THE ANNUAL MEETING PACKET WILL BE IN THE MAIL SOON.

Anyone is welcome to write to The Wedgefield Examiner via email: wedgefieldexaminer@yahoo.com. Remember to note whether you would like your name published with your article. The option is open to anyone who writes.


Our Annual Meeting packets should be arriving in the next day or two.  We have three board seats to fill and four candidates.  Three of the candidates currently serve on the board.  The Wedgefield Examiner has provided documents, minutes, and transcription of tapes for your consideration.  This is an important election.  The board has failed to answer resident correspondence, sanitized the minutes, made rule upon rule, failed to follow their Confidentiality Agreement or their signed Code of Ethics, hired a management company and failed to utilize the company for the betterment of our association, and abused any board or committee member who attempted to bring information to the table that differed with their cohesive plan - for discussion.  The following three board member/ candidates have raised their hands and voted to support motions that weren't in the best interests of the association:  Anderson, DeMarchi, and Walton.

The fourth candidate, Taco Wijthoff has never served on the board, has major investment in our community, and has volunteered time and money whenever and where ever he could make a concrete contribution to the outcome of an event, or add to the attractiveness of our community.  He is the only candidate who has put a pledge in writing to our voters.  Please consider casting your vote for Taco Wijthoff. Note:  Wijthoff has not asked, nor has he approved this article. HERE IS HIS PLEDGE:



Two by-law amendments will be included for your consideration and vote.  Legal Chair, Garrison did his best to put an unfavorable, out of context twist on them.  Why?  Who knows?  Maybe because it isn't part of this board's agenda.  They are self explanatory.  Please vote "yes" on each of them. 

HERE THEY ARE:

VERY IMPORTANT:  Recent elections have been won or lost by as little as one vote.  Often our residents feel confident that they will attend the meeting and fail to use their proxy.  Life has a way of getting in the way of our best intentions and they fail to vote.  Use your proxy and mail it in by the required deadline date.  Remember you designate the board secretary to vote in your behalf if issues come to the floor the day of the meeting.  The proxy should provide space for you to name a member you know will be at the meeting to cast your votes should the situation arise.

TODAY, OCT. 5TH WIJTHOFF WRITES FELLOW RESIDENTS, DE MARCHI, & RESIDENT MOROBIT. SEVERAL NEW ARTICLES WERE ADDED ON OCT. 2ND, 3RD, & 4TH. DON'T MISS OUT! WONDER DOG, BRADY SAYS, "STAY TUNED"

RESIDENT WIJTHOFF WRITES TO FELLOW RESIDENTS, DE MARCHI, AND MOROBIT

Anyone is welcome to write to The Wedgefield Examiner via email: wedgefieldexaminer@yahoo.com. Remember to note whether you would like your name published with your article. The option is open to anyone who writes.




Date: October 4, 2012

To: Mr. DeMarchi, Mr. Morabit, and Wedgefield Residents

From: Taco Wijthoff

RE: Recent correspondence of subdivision of lots

To my friends: Thank you very much for the outpouring of support you have given my family in hard times. Your letters and uplifting phone calls are much appreciated. I wish, though, that some information could have stayed private.

How did we get to this point? Several months ago I requested that the board research the subdivision of several lots in our PUD. For months, Mr. A. DeMarchi and the board of directors failed to address my concern. I and other residents had to readdress our concern to the board and ask the board to have the resident who owned the property to fix the problem before the elections in order to avoid another chaos.

Al finally found out what was wrong. It was exactly as I had told him. He went to the resident. It was me who brought the problem to light and requested that it be fixed. I did it through proper channels, never publicly naming the resident. Yet, now Al is obviously Mr. Morabit's best friend and I am the bad dog.

This is the second time in three months that Al DeMarchi has tried, and succeeded, in dragging me through the mud. In the first attempt he had Mr. Jacky Walton supposedly apologize to me at the beginning of a board meeting (you can listen to the tape). Is Al not able to offer an apology himself? Does he have to assign it to another board member? I have the best teacher the world has ever seen. So, I turn the other cheek and forgive him. Al has been many times at my house, we have been at his. Al makes the best cheese cake anywhere. I had the feeling that this was a true friendship with mutual respect. One wonders what causes a person to behave this way. He was a friend and at the snap of a finger, disrespects and hates you. I do not understand.

To Mr. Morabit, I can say we have never met. I do not know where you get your information. As for me, I would never send a letter to you like the one you publicized. I did not use your name and I tried to help. I've seen by your own admission that you sent more letters like this, even to DeMarchi, for which you later had to apologize. Do yourself a favor and look before you leap next time.

As for my being a "mud" person, you and I are both businessmen. I was happy to pay the assessment on my wife's house on the canal. I was glad not to have to pay equal assessments of $2,300. I'm sure you realize, as a multiple lot property owner, what that would have cost both of us.

Now there is talk about my lots at the Arbors. Again, this is a situation caused by a previous board and to be resolved by the board of directors, and legal opinion, according to our governing documents. What I want is of no consequence. I do not know where you get all your garbage from, but it does explain your rage.

Enough has been said. My motives are not what your might have been told. If you ever pass through our beautiful plantation Wedgefield, maybe we can have a beer summit together.

Sincerely,

Taco Wijthoff

RESIDENT JUDE DAVIS WRITES THE BOARD

Anyone is welcome to write to The Wedgefield Examiner via email: wedgefieldexaminer@yahoo.com. Remember to note whether you would like your name published with your article. The option is open to anyone who writes. 

 

All,

Earlier this year, Al DeMarchi forced a confidentiality agreement down the throats of all Board members and the residents of this community. He added this agreement to the policy manual under the guise of it having been approved by a previous Board. In fact, Al submitted this very same document to the 2009 Board, who ignored him. No subsequent Board approved this document until 2012. Questions were raised as to the consequences of violating the confidentiality agreement, and the lawyer opined that the Board member could be asked to resign. It’s time.

At the recent Board meeting to approve the budget, two residents spoke regarding lot confusion. Neither resident spoke the name, but Al DID.

In a communication with the owner of the lots in question, Al states that he had discussed this matter with Carol Z. Isn’t discussing this another violation of the confidentiality agreement?

As one of the residents who waits months for an answer to written questions, is denigrated at Board meetings and in correspondence, I am incensed at the time and effort Al went through to straighten out the Morabit question. He obviously plays favorites and uses his position on the Board to help some and hurt others. The Morabits have been receiving tax bills for three properties for five years. They knew there was confusion, but chose to ignore it. When questioned, Mr. Morabit doesn’t seek to have it corrected. Why should he, when Al DeMarchi was willing to spend hours doing it for him. IT WAS THE MORABITS RESPONSIBILITY TO SATISFY THE WPA, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. I hate to think that this was an attempt by a member of the Board running for office to pander for votes, but that is exactly what it looks like. Pandering for votes is unethical.

I would appreciate knowing what the Board intends to due about this obvious violation of the confidentiality agreement signed by Mr. DeMarchi and what I believe to also be a violation of the code of ethics.

Jude Davis

OUR BOARD SECRETARY LEAPS TO HELP ONE RESIDENT WHO THREATENS LAWSUITS AND SILENTLY INFORMS THE BOARD OF HIS OPINION OF ANOTHER HE FEELS IS JUST GOING TO TAKE IT TO THEIR LAWYER

Anyone is welcome to write to The Wedgefield Examiner via email: wedgefieldexaminer@yahoo.com. Remember to note whether you would like your name published with your article. The option is open to anyone who writes.

The last two days the blog has been busy with the 2? or 4? lot controversy.  Two men are at the center.  One board member/candidate DeMarchi, and the second, resident Morabit. If you have been following the blog you've seen Morabit's email to the Examiner and to DeMarchi.  You've seen the attention DeMarchi gives Morabit.  In fact he has done all of Morabit's work at the county offices.  A key point to remember as we proceed, is that Morabit spoke in Feb. & March and threatened llawsuits and threatened law suits for loss of property value in his recent email to the Examiner. 

DeMarchi was elected to serve all of us, fairly, equally, according to the governing documents, good business practice, and without prejudice or favoritism.  The balance of the board members should not only serve under the same standards, but serve as watch dogs to each others actions, and bring issues as they develop to the board table.  This article and documentation presents issues on both fronts.  First, the actions of DeMarchi for a favored few and his actions toward those he doesn't like.  What is worse, is that your board is aware and continues to sit silently by, despite the fact that DeMarchi shows prejudice to individual residents and disdain for the one board member - McBride, who attempts to do his job.

A few months ago, a resident wrote the following:

"We own approximately 220 feet along the main canal. In an effort to protect our property , and to REDUCE siltation into the canal, we, at great expense, bulk headed our property in 2006.

Unfortunately, the WPA owns the property across the canal from us in the form of the rice fields. I am sure that all of the Board members are aware that the WPA holds title to about 45% of the waterfront property and the entire spoils site. None of the WPA property along the rice fields is bulk headed or secured in any way. Twice each day, over acres of WPA owned rice fields; silt is deposited in the canal in front of my home. This siltation is greater than that from our secured property and thus is having an adverse effect on my use of the canal and the value of my home. No effort has been made by the WPA to ameliorate this negative effect." Additionally, this resident writes about a drainage problem resulting in standing water on their lot.

McBride is asked to answer.  On September 14th he sends the following response to all board members and Edmund LaFrance:

"(Resident Name)  I have been asked to respond to your letter regarding the negative effect on the use, enjoyment, and value of your property caused by the siltation from the WPA property.  The WPA Board of Directors recognizes that the Association owns approximately 45% of the waterfront property and must therefore help in the maintenance of the canals.  We are talking about a plan to help, financially, with a future maintenance dredge.  We do not know how we can help you with the present and continuing negative effects from the rice fields.  It would be economically unfeasible to bulkhead the rice fields and the WPA has no plans to do it.  If we can assist you in any plans you have, please let us know.

In addition to the property along the canals, most of the storm water from the south side of the plantation, including that from the golf course, contributes sand, rocks, and other debris into the canals.  The majority of the WPA property along the canals and all of the drain pipes remain unsecured by any attempt to just let water flow and prohibit the flow of debris.  We could, perhaps, look into reducing the amount of debris caused by storm water by the use of silt cloth combined with rocks on the land side of these pipes.  I will ask the drainage chair, Al DeMarchi, to look into this matter."

Remember McBride's draft was sent to the entire Board.  Immediately, on September 14 DeMarchi responds to the entire board with the following:

"John, Let me address the last part of your response. The drainage problem that (Resident's Name) refers to does not exist.  I have sent you pictures showing the flow of water into the the canal on (Street), and it does not run through the (Resident Name) property.  The other areas of concern include the drainage ditch on the (Another Resident Name) property and the (Another Resident Name) property."

NOTE:  Several paragraphs relating to other residents have been removed as not being pertinent to these issues.
"If you wish to get involved in the drainage issues, I would gladly accept you serving on the Drainage Committee.  Thus far I am the only member.

Now, regarding (Resident Name) canal concerns.

1.  She has lived here for 8 years and has never mentioned the siltation problem.  2.  When she served on the board, and the canals were dredged, the (Resident Name) had the opportunity to have the silt removed adjacent to their bulkhead.  They did not. 3.  She claims loss of value on her property, and yet in her court deposition, she states that her home value has increased from $330,000 when built to $600,000 at the last recent appraisal.  That is more than an 80% increase in value.  Where is the lost value?  4. A potential solution would be to bulkhead (or rip rap) the entire rice fields and retention pond, yet the unbulkheaded properties, not owned by the WPA, along the canal would continue to contribute to the siltation problem.  What then?  Would the (Resident Name) seek restitution from their neighbors for property damage? 5.  The Corp of Engineers, DHEC, and OCRM would most likely deny a permit for bulkheading the rice fields.  The cost would be astronomical.  The Coastal Conservation League would most likely seek an injunction against the project and we would end up in a court battle like before.  6. Silt is carried into the canals from the Black River as can be seen by the siltation of the North Canal entrance.  The laws of physics (and gravity) would contradict the depositing of silt, (solid matter) on an area that is higher (along the bulkhead) than the adjacent areas (the bottom of the canal).

The list goes on and on, yet the WPA and WDM must provide (Resident Name) a response to her letters.  As usual, we are caught in a situation where whatever answer is provided, (Resident Name) will present it to her attorney to seek some monetary settlement.  The WPA does not need provide that ammunition for another law suit.

