HERE IS THE LETTER:
October 28th, 2016
Madeline,
I would like to make an honest attempt at clearing up some information about the water amenities committee’s approach to canal dredging and simply outline the reasons we have chosen this course of action. We have studied the dredging issue for many years. We all experienced what the 2009 dredging did to our community. It was incredibly divisive and ripped the neighborhood apart. Our #1 priority in attempting this phase of dredging was to avoid anything that would initiate a repeat of the controversies surrounding the 2009 dredging. Every committee member and member of the board is in total agreement with this approach. There will never be a dredging plan that pleases everyone. There are those that feel every lot throughout the plantation should be assessed equally, and then there are those that feel the canal should be completely ignored by the WPA. What we have always tried to do is find that middle ground.That is how things get done. That has been our approach from day one.
Allow me to outline what our intentions are.
Every since the 2009 dredging was completed we have known that a second phase of dredging would be needed. That's the way it was engineered. We looked at all of the possible ways to assess for dredging without the controversies that surrounded the 2009 dredging. The board began allocating 15% of it’s budget 5 years ago. We needed a plan to come up with the rest. The ruling in the lawsuit challenging the individual assessment was that the 2009 board overreached its authority by using the individual assessment for the purpose of canal dredging. Whether or not you agree with this ruling,whether or not you think it was not a “real” judge,or if you think it is an invalid ruling, is not really relevant. The WPA board decided to accept the ruling and not appeal it on the advice of the WPA attorney. In a meeting with the attorney he laid out all the reasons for and against an appeal and made a compelling case as to why we should accept it and move on. We took his advice. You are certainly free to criticize that decision, but it doesn't change the fact that the WPA had a weak case and faced a very expensive and uphill battle to win an appeal. We then began to look at the possibility of dredging using the monies allocated by the WPA . While not enough to completely fund a maintenance dredge, it is a significant amount. We then put together a plan to privately raise the remaining amounts through voluntary contributions. We realize this plan is not perfect but it is our only logical and ethical way to dredge. The WPA board will not do another individual assessment, and frankly would be foolish to do so again after having lost the lawsuit. The only other legal way would be to assess everyone an equal amount, which we feel is grossly unfair and would result in more controversy and litigation,something we desperately want to avoid. Our plan is clean and simple.The WPA contributes up to ⅓ of the cost and we raise the remaining ⅔ from private donations. It’s the only way this will ever happen again. If this plan fails, there is no plan B. It’s over, and your water access behind your home will be no more. There will never be a WPA board willing to do what you suggest, and do another individual assessment. The only other option the canal lot owners have is to file litigation against the WPA for failing to maintain the canals. That would be a ridiculous course of action for many reasons. It would be incredibly expensive and the money needed to pay for attorneys would need to be privately raised. Why not spend that money on dredging??? It would be an uphill battle that would take years to finish. We would need to prove the WPA has an obligation to maintain the canals.Our covenants are weak, judges are lazy, and attorneys are greedy. It is simply not a risk I would be willing to take. All the while the canals would be filling in every day and the permit closer to expiring. That time and those resources could be better spent on actual dredging. Our plan gets this done in 18 months and give us 10-15 years of usable enjoyment out of the canals. We have no interest in spending countless dollars and years of fighting.
I respect you and what you do with your blog, even if I disagree with its content. Debate can be a healthy thing and I believe that is how you find the middle ground and actually get things accomplished. I believe that is what we have done here. We have listened to every conceivable opinion on dredging and drawn on those opinions in coming up with this plan. This is the best we can do.You have stated in your blog that you agree in principal with our plan, just not the private fundraising aspect. As someone that served on the WPA board during the 2009 dredging, I shouldn't have to tell you how difficult this issue can be. We have been openly discussing canal dredging for about 6 months now and haven't really heard any negative feedback from the residents most staunchly opposed to it last time. Most canal lot owners are also supportive and appreciative of our efforts. The Board of Directors is supportive. That indicates to us that we have found that middle ground that might just allow us to accomplish our goals without the controversies of the past.
I appreciate you allowing us to use your forum to present our point of view. We realize it is unlikely that we will ever have your support and we accept that. We are not bad people. We are not the manipulative, secretive, incompetent scoundrels you sometimes suggest we are.You seem to have a vendetta against us and our ideas but I ask you, what is your plan? What are you doing for canal lot owners? You often speak of our “governing documents” but our covenants are so weak and poorly written and outdated. Do you really think an individual assessment is going to happen? Do you think this course of action you are on is constructive? You are trying to destroy our efforts and the efforts of those that have worked tirelessly and donated tens of thousands of dollars to obtain the permit. And you seem hell bent on simply being “right”. What do you think you accomplish if you can suppress our efforts? The permit expires in 2018 and then it's over. Done! It will never be dredged again if we fail. We have a very realistic chance at accomplishing our goal. If you wish not to contribute to our efforts we certainly respect your decision. There are certain realities canal lot owners must accept. This plan is as close to perfect as we will ever get concerning dredging and we are united and as determined as ever to get this done. You will certainly continue to trash our efforts,but for every hour you work to hurt us, we will work 10 for the betterment of the canal community and Wedgefield as a whole.
I will never understand your way of thinking, but I will respect your right to voice your opinion. Thank you for allowing me to voice mine.
For the water amenities committee,
Adam Anderson
