PART ONE: THE MARCH WPA MEETING - RESIDENT COMMENTS, AND AN ASSOCIATED LETTER TO THE BOARD, WITH NO APPARENT RESPONSE TO THE RESIDENT. YOU'LL JUST HAVE TO READ THE ARTICLE TO GET THE ENTIRE STORY

The Wedgefield Examiner was not able to attend the March WPA Board meeting, but I have listened to a tape of the meeting provided on THE WEDGEFIELD TIMES.   This article centers on the resident comment section of the meeting.  The first resident to speak is what I call the "shed and governing documents" resident.  This resident had sent correspondence to the board twice over the last 4 months regarding the issue of a shed, and hadn't been answered.  It appears from the resulting conversation during the board meeting that he had supplied several pictures for the board.  The resident also refers to a ARC article in the most recent Wragg.  I have provided both the resident letter, and the section of the Wragg he refers to, below.  Please take a moment and read through both before we proceed with our report.

The resident starts out reminding the board that he has lived in Wedgefield for 36 years, has written to the board twice regarding what he views as a shed violation on lot 225, provided pictures to the board, finds the conditions on the lot - and around the shed to be unsightly, and notes that he hasn't received a response in 3 1/2 months.  He goes on to remind the board that there are three trailers parked in the yard, 3 gas tanks stored outside,  lot 225 has trespassed on his neighbor's drive way and lawn to get some of these trailers onto his property, the shed  architecturally violates ARC rules, affects over 20 different home owners, and appears to be placed over the homeowners property and on to golf course property.  It appears the property owner has studied our governing documents because he cites several sections including those provided in the Wragg.  In the end he asks the board "TO DO THE RIGHT THING."

As I listened to the board's response I felt that they were abusive to the resident at times, cocky, and I was disgusted at their apparent evasive behavior regarding enforcement of our governing documents.  What do I mean?  First, Garrison agrees that 2 trailers on a residential lot are all that are allowed.  Yet, 3 1/2 months later there are still three trailers.  Later, it is stated that if the gas tank isn't enclosed that they will send a letter.  Again, when?  Board Members, McMillin and DeMarchi previously, verbally told the resident that the shed was out of compliance, and had never even been permitted!  Yet, as the conversation from the board table continues the shed is OK.  As our resident continues to call the situation on lot 225 an eyesore Garrison says, "there are a lot of places here like that"!  Really????  Residents, this is the whole problem in Wedgefield!  Your board turns a blind eye to our governing documents, fails to up hold the standards provided in those documents, and has left Wedgefield in shambles!  What is worse, is that on occasion, they decide to enforce around all this mess, on a rare few, with absolutely no consistency.  This board made this discussion the good (only on the part of the resident), the bad, and the ugly!  What do I mean by the ugly?  Garrison turns the tables on the resident as he speaks again about lot 225 being an eyesore, and says that he supposes that people would find the boat and trailer parked in his yard an eyesore!!!!!  Really?????  The resident has one boat and trailer.  He meets the requirements.  Your board board ADMITTEDLY has done nothing - NOT ONLY ABOUT LOT 225, BUT REMEMBER "there are a lot of places here like that".  

STAY TUNED!  THE NEXT RESIDENT SPEAKER HAS WAITED A LONG TIME TO SEE RESULTS FROM THE BOARD AFTER HE WROTE MONTHS AGO.

THERE ARE MORE PROBLEMS IN THE CANALS - READ RESIDENT'S LETTER

Fom: 

Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2016 8:50 AM

To: 

Subject: Re: Thieves

 

I would say one of the two "white trash" that fished late Sunday and one of them were the guys that dumped the trees.

 

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 8:43 AM, 

(RESIDENT'S NAME WITHHELD) Called me this morning to say (RESIDENT NAME REMOVED) canoe was stolen off his dock, it’s been there for 20 years, never a problem. Just another sign the “up the river thieves” 

are looking around for more !! Lookout for the “fisherman” coming in the lagoons and the Main canal.

 

THE WEDGEFIELD EXAMINER IS ENJOYING FAMILY. WE MISSED THE MARCH WPA BOARD MEETING. WE'LL LISTEN TO THE MEETING TAPE ON THE WEDGEFIELD TIMES, AND START REPORTING ON MARCH 23RD.

The Wedgefield Examiner Wonder Dog Brady, says "stay tuned".  

DID YOU HAVE A DOCK FLOAT MISSING. IT IS HERE IN OUR CANAL

FISHERMAN WELCOME, AS THE REGS STATE, AS LONG AS THEY AREN'T DESTROYING OUR CANALS

Saturday evening, as we sat down to dinner, I noticed a boat in the canal behind our house.  I grabbed my camera, and shot this picture from my kitchen, prompted by the tree dumping a few days earlier.  The tree dumping fisherman have made us suspicious of anyone who is out there.

