The Compliance Report was given by Vice President/Legal Chair/Compliance Chair, Garrison. The committee is in the process of going over each section of the policy manual. Each member has been assigned a section. The committee will come up with language to address burning and signage. The policy manual each board member has, and the copy posted on the WPA website is not up to date. While there is a list of changes that were made, the language has not been inserted into the Policy Manual. There are sections like Communications, that include things like yard of the month (brought laughter from the board table), that should be revised, if left in, to include the word "optional". He mentioned the procurement section, that currently requires getting 3 bids on $1,500 projects. He said something about not wanting favoritism, but, when "policy gets in the way of good business, it is bad policy"
COMMENTS: I was disgusted by the report, and by the situation our President, and this board in general has put us in. First, from almost any good faith attempt at good governance, I find fault with President Walton's judgement in naming the Legal Chair, as Compliance Chair. One should be seeking the advice and counsel of the other. Our President has left Garrison, in the comedy situation of saying, "self am I RIGHT, or am I Right? "Yes, self, I always seem to find myself, RIGHT." He has also removed a check and balance, as it relates to governing. It appears nothing short of "conflict of interest", to good governance, and is poor judgement, and cronyism.
Board member, De Marchi, former Compliance Chair, had his committee go through every section of the Policy Manual, and month, after month, made changes to the Policy Manual, failed to publish the proposed changes on the WPA website, between first and second readings, for months, and when it was brought to the board's attention, they mass re-approved the changes. It is at moments like these, that your board in general, for the last few years, have failed to exercise their individual responsibilities as board members, to question, insure following of the governing documents, and raised their hands, and voted yes, for their old boys' network COHESIVENESS.
This board appears to continue to change the Policy Manual, not for the benefit of good governance, but to eliminate safeguards of good governance, and generally good business safe guards, to benefit their private agendas. What do I mean? Consider a few current items. We will be served a new burning policy. Why? Go back to the board's sanitized minutes, or listen to the tapes of the last few years, or review the correspondence file. There weren't any complaints noted regarding burning. We are getting a new burn policy to accommodate Board Member, McMillin's want to burn in a big ugly pot, on his vacant lot.
He brought the policy change recommendation to the board, with nothing to substantiate a need for change.
Why are we getting a new signage change proposal? Again, go back to all the places suggested above, and look for complaints by, or to, this board. There aren't any. Who abused signage? Two board members - McMillin and Walton (not President).
I made a complaint about Walton's signed used boat yard. Mc Millin made the disgusting, red neck, Christmas sign, with my address painted on it, to insult me. It did little, but indicate how crude this board can get, but all residents will get a new signage policy.
Now, Garrison is talking about changing the requirement limit on when they need to seek bids! Someone on that board should have a policy outlined as to how to seek bids. This board has already changed the policy manual to take petty cash from $100, to $200, to $300, for their convenience, because of poor planning, and circumventing a decent process for purchasing. This board already piece meals projects, in avoidance of proper bidding, contract awarding, and real contracts. Look at the gate house and what their piece meal efforts have got us over the last 2 years.
