NOTE: I will relate what occurred to the best of my ability. As always, I highly suggest that you go to the tape of the meeting at the WPA website, or The Wedgefield Times, to verify information for yourself. COMMENTS, are provided at the end of the article, and noted as such.
The meeting was called to order with 7 board members at the table. Present: McMillin, Anderson, Cline, DeMarchi, John Walton, Garrison, and President Walton. Absent: Ebert, and Johnson. 9 members attended the meeting.
HIGHLIGHTS:
*The minutes of the July meeting were unanimously approved, despite the fact that the copy provided in each board member packet was incorrect. When a board member asked if each board member had received the correct copy via email, prior to the meeting, Garrison laughed and said that some board members claim that they don't have email.
*President's Report:
President Walton, announced that there were three people who had turned their resumes in to run for board. They are the same three people on the board, whose terms are ending - DeMarchi, Anderson, and John Walton.
*Vice President's Report:
Garrison reported that while the nominating process is complete, that he had concern that with an uncontested election, residents might not vote. It is important that we all turn in our proxies, or vote the day of the election, because there are important items on the ballot, and if enough people don't vote, and there isn't a quorum, we'd have to have a do over.
*Secretary's Report:
Cline reported that all the printing for the annual meeting packets would be done in house. A motion was made and passed, to purchase the necessary supplies, not to exceed $1,700.
Cline announced that Peggy Phillips would serve as the election inspector, and named the following as the election committee: D. Aguilera, C. McBride, J. & M. Sasso, V. Segelken, M.Cavanaugh, S. Hastings. She would like two more people.
*Treasurer's Report:
DeMarchi announced that the 2016 proposed budget had been presented to the board, and would be voted on in September. The budget was based on 2016 assessments at $525.00. Discussion by Garrison, brought concern about the assessment, and it was agreed that DeMarchi would redo the proposed budget based on the assessment staying at $500.00.
Articles will follow regarding the confusing, and proposed changes to the percent of allocation to each of the categories of the reserves. Safe to say, regarding the 2015 budget, funds from Marina, Landscaping, and Drainage, will be reallocated to a total of $101,000, to Roads. This may allow the board to contract with the recently approved road contractor, and complete more of the areas on the road repair list. Last month, the board approved over $150,000 for a road contract that would repair 13 areas, on a list of over 25.
As the board was discussing the reallocation of percentage of reserve categories, a resident in the audience yelled, "take it from canals".
*Legal Report:
Garrison reported that the board had received 3 proposed changes to our governing documents, for the annual meeting ballot. They would be forwarded to the attorney for review. This wasn't to determine whether they were good ideas, or not, but whether they were legal. Briefly, they are:
1) By-Law change to require the board to contract with a CPA to perform bookkeeping/accounting functions (my words). Garrison stated that this was about the third time this was presented for a vote. (Comment: Thanks persistent resident!)
2) By-Law addition, that would require the board to take canal dredging to a full membership vote, if it were proposed.
3) Covenant proposal, that would allow changes to the covenants, with a vote of 60% of the eligible voters, rather than the 100%, currently required.
It should be noted that the board held a closed meeting, to discuss "legal issues", and Garrison did not report that the meeting was held, who attended, or what it was about.
*Drainage Report:
DeMarchi opened a bid for proposed work on Francis Parker, and Joanna Gillard Lane, for $600, and made a motion to award a contract to the bidder. The motion passed unanimously.
Grounds' Report:
The most important part of this report, given by McMillin, is that a bid to fix the exterior of the gatehouse, not to exceed $4,400 was opened, a motion made, and approved to go to contract. The work would include items such as putting in the windows that have been in storage for over two years, extension of roof line, gutters and down spouts, filling in of openings in brick grout, new doors and frames, etc. (Comment: This is like the good, the bad, and the ugly. The good - finally it looks like credible work will be done. The bad - it has taken two years, conflict of interest, and a some what prior, appearance of corruptness, and poor board management to get to this point. The ugly - even when you think you've gotten past the poor management issues, McMillin would like to give the contractor money in advance, if you had looked at a road contract he authored a few years ago, you'd have had fear in your head for what he proposed. Cline, President Walton, and Garrison, spoke against it. Thank you!)
*The Bookkeeping Proposal:
DeMarchi presented two bids. One was for $600 a month, and the other from the CPA who had performed our audit for the last two years, in the amount of $150.00 a month. A motion was made, and passed to go to contract with the $150.00/month. We'll do an article later on.
*A Resident's Comments, Brings DeMarchi Back To Speed Bumps!
During resident comments, the resident who has spoken about speed bumps three months consecutively, stated that he wasn't asking for speed bumps, but continued to have concerns for the dangers of turning left from the stop sign, at the corner of Wraggs Ferry, and Wedgefield. DeMarchi stated that he had consulted several entities, all of which indicated that speed bumps were the answer, and he felt that it should take a vote of the FULL board. (Comment: DeMarchi can not let speed bumps GO. The board voted with 8 members at the table. The vote was 4-4, and the motion was not approved. If he can't accept that, then the question to him is, "What are you proposing to do about ALL the votes that have been taken with less than nine members at the table, with a quorum, or is this nonsense just because it didn't go your way?
THE END, EXCEPT FOR THIS. MORE ARTICLES WILL FOLLOW, BUT IT IS TIME TO GET THE HIGHLIGHTS UP!