Up until the tree dumping, we had become use to fisherman in the canal behind our home 3 - 4, sometimes even more, days a week.  We had actually enjoyed watching them catching fish, observing their techniques, type of bait, etc.  Most, have stayed off our bulkhead (maintained at our expense), left our deck alone, etc.  The legal (possibly) abuse by the State of South Carolina, "open waters", regulations, have left me capturing pictures

TWO FORGED DOCUMENTS? ONE RESIDENT PAYS, THE SECOND GETS A NEW SETTLEMENT FROM THE SAME REFEREE! VIEW THE RECORDS HERE FOR YOURSELF

Readers, this article has taken more than a little mind engineering to determine how to present the documents, history, and relate the problems presented.  If you are a regular follower, you will know much of the history.  Prior to the November 2015 WPA Annual Meeting, I had visited the WPA office, and reviewed the documents relating to the litigation brought by the WPA, against the last two residents who had contested/failed to pay the canal dredging assessments.  For the most part, the board had been silent from the board table regarding the cases, and at least three WPA attorneys of record had been hired - fired, and one was disbarred.  At some points, when questioned by one lone board member, Legal Chair Garrison, and Treasurer DeMarchi, throw out terms such as JUDGE, RULINGS, LIKE A JUDGE, etc., in regard to what these papers represent, and the professional - REFEREE (as noted on the papers - not judge), who signed, the SETTLEMENT - not ruling.  Additionally, what reluctantly comes out from Legal Chair Garrison, is that the first two documents presented were FORGED - Garrison claims, not signed by Referee Beverly.  It should be noted that I asked Garrison about the documents during the November 2015 Annual Meeting, and the first words out of his mouth were "I don't want to talk about it."  He never used the word "forged", he said the papers dated June 2013, were not signed by Referee Beverly, and he didn't know who signed them.  What is important, is that your board RELIED on them, and collected according to the settlement on ONE of the resident defendants, and 1 1/2 years later, went back to Referee Beverly for a SECOND vastly different settlement on the second resident defendant.  Your board NEVER opened this mess up to the membership from the board table in all this time.

What I missed during my examination of the records, prior to the 2015 WPA Annual Meeting, was that there were TWO FORGED RECORDS OF SETTLEMENT IN 2013, one for each of the resident litigations.  Each of the residents had the same SETTLEMENT as it related to the justification of the INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENT - the $5,000 assessed to every canal lot owner.  The legal justification is IDENTICAL in each of the documents.  Yet, your board only collects, according to the terms of these identical settlements, signed on the very same day, on ONE of the residents.  By your boards' actions - collecting on one, if you are kind, you believe that they thought in the moment, that the documents were legitimate,  that thought is removed, when they fail to collect on the second, don't discuss, or investigate what took place, and hire Beverly A YEAR AND A HALF LATER, to change the opinion on Individual Assessment, and determine by written opinion that it wasn't a legal assessment, and the resident doesn't have to pay it!  Referee Beverly is dead.  We can't ask him about the documents, but some one should be asking your board, our local solicitor, our current attorney, and state entities, how FORGED documents entered this litigation, were applied to one resident, and we got to the place of a new SETTLEMENT for the second CONCERNED CITIZEN resident, with the legal opinion that our CONCERNED CITIZEN Legal Chair always wanted.  This is a huge legal pile of garbage, and someone should start getting to the bottom of it, because our Legal Chair has begun to give this forged cover up regarding Individual Assessment, his blessing, by calling it a RULING (not - tainted, forged SETTLEMENT), as he moves his personal canal dredging agenda forward.

I've left the resident names out of the documents.  I've provided you with the front pages, signature pages of each of the 2013 FORGED documents.  I've provided the language for the justification of Individual Assessment ONCE to save space, but the language is identical in both.  These records are on file in the WPA office, and you can verify that for yourself.  I've protected the names of the residents involved.  I call them the 2nd to last resident standing, and the last resident standing.  

THE LAST RESIDENT STANDING.  THIS RECORD INCLUDES THE JUSTIFICATION OF THE $5,000 ASSESSMENT.

THE 2ND TO THE LAST RESIDENT STANDING.  THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINED THE EXACT LANGUAGE FOR JUSTIFICATION OF THE $5,000 ASSESSMENT PROVIDED ABOVE, BUT IS NOT DUPLICATED HERE IN ORDER TO SAVE SPACE.  THIS IS THE RESIDENT THAT YOUR BOARD COLLECTED THE $5,000 INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENT FROM - THEY RELIED ON THE CLAIMED TO BE FORGED DOCUMENT.

THIS IS THE SETTLEMENT PREPARED BY REFEREE BEVERLY ONE AND A HALF YEARS LATER, AT OUR EXPENSE, FOR THE LAST MAN STANDING, IT TOTALLY TAKES AWAY INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENT

THE WEDGEFIELD EXAMINER WILL ADD TO THIS ARTICLE LATER.  I WANTED TO GET THE DOCUMENTS UP ON THE BLOG, AND MY SCHEDULE IS BUSY.  STAY TUNED.

LATE TODAY: DOCUMENTS REVEAL THAT THE WPA HAD TWO IDENTICAL SETTLEMENTS FOR THE LAST TWO CANAL LOT ASSESSMENT OBJECTORS, COLLECTED ON ONE, AND A YEAR PLUS LATER, SETTLED IT AGAIN. NOW, WE MAY HAVE TWO FAKE SIGNATURES! WE'LL PROVIDE THE DOCUMENTS