled, and our reserves have been assigned.

Please follow over the next few days.  This is where you live, and yet only about 20 of the 577 properties were represented at the meeting tonight.

P.S.  Up the road, don't say things were done in secret, plenty happened and you didn't bother to get there.  There maybe some secrets anyway!

A SHORT, NOT SO SWEET, REFLECTION, ON AN INCIDENT FOLLOWING A STEP IN THE LEGAL PROCESS REGARDING THE COUNTERSUIT

During the first full week of June, I and two of the other complainants in the counter suit were deposed at the Georgetown County Court House.  I won't go into what was said and who was there during the process that occurred within the court room walls.  It was a long day.

Around 5:00PM, as three of us were leaving via the public hallway (minding our own business), three of the defendants were standing.  As we walked by George Wilson called one of us "a pile of shit".  All three of us heard it, in fact one in our group asked, "did someone just call me a pile of shit?"  There was no response and we moved on.

Sometimes, we are asked, "why do you continue with the lawsuit?" Reflect back on the scene of the day.  We were all participants in a legal setting.  We were in a court ordered meeting, under oath, attorneys, complainants, and defendants present, under the law.  The expectation would be adult, disciplined, respectful behavior on the part of all parties, in any circumstance, particularly this one.

As one of the litigants, in my humble opinion, it continues because of the unrestrained, unnecessary harm brought to my reputation, my family, and my community.  Dependent on the individual complainant, there has been ruthless action of speech, physical harm, loss of community, and financial loss in the value of our homes, and at times it has caused real fear. The undisciplined, harm continues today. 

WILL YOU ATTEND THE JUNE 19TH WPA BOARD MEETING?

Mark your calanders now and plan on attending the June 19th WPA Board Meeting.  The June Agenda is provided below, for your convenience.

Here is a list of items I discussed in a previous article.  I had hoped they would all be covered by the June Meeting.  Review them, look through the agenda and see for yourself whether we will be provided information on all of the items.

Here are some of the opinions that should be coming our way:

*A possible option for the long term maintenance of the canals. The committees involved had to hold the information regarding what the option was - confidential. I personally don't think it should have been handled that way. If you are going to keep residents in the DARK, I wouldn't do it for too long. Suggestion to Board: I'd push for this opinion in writing and provide it, and an explanation to the residents. I wonder what the Concerned Citizens would have reported to the newspapers about secrecy?

*Legal options were to be sought on some of the proposed changes to the policy manual.

*McBride made a motion regarding the Confidentiality Agreement. Legal opinion was to be sought on some aspects of that. After the show Garrison put on about confidentiality at the May Board Meeting, I think this would be answered sooner than later.

*The Board is paying $7,500 to fix 60 feet of bulk head on canal frontage the Association owns that borders a resident's property. There are 4 or five other properties where the Association owns the frontage and the Board spoke of quit claim deeding the property to the residents involved. Will they give us the opinion on this issue in June? One of my wisest friends asked me the other day if I thought the Board had a right to give away Association property. I don't know, do they?

*The final piece that requires clarification is the Arbors. 

 

VACATION

The Wedgefield Examiner is taking a short vacation.  We are headed to the airport to pick up our daughter and will be out and about with her.  The Wedgefield Examiner will be back on June 12th.   Please stay tuned.

THE CLOCK IS TICKING ON LEGAL ISSUES, WILL THE BOARD PUSH TO CUT THE LEGAL TIME HOLD UP FOR THE ANSWERS, PRIOR TO THE JUNE 19TH MEETING?

THERE ARE SEVERAL "HANGING" LEGAL ISSUES ON THE BOARD TABLE WAITING, EITHER FOR THE ATTORNEY TO PROVIDE LEGAL OPINION, OR FOR THE BOARD TO SHARE THE LEGAL OPINION

Residents, it is time to mark your calendar and plan on attending the June 19th WPA Board Meeting.  Maybe it is the Polly Anna side of me, but I am counting on the Board to bring us up to date on Board Attorney opinions. Why?  First, we should have the right to hear & read the attorney's opinions.  Maybe not, if they involve a resident individual issue, but for sure if they involve application of policy or by-laws, on more generalized questions.  Does it sound like I don't trust verbal interpretation by our Legal Chair?  Well I don't.  Why?

Garrison is a hold over from the group who brought Attorney Moran to us when he and his cronies wanted to remove two people from the Board, after the current Board Attorney, told them they could not do it under the circumstances they presented.  It was probably the first, of the last two years of lawyer shopping.  He is part of the crew that ignored Moran as Attorney of Record when he told them to stop their outrageous attacks on Reames and Wijthoff.  As Legal Chair, he has gone to Moody for another opinion on matters that past Attorneys of Record had opinions on file for.  Lawyer shopping.  Additionally, it seems, let me stress seems, that if they feel an opinion will help them regarding how they want issues  to play out, the opinions come quickly.  If not, it seems the lawyer has a busy schedule and we'll have to wait.

Here are some of the opinions that should be coming our way:    

*A possible option for the long term maintenance of the canals.  The committees involved had to hold the information regarding what the option was - confidential.  I personally don't think it should have been handled that way.  If you are going to keep residents in the DARK, I wouldn't do it for too long. Suggestion to Board:  I'd push for this opinion in writing and provide it, and an explanation to the residents.  I wonder what the Concerned Citizens would have reported to the newspapers about secrecy?

*Legal options were to be sought on some of the proposed changes to the policy manual.

*McBride made a motion regarding the Confidentiality Agreement.  Legal opinion was to be sought on some aspects of that.  After the show Garrison put on about confidentiality at the May Board Meeting, I think this would be answered sooner than later.

*The Board is paying $7,500 to fix 60 feet of bulk head on canal frontage the Association owns that borders a resident's property.  There are 4 or five other properties where the Association owns the frontage and the Board spoke of quit claim deeding the property to the residents involved.  Will they give us the opinion on this issue in June? One of my wisest friends asked me the other day if I thought the Board had a right to give away Association property.  I don't know, do they?

*The final piece that requires clarification is the Arbors.  We have research that was conducted by resident R.V. Wheeler that speaks clearly to the issues.  I was going to tell you to go to older posts at this site and read it.  I'll make it easy for you and cut and paste it right into this article. 

Before I do that, a few things to keep in mind.  Why is our Board continuing to ignore opinions we have paid for, and seek a new idea?  Is it driven by, "we'll shop until someone agrees with what we want", at our added expense?  Can we all come into the office and read the opinions?  Can we take a copy?  We paid for it. 

Remember, you can always write and express your opinion at wedgefieldexaminer@yahoo.com Be sure and note whether you would like your name published.

HERE IS THE RESEARCH ON THE ARBORS: