Thursday, August 29, 2013
ARE YOU TIRED OF ALL THE ARC VIOLATIONS IN OUR COMMUNITY THAT ARE LEFT UNREGULATED BY THE ARC COMMITTEE? DO YOU HAVE AREAS THAT YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT YOU HAVEN'T BOTHERED TO WRITE THE BOARD ABOUT, BECAUSE THEY DON'T RESPOND TO RESIDENTS? WRITE THE WEDGEFIELD EXAMINER: wedgefieldexaminer@yahoo.com. WE'LL PUBLISH YOUR CONCERNS . WE WON'T USE YOUR NAME OR ADDRESS. IF YOU HAVE PICTURES, YOU CAN ATTACH THEM., OR MAIL THEM TO THE EXAMINER'S HOME ADDRESS. IF YOU INCLUDE PICTURES, PLEASE CROP THEM TO HELP PROTECT THE HOMEOWNER. WE'LL PUBLISH THE RESULTS OF OUR SURVEY
YOU HAVE TO GIVE CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE
The Wedgefield Examiner could go away, fade into the sunset, if our board operated according to our governing documents, in the best interests of Wedgefield, openly, honestly, and according to best business and accounting practices. It would be unfair to fail to acknowledge the positive. Your Roads Committee is currently operating according to the attributes noted above. At the August Meeting Chair, Adam Anderson reported on two or three road projects. The detail of where and when is not as important as the method. Engineers have been hired to examine the areas, note and recommend resolution of problems, and submit proposed drawings for repair. The board was presented with two drawings. Board members asked which of the drawings were recommended by the engineering firm and voted to select the firm's number one drawing. Next, the discussion moved to securing bids, contract management, etc. Anderson made a motion to allow the engineering firm to write and publish the request for proposal to vendors for the road repair. Additionally, he would like to hire the firm to oversee the project, once the vendor is selected. Thank you Roads Committee for recognizing the benefits of hiring professionals to solve the problems with our roads. Will it cost more? Obviously! Is it necessary? Yes! One of the areas to be repaired was repaired in 2010 when our board felt that they had the expertise necessary to handle it all. Anderson was not on the board at that time. Many sitting on the board then, are now. Could this be the start of our board's recognition of the need to bring professionals in to keep Wedgefield functioning and beautiful? I'll keep my answer to myself. This has been a positive article. I won't change the focus. I do have questions for Anderson. Will you hold the other members of the board to this standard? Will you ask questions at the board table, if they don't? Will you vote no on their projects, if they fail to bring in the proper expertise?
Thursday, August 22, 2013
THE WEDGEFIELD EXAMINER HAS TRANSCRIBED THE GROUNDS CHAIR'S WORDS. WE HAVE THE ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS POSTED ON TUESDAY: IS THE BOARD COUNTING ON YOUR COMPLACENCY WITH ONLY THREE CANDIDATES TO RUN TO FILL THREE SLOTS? WE'LL SEE. ARE THEY ABOUT TO START BUILDING AGAIN? THE GROUNDS CHAIR WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A MAINTENANCE SHED BUILT ON LAND WE DON'T HAVE ROAD ACCESS TO. DID I REALLY HEAR HIM ASK ABOUT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS AND USE THE WORD "POOL"
We enter this discussion when the WPA Grounds Chair has capital improvement questions under old business. The board is advised that they each have a projected 2014 budget in their board packets. They are to review it and if they have questions they are to take them to the Treasurer prior to the September board meeting. The board will vote on the 2014 budget at the September meeting.
I have transcribed this section of the board meeting tape to the best of my ability. Listen to the tape yourself at The Wedgefield Times. The tape at that site is clear and posted quickly. Thank you Wedgefield Times! The transcription will be in quotes, underlined and printed in blue ink. Comments will appear in red.
Transcription:
McMillin: "One comment. I see there is no capital improvements for playground, pool, or anything like that. If anything like that would ever come up how would it be handled? Just through reserves?" Garrison, "Reserves, or reserves as I understand it are primarily for repair. Capital improvement would not, as far as I'm concerned, I don't think it would be covered under reserves" McMillin, "If we were to try and do something like that where would the money come from? Assess that year.....?" Garrison, "Not necessarily, it would depend ....I mean how much money are you talking about...submitting for budget.....wouldn't happen next year - 2014 budgeting is all ready, once approved it will be in place. If you got an idea for something you want to....capital for 2015 you then, next year... This going to cost $25,000, or $40,000, or what? Then it would be up to the finance committee to look at it and say OK, is there money that's in here that we COULD MOVE TO SOMETHING ELSE to allocate that based on what we expect the revenues to be, or do we have to change the revenue strain to accommodate it. " McMillin, "One other issue, I hate to drag this up. We have no where here where we can do any sort of maintenance, or store anything for maintenance. There was talk about the of disposal area out there. I don't know if that ever went any where or not. There is some property out there that we could possibly be used to erect some sort of a MAINTENANCE BUILDING that we could possibly use that we could keep like our Christmas decorations in, or if we were TO PURCHASE ANY OF OUR OWN PIECES OF EQUIPMENT....like that. There is a scenario here that WE tossed that if we were to have a truck load of mulch come in we could buy it in quantity and save some money and that sort of thing. There is nothing for that in the budget as well, correct?"
Yes, we are in red ink - comments. Transcription will continue in blue and quotes after. Why would there be figures in any budget for CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS that haven't been brought to the board by a committee for complete open discussion? McMllin refers to WE in his discussion. WHO IS WE? It isn't a committee because he doesn't have one. He is a committee of one. When he first came to the board in 2009 he was asked and asked again to form a Grounds Committee. He stated he didn't want a committee, he worked better this way. Then who is WE? It could be WE, as in many of this board who allow things to be interjected and then pretend that it was a plan. Listen to previous meeting tapes. This kind of thing happens again and again. It could appear that it was a plan of the behind closed doors operations of this old boys network. If you were at the meeting, NOT ONE BOARD MEMBER SAID, 'WHERE DID ANYONE EVER TALK ABOUT A MAINTENANCE BUILDING OR EQUIPMENT, POOL, OR SERIOUSLY ABOUT A PLAYGROUND, AT A MEETING IN THE PRESENCE OF RESIDENTS, SUPPORTED BY A COMMITTEE'S RESEARCH? Most of these board members just let things slide by, so they can place their next idea on the table without interference, or sound back up. This alone has answered the question as to whether your complacency has led to only three people running for board to fill three vacancies. It has. Two of the people running, are running again, because you have sat by while they ran you around the merry go round and you didn't even go to the theme park - the meetings.
Since questions didn't hit the board table, here are comments and questions. First note that none of this ridiculous discussion will appear in the sanitized upcoming August minutes. Even if there was road access to this piece of land, why would our association need a maintenance building, maintenance equipment, or a place to store a great deal on mulch, or associated personnel to use such things? We elect board members to oversee our assets, not start home grown operations. Next we'll have to add bull work to board and committee job descriptions - on second thought this is a lot of bull. We should have board members who solicit bids to do our maintenance. A word your board loves - it is precedent here. The precedent here is to contract the work out. Why would we build a building and buy equipment for board members to use? Save a couple hundred dollars on mulch? McMillin kept us two meetings on his current ground maintenance contract, and added mulch and the spoil site to the maintenance contract. Why would we ever consider a pool? McMillin has wanted one since 2009. At that time a golf course family member sat on the board with us. He offered the pool to the board stating it would be the association' s responsibility to pay insurance, maintenance, staffing, and we could collect the fees and keep them. Board members asked for the records of cost for insurance, maintenance, staffing, history of repairs, etc., at least three times and they were never provided. McMillin kept calling and asking me and others to vote for it, despite the fact we didn't have the information needed to make a good business decision. Would we ever want to take on the liability, construction, of such a project, and supervise the related employees? As to the playground, that has been brought up several times. I attend most meetings and haven't seen the group that was interested at a meetings in almost 2 years. We are having a problem now with young people gathering at the front gate and landing, and tweens (too young to drive) running around in golf carts without lights, and boom boxes blaring, hanging off the carts, at all times of the day and night. This board fails to police and question each other. When one asks questions honestly and openly he/she is rebuffed, smirked at and demoted to the least responsible committee assignments by our board president, who is running for board again. We have one or two who pose questions but don' follow through. It is a show for your benefit and they allow their cohesive cohorts on the board to continue on. I received an email from a resident who commented on the fact that we only had three running for board, who said we can expect in 2014, what we have in 2013. Back to transcription.
Garrison, "NOT AT THIS TIME." McMillin, So that would have to wait until 2015 as well" Garrison, "As it stands, yes, I would think so." This was Garrison's chance to ask where all this was coming from and find out who "WE" is, but just maybe he is part of "WE" McMillin, "Does anyone know the status of that property? President Walton, "Al is still working with that?" President Walton doesn't ask where all this is coming from. Is he "WE", and just hasn't told you because you haven't called him on any other off the table decisions.
I've stopped the transcription. I was at the meeting and I did listen to the tape to the end of this discussion. The board went on to discuss where they were in seeking access to the land mentioned above that was quit claim deeded to the association. During the discussion McMillin described the pipe that HE sees as necessary to make the land useful. If only he had a maintenance building he could save us a fortune He sits on the Water Amenities Committee, how did the old dock work out for us? We don't know because your board didn't report on it. Someone on the board and committee posted a sign and advised you to ask me. Here's your answer: Your board failed, ignored their own motions, covered up, and allowed this committee to abuse a fellow board and committee member. It didn't go well and the whole thing lacked ethics and truth.
This section of the meeting was disheartening from an administrative, good governance, good boardmanship, perspective. I'm not sure why, but maybe it was just the final icing on this miserable poorly, half baked, Wedgefield administrative cake. It was another indication of what this board is going to do with the findings of the Reserve Study that we all just paid $4,000 for. We don't have any compliance measurement of this group. Our compliance person is the treasurer. That is just a big no, no! When your board isn't properly regulated by true compliance, it is up to the membership. Where are you?
P.S. Don't build a shed. Clear the junk out of the house at the landing and the gate house. Get rid of some of those old decorations. As you drive in, take a look at the gate house which is a land mark piece to our entrance and clean the little trees out of the eves.
I have transcribed this section of the board meeting tape to the best of my ability. Listen to the tape yourself at The Wedgefield Times. The tape at that site is clear and posted quickly. Thank you Wedgefield Times! The transcription will be in quotes, underlined and printed in blue ink. Comments will appear in red.
Transcription:
McMillin: "One comment. I see there is no capital improvements for playground, pool, or anything like that. If anything like that would ever come up how would it be handled? Just through reserves?" Garrison, "Reserves, or reserves as I understand it are primarily for repair. Capital improvement would not, as far as I'm concerned, I don't think it would be covered under reserves" McMillin, "If we were to try and do something like that where would the money come from? Assess that year.....?" Garrison, "Not necessarily, it would depend ....I mean how much money are you talking about...submitting for budget.....wouldn't happen next year - 2014 budgeting is all ready, once approved it will be in place. If you got an idea for something you want to....capital for 2015 you then, next year... This going to cost $25,000, or $40,000, or what? Then it would be up to the finance committee to look at it and say OK, is there money that's in here that we COULD MOVE TO SOMETHING ELSE to allocate that based on what we expect the revenues to be, or do we have to change the revenue strain to accommodate it. " McMillin, "One other issue, I hate to drag this up. We have no where here where we can do any sort of maintenance, or store anything for maintenance. There was talk about the of disposal area out there. I don't know if that ever went any where or not. There is some property out there that we could possibly be used to erect some sort of a MAINTENANCE BUILDING that we could possibly use that we could keep like our Christmas decorations in, or if we were TO PURCHASE ANY OF OUR OWN PIECES OF EQUIPMENT....like that. There is a scenario here that WE tossed that if we were to have a truck load of mulch come in we could buy it in quantity and save some money and that sort of thing. There is nothing for that in the budget as well, correct?"
Yes, we are in red ink - comments. Transcription will continue in blue and quotes after. Why would there be figures in any budget for CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS that haven't been brought to the board by a committee for complete open discussion? McMllin refers to WE in his discussion. WHO IS WE? It isn't a committee because he doesn't have one. He is a committee of one. When he first came to the board in 2009 he was asked and asked again to form a Grounds Committee. He stated he didn't want a committee, he worked better this way. Then who is WE? It could be WE, as in many of this board who allow things to be interjected and then pretend that it was a plan. Listen to previous meeting tapes. This kind of thing happens again and again. It could appear that it was a plan of the behind closed doors operations of this old boys network. If you were at the meeting, NOT ONE BOARD MEMBER SAID, 'WHERE DID ANYONE EVER TALK ABOUT A MAINTENANCE BUILDING OR EQUIPMENT, POOL, OR SERIOUSLY ABOUT A PLAYGROUND, AT A MEETING IN THE PRESENCE OF RESIDENTS, SUPPORTED BY A COMMITTEE'S RESEARCH? Most of these board members just let things slide by, so they can place their next idea on the table without interference, or sound back up. This alone has answered the question as to whether your complacency has led to only three people running for board to fill three vacancies. It has. Two of the people running, are running again, because you have sat by while they ran you around the merry go round and you didn't even go to the theme park - the meetings.
Since questions didn't hit the board table, here are comments and questions. First note that none of this ridiculous discussion will appear in the sanitized upcoming August minutes. Even if there was road access to this piece of land, why would our association need a maintenance building, maintenance equipment, or a place to store a great deal on mulch, or associated personnel to use such things? We elect board members to oversee our assets, not start home grown operations. Next we'll have to add bull work to board and committee job descriptions - on second thought this is a lot of bull. We should have board members who solicit bids to do our maintenance. A word your board loves - it is precedent here. The precedent here is to contract the work out. Why would we build a building and buy equipment for board members to use? Save a couple hundred dollars on mulch? McMillin kept us two meetings on his current ground maintenance contract, and added mulch and the spoil site to the maintenance contract. Why would we ever consider a pool? McMillin has wanted one since 2009. At that time a golf course family member sat on the board with us. He offered the pool to the board stating it would be the association' s responsibility to pay insurance, maintenance, staffing, and we could collect the fees and keep them. Board members asked for the records of cost for insurance, maintenance, staffing, history of repairs, etc., at least three times and they were never provided. McMillin kept calling and asking me and others to vote for it, despite the fact we didn't have the information needed to make a good business decision. Would we ever want to take on the liability, construction, of such a project, and supervise the related employees? As to the playground, that has been brought up several times. I attend most meetings and haven't seen the group that was interested at a meetings in almost 2 years. We are having a problem now with young people gathering at the front gate and landing, and tweens (too young to drive) running around in golf carts without lights, and boom boxes blaring, hanging off the carts, at all times of the day and night. This board fails to police and question each other. When one asks questions honestly and openly he/she is rebuffed, smirked at and demoted to the least responsible committee assignments by our board president, who is running for board again. We have one or two who pose questions but don' follow through. It is a show for your benefit and they allow their cohesive cohorts on the board to continue on. I received an email from a resident who commented on the fact that we only had three running for board, who said we can expect in 2014, what we have in 2013. Back to transcription.
Garrison, "NOT AT THIS TIME." McMillin, So that would have to wait until 2015 as well" Garrison, "As it stands, yes, I would think so." This was Garrison's chance to ask where all this was coming from and find out who "WE" is, but just maybe he is part of "WE" McMillin, "Does anyone know the status of that property? President Walton, "Al is still working with that?" President Walton doesn't ask where all this is coming from. Is he "WE", and just hasn't told you because you haven't called him on any other off the table decisions.
I've stopped the transcription. I was at the meeting and I did listen to the tape to the end of this discussion. The board went on to discuss where they were in seeking access to the land mentioned above that was quit claim deeded to the association. During the discussion McMillin described the pipe that HE sees as necessary to make the land useful. If only he had a maintenance building he could save us a fortune He sits on the Water Amenities Committee, how did the old dock work out for us? We don't know because your board didn't report on it. Someone on the board and committee posted a sign and advised you to ask me. Here's your answer: Your board failed, ignored their own motions, covered up, and allowed this committee to abuse a fellow board and committee member. It didn't go well and the whole thing lacked ethics and truth.
This section of the meeting was disheartening from an administrative, good governance, good boardmanship, perspective. I'm not sure why, but maybe it was just the final icing on this miserable poorly, half baked, Wedgefield administrative cake. It was another indication of what this board is going to do with the findings of the Reserve Study that we all just paid $4,000 for. We don't have any compliance measurement of this group. Our compliance person is the treasurer. That is just a big no, no! When your board isn't properly regulated by true compliance, it is up to the membership. Where are you?
P.S. Don't build a shed. Clear the junk out of the house at the landing and the gate house. Get rid of some of those old decorations. As you drive in, take a look at the gate house which is a land mark piece to our entrance and clean the little trees out of the eves.
Wednesday, August 21, 2013
LATER TODAY: IS THE BOARD COUNTING ON YOUR COMPLACENCY WITH ONLY THREE CANDIDATES TO RUN TO FILL THREE SLOTS? WE'LL SEE. ARE THEY ABOUT TO START BUILDING AGAIN? THE GROUNDS CHAIR WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A MAINTENANCE SHED BUILT ON LAND WE DON'T HAVE ROAD ACCESS TO. DID I REALLY HEAR HIM ASK ABOUT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS AND USE THE WORD "POOL". GO LISTEN TO THE GROUNDS REPORT. I WILL AND I'LL TELL YOU WHETHER I HEARD THE "POOL" WORD.
Tuesday, August 20, 2013
QUICK NOTES ON THE WPA AUGUST MONTHLY MEETING - YES IT WAS TONIGHT
The Wedgefield Examiner is busy tonight and early Wednesday morning. I did attend the WPA board meeting. Attendance was very low. Probably less than a dozen people. Here are a few highlights.
*Only 3 people are running for board to fill THREE VACANCIES. Why doesn't anyone want to work with this cohesive board???
*The 2014 budget was not brought up for approval.
*Surprise, Surprise, the Water Amenities Committee did not report that the old dock had been removed. Remember, after they removed it someone on the board or committee put up a sign advising you to ask the Wedgefield Examiner where it went. It is not the duty of the Wedgefield Examiner to tell you what your board did with it. They must be embarrassed about how they handled that whole mess and don't really think you should know.
*Only 3 people are running for board to fill THREE VACANCIES. Why doesn't anyone want to work with this cohesive board???
*The 2014 budget was not brought up for approval.
*Surprise, Surprise, the Water Amenities Committee did not report that the old dock had been removed. Remember, after they removed it someone on the board or committee put up a sign advising you to ask the Wedgefield Examiner where it went. It is not the duty of the Wedgefield Examiner to tell you what your board did with it. They must be embarrassed about how they handled that whole mess and don't really think you should know.
FAREWELL OLD DOCK!!!!
Friday, August 16, 2013
THE DEADLINE HAS PASSED FOR SUBMISSION OF NAMES TO RUN FOR BOARD. RUMORS ARE FLYING. COULD THE WEDGEFIELD EXAMINER BE A PROBLEM?
TThe Wedgefield Examiner is back from vacation. The rumors and phone calls carrying rumors about who will run for board have been flying. WHEN THE INFORMATION ON THE EXAMINER HAS COME FROM RUMORS WE MAKE SURE YOU KNOW THAT THEY ARE RUMORS.
Obviously, by the calls, residents are concerned about who is going to run for board. Yet, I'm told that the Nominating Committee is having difficulty getting people to agree to run for board. Your board would probably say it is just things like The Wedgefield Examiner that keeps people from running. I'm told by individual board members that no one on the board reads it, so how could that be? Yet, despite those statements, the board treasurer's wife found it necessary to speak about that certain publication, at a board meeting. The Wedgefield Examiner isn't so arrogant that it believes that is the problem.
Since The Wedgefield Examiner works with documents and transcription of board meeting tapes, it would seem unlikely that anyone would be afraid to run, because of what might be printed on this blog. If you, the board, or anyone else believes The Wedgefield Examiner is a problem, I have a few questions for you. Why would any decent, above board, individual be afraid to have their very own words or written documents presented to the membership readers? If a board member, current or potential, believes that they are acting according to our governing documents and in the best interests of the association, voting and making decisions independently using their own brain power, why wouldn't they want to be quoted, or their documents displayed? Aren't, or shouldn't they be proud of their work? Could it be that without deals, good old boys' network deals, that people are afraid of the potential of being harassed, ignored, and laughed at, at the board table, by their own fellow board members? Far fetched? Attend the meetings and listen to the board meeting tapes for yourself.
THE RUMORS:
*The committee is having difficulty finding people to run for board.
*One of the current board members who still has two years left on his/her term, is telling people that she/he will resign after the annual meeting. Why not now, when you as residents would have the opportunity to vote and fill that board seat? If true, it is either one of two scenarios. The first is this individual may just want begging - please don't leave, what would the board do without you? It could also be that members of our very own board are advising this individual to wait until after the annual meeting (an old Concerned Citizen trick), so the board can select one of their own "kind", to fill the seat, taking away your power to vote.
*Two of the current board who will have completed their term, are going to run again.
*A well known Concerned Citizen who has previously sat on the board will run. In this event, one of the current board members, who has to run again to stay on the board, would decide not to run, so she/he could be contracted with by the board, to do work for the association.
_________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
Think about attending the August board meeting. Hopefully, the Nominating Committee will provide a report and you'll know who is going to run for board. As to the rest of the RUMORS you'll just have to let the events roll in. Stay tuned. It will be an interesting few months. It is important. This is where we live and much of our quality of resident community life depends on good governance.
Obviously, by the calls, residents are concerned about who is going to run for board. Yet, I'm told that the Nominating Committee is having difficulty getting people to agree to run for board. Your board would probably say it is just things like The Wedgefield Examiner that keeps people from running. I'm told by individual board members that no one on the board reads it, so how could that be? Yet, despite those statements, the board treasurer's wife found it necessary to speak about that certain publication, at a board meeting. The Wedgefield Examiner isn't so arrogant that it believes that is the problem.
Since The Wedgefield Examiner works with documents and transcription of board meeting tapes, it would seem unlikely that anyone would be afraid to run, because of what might be printed on this blog. If you, the board, or anyone else believes The Wedgefield Examiner is a problem, I have a few questions for you. Why would any decent, above board, individual be afraid to have their very own words or written documents presented to the membership readers? If a board member, current or potential, believes that they are acting according to our governing documents and in the best interests of the association, voting and making decisions independently using their own brain power, why wouldn't they want to be quoted, or their documents displayed? Aren't, or shouldn't they be proud of their work? Could it be that without deals, good old boys' network deals, that people are afraid of the potential of being harassed, ignored, and laughed at, at the board table, by their own fellow board members? Far fetched? Attend the meetings and listen to the board meeting tapes for yourself.
THE RUMORS:
*The committee is having difficulty finding people to run for board.
*One of the current board members who still has two years left on his/her term, is telling people that she/he will resign after the annual meeting. Why not now, when you as residents would have the opportunity to vote and fill that board seat? If true, it is either one of two scenarios. The first is this individual may just want begging - please don't leave, what would the board do without you? It could also be that members of our very own board are advising this individual to wait until after the annual meeting (an old Concerned Citizen trick), so the board can select one of their own "kind", to fill the seat, taking away your power to vote.
*Two of the current board who will have completed their term, are going to run again.
*A well known Concerned Citizen who has previously sat on the board will run. In this event, one of the current board members, who has to run again to stay on the board, would decide not to run, so she/he could be contracted with by the board, to do work for the association.
_________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
Think about attending the August board meeting. Hopefully, the Nominating Committee will provide a report and you'll know who is going to run for board. As to the rest of the RUMORS you'll just have to let the events roll in. Stay tuned. It will be an interesting few months. It is important. This is where we live and much of our quality of resident community life depends on good governance.
Saturday, August 10, 2013
Thursday, August 8, 2013
THE OLD DOCK REALLY HAS BEEN MOVED AND SOMEONE ON THE BOARD OR COMMITTEE HAS A SENSE OF HUMOR
Yes, the old dock is gone. The FOR SALE sign is gone. There is a new sign posted by someone on the board or committee. It reads:
WHERE CAN THE OLD DOCK BE? ASK THE WEDGEFIELD EXAMINER
Thanks for the publicity, whoever you are. If your board and committee had followed through according to the motion and discussion at the board table, they never would have been put in the position of having to move this thing. You could have had confidence that they say what they mean and govern with openness, honesty, and stand by our governing documents. Am I sorry that they don't like the fact that the Wedgefield Examiner followed their ridiculous maneuvers? No, this mess is just another example of their failure to act, question, and govern as individual board members, in the best interests of Wedgefield. It is a sorry state of affairs when they lie to the membership.
Tuesday, August 6, 2013
PRECEDENT, FOR THE RECORD, AND POSSIBLE LONG TERM RAMIFICATIONS IF YOUR BOARD FAILS TO CONSIDER THESE TERMS
The upcoming August 20th board meeting could prove to be a landmark meeting in the future of Wedgefield Plantation Association. Why? The first ever in the history of the association Reserve Study has been completed. Has your board accepted the findings? Will they vote to accept and implement the study? We probably won't have any indication in advance of the meeting. If you review the agenda that should be posted one week prior to the meeting, if it is as usual, it appears that your board changes the date of the previous agenda, and posts the same outline month after month. There isn't any detail, subjects to be covered under committee reports, etc. You might sometimes wonder whether the individual board members review it, or submit info to be included. Watch for the agenda to be posted next Tuesday. In regard to the Reserve Study, the question arises as to whether they have all reviewed it and are prepared to discuss, vote - to accept all, or portions of it. Have each of the board members who serve as committee chairs taken the portions that include their committee work to their committees for review, discussion, and recommendations?
If you attended the July board meeting, you'd be aware that our treasurer was ready to approve a 2014 budget, in denial of the reserve figures set in the study. McBride wanted to discuss some portions and was put on hold until the August meeting.
Have you read the Reserve Study? If you have you may have noticed the positives and the flaws. You may have noticed that the study contractor refers to "information provided by THE BOARD", yet we have shown you that the entire board was never included in what was sent, or what was said to the contractor. Some of the information provided by the board is unfounded and untrue. Now, at the August meeting, would be the time for individual board members to ask that the Reserve Study discussion and vote be brought to the board table. Will they indicate areas of acceptance or rejection? This is an important mile stone and should be discussed in the presence of the membership.
There are mixed feelings about the study because of the board's (those who called themselves the entire board) broad statements, lack of professional engineering studies, etc. It is a flawed study. It could be helpful as it lays out a plan for our roads, landing, etc. If followed, that alone would remove future complications of individual board member favored projects. The study constantly reminds the board to seek professional guidance for all projects, including certified professionals for our financial assets, as the plan is implemented.
If the study isn't discussed and manufactured information pulled out, we may be left with the board weapons of "precedent" and "for the record, or it is a matter of record". Do you think the individual board members you elected, or will elect again would do that? Precedent has been voiced from some of these current board members regularly and often not to our benefit. "For the record" could be pulled out for the segments they would like to highlight in the event of a lawsuit. Hopefully board discussion will pull segments that are not true from the document. Look at the record.
*Our chair of drainage has stated on the record that ditch maintenance is the responsibility of the lot owner. There are individual records in the office where residents were billed through Individual Assessment for ditch maintenance. Yet, this same chair claims (now that he has his own road to deal with) that there is a precedent for the association covering the expense of ditch maintenance.
*There is a precedent of repairing roads without engineering support and utilizing unlicensed and uninsured contractors. Will your board now and in the future fall back on that precedent, ignoring the study recommendations?
*There is a precedent of this board violating our governing documents and their own board votes. Think about the now 4 month drama of the landing dock. What about the fact that the Water Amenities chair wouldn't answer a question at the board table, presented by another board member, as to how much the dock was sold for? The treasurer also tried to avoid answering it. Think about the fact that the board has approved a grounds contract that leaves our assessment dollars being used to pay for almost 50% of the costs of moving 22 private lots. How is that general benefit? Will it become precedent? Your board sat by while our treasurer advised me that I would need to follow state law to view documents, rather than our governing documents. This board hadn't applied that rule to another resident. Could you be next? This board lacks continuity in governance. They are capable of bringing any portion of the study document forward when it is convenient to what they want to do next.
*If you are a canal lot owner you really need to spend time with the study to see the twists and turns of what was said to be the "BOARD PROVIDED INFORMATION" before that portion of the study becomes "on the record, or the record", in some lawsuit up the road. There will be a separate article on that portion of the study later.
Do you think this is a lot about nothing? I hope not. If you do it may be because you don't attend meetings, read the documents, and watch this board at work. Failure to look at the study now and what parts your board approves, or discusses in the presence of the membership, could lead to LONG TERM RAMIFICATIONS, that we wouldn't want for our community. Do yourself a favor and read the document and then write and ask a board member how much time they have spent reviewing the document - the once in our history document, and whether there are sections they want brought to the board table now. We elect INDIVIDUAL board members hoping they will use their INDIVIDUAL life experience, education, and values, and to stand up to enforce our governing documents, and vote in the best interests of Wedgefield Plantation Association, rather than vote with a herd mentality. Attend the August board meeting and see just how important this study is to your board. Could all be a moot point if they don't put it on the agenda? Remember they ignored even publishing, or governing according to a 2011 by-law.
UPCOMING ARTICLES:
*Another Way To Fill A Board Seat Without Involving The Membership
*The Reserve Study And Canal Lot Owners - It Isn't That Complicated But It Is Important
If you attended the July board meeting, you'd be aware that our treasurer was ready to approve a 2014 budget, in denial of the reserve figures set in the study. McBride wanted to discuss some portions and was put on hold until the August meeting.
Have you read the Reserve Study? If you have you may have noticed the positives and the flaws. You may have noticed that the study contractor refers to "information provided by THE BOARD", yet we have shown you that the entire board was never included in what was sent, or what was said to the contractor. Some of the information provided by the board is unfounded and untrue. Now, at the August meeting, would be the time for individual board members to ask that the Reserve Study discussion and vote be brought to the board table. Will they indicate areas of acceptance or rejection? This is an important mile stone and should be discussed in the presence of the membership.
There are mixed feelings about the study because of the board's (those who called themselves the entire board) broad statements, lack of professional engineering studies, etc. It is a flawed study. It could be helpful as it lays out a plan for our roads, landing, etc. If followed, that alone would remove future complications of individual board member favored projects. The study constantly reminds the board to seek professional guidance for all projects, including certified professionals for our financial assets, as the plan is implemented.
If the study isn't discussed and manufactured information pulled out, we may be left with the board weapons of "precedent" and "for the record, or it is a matter of record". Do you think the individual board members you elected, or will elect again would do that? Precedent has been voiced from some of these current board members regularly and often not to our benefit. "For the record" could be pulled out for the segments they would like to highlight in the event of a lawsuit. Hopefully board discussion will pull segments that are not true from the document. Look at the record.
*Our chair of drainage has stated on the record that ditch maintenance is the responsibility of the lot owner. There are individual records in the office where residents were billed through Individual Assessment for ditch maintenance. Yet, this same chair claims (now that he has his own road to deal with) that there is a precedent for the association covering the expense of ditch maintenance.
*There is a precedent of repairing roads without engineering support and utilizing unlicensed and uninsured contractors. Will your board now and in the future fall back on that precedent, ignoring the study recommendations?
*There is a precedent of this board violating our governing documents and their own board votes. Think about the now 4 month drama of the landing dock. What about the fact that the Water Amenities chair wouldn't answer a question at the board table, presented by another board member, as to how much the dock was sold for? The treasurer also tried to avoid answering it. Think about the fact that the board has approved a grounds contract that leaves our assessment dollars being used to pay for almost 50% of the costs of moving 22 private lots. How is that general benefit? Will it become precedent? Your board sat by while our treasurer advised me that I would need to follow state law to view documents, rather than our governing documents. This board hadn't applied that rule to another resident. Could you be next? This board lacks continuity in governance. They are capable of bringing any portion of the study document forward when it is convenient to what they want to do next.
*If you are a canal lot owner you really need to spend time with the study to see the twists and turns of what was said to be the "BOARD PROVIDED INFORMATION" before that portion of the study becomes "on the record, or the record", in some lawsuit up the road. There will be a separate article on that portion of the study later.
Do you think this is a lot about nothing? I hope not. If you do it may be because you don't attend meetings, read the documents, and watch this board at work. Failure to look at the study now and what parts your board approves, or discusses in the presence of the membership, could lead to LONG TERM RAMIFICATIONS, that we wouldn't want for our community. Do yourself a favor and read the document and then write and ask a board member how much time they have spent reviewing the document - the once in our history document, and whether there are sections they want brought to the board table now. We elect INDIVIDUAL board members hoping they will use their INDIVIDUAL life experience, education, and values, and to stand up to enforce our governing documents, and vote in the best interests of Wedgefield Plantation Association, rather than vote with a herd mentality. Attend the August board meeting and see just how important this study is to your board. Could all be a moot point if they don't put it on the agenda? Remember they ignored even publishing, or governing according to a 2011 by-law.
UPCOMING ARTICLES:
*Another Way To Fill A Board Seat Without Involving The Membership
*The Reserve Study And Canal Lot Owners - It Isn't That Complicated But It Is Important
NEW ARTICLE TO BE POSTED LATER TODAY - "PRECEDENT, FOR THE RECORD, AND POSSIBLE LONG TERM RAMIFICATIONS IF YOUR BOARD FAILS TO CONSIDER THESE TERMS"
Contrary to a rumor, the Wedgefield Examiner isn't going away. We took time to smell the flowers, enjoy the beach and sea breeze, and visiting family! A new article is in development and should be published late today, or early Wednesday.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)