Please remember two things John.  The WPA can not control the elements, and my personal observations on the issue are not to be shared with others."  (Please note:  any underlines in DeMarchi's letter were added by me.)

First, I obtained these documents legally, with a written request to review the correspondence file and have copies provided.   The documents are in my files and have been properly stamped "copy" from the office.  Due to technical problems I was unable to put them up for proper viewing.  Additionally, the documents contained too many resident names.

A few more facts should be added.  You'll note that DeMarchi claims the resident doesn't have a drainage problem.  In fact he discusses it at a recent board meeting.  He didn't name the resident but was it an attempt to diminish the resident as though they are imagining the water problem?  Further research indicates that the resident told him pictures would be provided.  A second visit was made and yes in deed he could see the problem.  Why the need to pontificate on drainage in this response to McBride except to diminish him again, to his fellow board members? 

Let's move to the canal portion of the letter. Go back and read McBride's writing. Mc Bride shared his letter with the entire board. No one else responded. Yet, DeMarchi treats him like a child. McBride has had a lot of experience working with engineers etc., as it relates to the canals. He doesn't need to be tutored by DeMarchi.

Look at # 3 in DeMarchi's letter.  How does he know what the resident testified to during deposition?  DeMarchi tried to attend one day but was asked to leave. Who has he been talking to?  The only people in the room during the depositions that he is talking about are the attorneys, the court recorder, the person being deposed, and the plaintiffs and defendants, if they wish to be there.  I have attended almost all of these.  Some of the individuals on our side of the suit work.  The three people from our side who regularly attend did not discuss what happened in the depositions.  That leaves the Concerned Citizen element of the lawsuit.  Who has DeMarchi been talking to about the  Morabit lot problems?  He writes that it is Ms. Z.  Yet, he relates information to the board against this resident, without sound fact.  Then he says, "(resident name) will present it to her attorney to seek some monetary settlement."  Another attempt to put this resident in a bad light with the Board?  I have read this resident's complete letter to the board.  THERE IS NO THREAT OF ATTORNEY OR SUIT ANYWHERE IN THE LETTER!  Wait threatening lawsuits is acceptable to DeMarchi.  He's jumped through hoops for Morabit.  His threats are on tape and the Examiner has published his presentation to the Board and his recent letter (at his request).

Finally, remember DeMarchi's final advisement to McBride, "Please remember two things John. The WPA can not control the elements, and my personal observations on the issue are not to be shared with others."   When most of us work toward resolution of a problem, and we research, and share what we believe should be considered, we stand by it.  We claim it, and we don't hide it.  Same thing should apply when we are performing from board seats.  What doesn't DeMarchi want shared?  When he does these things he insults the very board seat he holds.  When your board helps him hide what he does, sanctions what he does, they insult their board seats. 

Three of the current board are running for re-election - DeMarchi, Anderson, and Walton (John).  Think about who you will vote for.  Anderson and Walton have supported DeMarchi in motions he brings to the board table and by their silence, when they don't bring these issues to the surface.










 

THE WHEELERS WRITE THE WEDGEFIELD EXAMINER



 

Anyone is welcome to write to The Wedgefield Examiner via email: wedgefieldexaminer@yahoo.com. Remember to note whether you would like your name published with your article. The option is open to anyone who writes.

 

 

PLEASE NOTE:  I have retyped the letter sent by the Wheelers.  I have not changed any words.  If there are typos they are mine and not theirs.  I had technical problems placing it in the article.

 

"We read with dismay the vitriolic comments of a Wedgefield lot owner who doesn't reside in our community.  His diatribe was directed toward a valued resident whom we admire and respect.  We have never met the author but, having read his filth and hate filled lies, we have an excellent picture of his character.

 

Taco has been a friend for a few years but was known to us for his philanthropic efforts for many years.  When planning student trips to Europe, he silently donated thousands of plants for our fund raisers.  We were told each time that he preferred anonymity.  Students whose parents had difficulty paying the entire amount were able to sell plants and earn their fare.  Not satisfied with this level of participation, Taco donated "scholarships" to deserving students.  Again, strict anonymity.

 

Whenever we were in need of a money making project, we could always count on Georgetown Green House and Taco's generosity.  He has sent countless truckloads of plants to hospitals, nursing homes, and assisted living facilities.  You probably haven't heard about his support of many local charities.  Several years ago he bought plane tickets for missionaries who could not afford to return to their homes.  He was recognized by the press, but was reluctant to discuss his contributions.

 

If you are a resident of Wedgefield you benefit each time you drive through the gates and enjoy the flowers that are blooming.  If you attended the Christmas tree lighting ceremony when we first lit the twelve foot tree, you took home a poinsettia delivered by an anonymous donor.

 

The attack on our friend was discouraging, but those who know him are well aware of the truth.  He is the most patriotic, proud American we know.  We would love to live in a community where all residents are as generous and caring as Taco and Yvette.  If you'd like a breath of fresh air, get to know them."

 

Tess and RV Wheeler

Wraggs Ferry Road

Wedgefield

 



 

 

 

A RESIDENT TALKS OUT OF BOTH SIDES OF HIS MOUTH AND JUST HOW FAR ONE OF YOUR BOARD MEMBERS WILL GO TO ASSIST AND ANSWER SOME RESIDENTS

Anyone is welcome to write to The Wedgefield Examiner via email: wedgefieldexaminer@yahoo.com. Remember to note whether you would like your name published with your article. The option is open to anyone who writes.


We are going to start at the beginning of a twisted piece.  Find a comfortable chair and please take the time to read the entire article.  You'll recall that Mr. Morabit wrote The Wedgefield Examiner and asked that his opinion be published.  If you haven't read it see "Resident Morabit Writes the Wedgefield Examiner" at this blog.  As he writes the Examiner he compliments, "Thanks for your notification and invitation service to deliver opinions both pro and con to the people of the Wedgefield community!" Later, "Here’s your chance to continue your support for the dissemination of the truth, and opinions that may be contrary to your own. This policy enables residents to evaluate issues for themselves.   I will look for its quick publication. Thanks for your continuing blog service to Wedgefield!" On September 25th he writes the following to DeMarchi, "It has come to my attention after reading the latest distasteful "Wedgefield Examiner",   Remember the dates:  Morabit writes the Examiner on the September 27 and DeMarchi on the 25th.

On September 24 Wijthoff has written the Board on the issue of Morabit's lots and shared his letter with the Examiner.  Wijthoff never uses Morabit's name.


On September 25th Morabit writes DeMarchi. His email is presented below.  I have removed their email addresses.  There is nothing on this email that indicates that the email was distributed to the entire Board.  Here it is:



On September 27th DeMarchi writes Morabit.  His email is presented below.  I have removed their email addresses.  Again, there is nothing that indicates that DeMarchi shared this with the entire Board.  Here it is:

First note who DeMarchi has been discussing this issue with - Zieske.  Note the work that DeMarchi has done at the assessor's office on behalf of Morabit.  Once again, you've seen the timeline. DeMarchi leaps to help a man who threatens lawsuits in his letter to the Examiner and who threatened lawsuits in Feb. and March of 2012 against each board member who failed to vote yes in behalf of another lawsuit.  Is this what it takes for residents to get action from the Board.  Would you and I get this individual attention?  DeMarchi references the board meeting on the 26th, "I again defended your ownership and voting rights to the board and the audience."  Isn't this the same board member who was calling Wijthoff about his voting rights within hours of Concerned Citizen, Thomas writing the Board?  He's spending a lot of his time talking to one side - Zieske, Morabit, and Thomas.  Why?  Additionally, Wijthoff spoke at the board meeting on the 26th.  He never once mentioned Morabit's name.  Al DeMarchi did!  Where is the integrity of his confidentiality agreement?  He wants all volunteers, board, and staff to sign it.  He, and his fellow board members have been the only ones to break it!  Could we have consistentcy and fairness on any level?

On October 1st Morabit writes DeMarchi his thanks.  Morabit does ask that his email be distributed to the entire board.  Here it is:

I've visited the office and secured the documents noted above from the Correspondence File.  Usually, I remove the writer's name.  Since Morabit had his name published on the blog, I've included it.  I am concerned that some residents get this kind of service, when others don't even get answers to correspondence.