It is time to stand up, and let other residents know that you are concerned. Your comments, agree or not, are welcome, and will be published without your name. Send your emails to:
wedgefieldexaminerthe@yahoo.com.
The Wedgefield Examiner will get down to the business of this post. I've been on vacation for 9 days. When I settled down to the business of the blog, I went to "STATS" to see what people were reading. The back page of the blog indicated 5 older articles had been reviewed. I went back and read each of the five. The number of people who had reviewed 3 of the articles was exactly the same - 5 readers on each of these older articles. Was this a research group or committee? I don't know, but something is up. One of the five articles had 6 readers. The last of the old articles had 4 readers. I'm going to reprint each of the articles in this posting in the order that they appeared on the blog. Maybe you can figure it out. In the mean time, since the board members don't read the blog, but seem to know what it says (someone told them), please tell those board members you talk to that readership just keeps climbing RAPIDLY.
ARTICLE 1, from 7/24/16 - 6 readers went back to review it.
TITLE: "YOUR BOARD SAYS "NO" TO OPENING THE CANAL MEETING TO ALL MEMBERS. I WON'T BE ATTENDING THEIR MEETING - CIRCUS"
HERE IS MY LETTER TO THE BOARD:
HERE IS THE BOARD'S RESPONSE:
July 23rd, 2016
Mrs. Claveloux,
I apologize for the delay in responding to your letter. I have been very busy.
I am in receipt of your letter asking for the entire membership to be invited to the meeting of the canal lot owners. This meeting is NOT an official WPA function. We are breaking no covenants, bylaws, state laws or ethics. It is for the sole purpose of the owners of canal lots to decide if they, as a group, want to pursue a maintenance dredge and to discuss among ourselves what will be needed from this group to move the project forward. If the interest in the project among canal lot owners is low, then it all becomes a moot point. There is no reason to get the entire WPA involved until we can first discuss the project among the people it will effect the most. I find it odd that you would be in such strong opposition to a meeting like this because while you were a board member I personally recall attending several similar “private” canal lot meetings prior to the 2009 dredging. I would ask that you reserve criticism of the meeting until you have heard the content.
Thank you for your interest and concern,
Community Liaison
Adam Anderson
First Mr. Anderson, you don't have your facts straight. I filled a board seat, after 6 board members resigned, and I was appointed to the board. My first board meeting was December 2008. My final board meeting was the annual meeting in November 2009. I moved here in 2004, and almost immediately began attending canal lot owner meetings, usually in homes of canal lot owners. Unlike your meeting, those meetings were not called by a committee of the board, with the board invited, and held at the regular meeting place of the board. During that time, canal lot owners were expected to pay for the dredging permit. My husband, and I were contributors toward the expense of securing the permit. The WPA board sued, save the wet lands groups sued, etc., all trying to halt the permit. We contributed to the degree we were asked every time, we were asked, and yes we attended meetings.
Your board has a maintenance dredge permit. Your committee, composed of many from the board, and I'm told even the Legal Chair sits on the committee, have reported ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, from the board table. Board, go read your own board minutes for the last year, and note that not once, do you tell the WPA membership the committee is seeking bids, funding plans, etc. Your board during resident comments, six to eight months ago, was asked by a canal lot owner what was being done about the maintenance dredge, and your Legal Chair, said there was no interest by the canal lot owners! The board has been asked since then. It appears it was a lie, because it also appears that the committee was doing a whole lot, but the resident peons were to be kept in the dark, until this board, and this committee deemed we should know.
As to what I did, or the board I served on did in this circumstance, I'm proud to show you. The official minutes that address the lead up to dredging during my tenure on the board, are provided at the end of this article. I was the board secretary, and the community liaison. Go through the minutes. You'll note the CLEAR, VERY DEFINED information EVERY MONTH IN THE CANAL REPORTS. YOU'LL NOTE THAT THE INFORMATION MEETING WAS OPEN TO EVERY RESIDENT! YOU'LL NOTE THAT THAT BOARD INVITED NON CANAL LOT OWNERS TO SIT ON THE COMMITTEES REPEATEDLY!
What may, or may not happen to one Wedgefield lot, let alone 79 lots, is the business of every lot owner in Wedgefield, any time, and all the time! Especially now when almost EVERY lot in Wedgefield is losing it's asset - canal, or golf course. For sure, it is the business of every lot owner when the BOARD, and a COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD, won't operate in the open. Most of the 79 lot owners who are invited, have been kept in the dark, FROM THE BOARD TABLE. In any other case, when a committee of the board calls a meeting to provide information to the board, at the WPA office, it is called an OPEN MEETING, and all residents get to attend. Did our legal chair suggest you use the words NOT OFFICAL? It was announced from the board table, questioned by a non canal lot owner, and you said "NO" they couldn't attend. To keep people in line, not question, as usual this board intimidates! I'm not intimidated, I grew up being told to consider the source. This one, the board, isn't credible.
I'm not attending the meeting, I wouldn't be able to believe a word that is said! I dare to say, that the reason the meeting is so closed is because YOUR BOARD LEGAL CHAIR, has cowed the board, and committee into his thoughts on how the dredging has to be paid for, and the less presented on record the better. There is NO ruling on anything as far as dredging! Your legal chair is not credible! I'll reprint the article on how he got those REFEREE SETTLEMENTS - one was forged, traveling through 5-6 attorneys, one of which was disbarred. Your whole board, and committee forget just who your legal chair is. His support as speaker, writer, organizer of the group, and the very 3 residents who sued my board, caused him to be countersued for his actions.
You may have seen me at meetings, often held with canal people, as I, and others worked to organize The Wedgefield Civic Group (not on the board at the time). You may have seen me at meetings, because YES you were at a lot of them, when I was gathering information to write for The Wedgefield Times (not on board). You may have seen me at meetings when I was speaking with others to raise funds to pay for the countersuit. You may have seen me at meetings in homes, getting papers signed by canal lot owners - waivers for the dredging. You have water behind your house, because I and others did the work! You have no right, no fact, and no credibility to ever say what you did! The committee composed of almost half this board, is as corrupt, and abusive as the board.
HERE ARE THE MINUTES I PROMISED FROM MY TENURE ON THE BOARD. I didn't publish the August minutes on. They are at times, almost 20 pages long. RESIDENTS, go to the old website for the WPA. You can get there by searching Wedgefield Plantation Association. Once there, tap "board reports", and then select 2009, and then the month. If you read what happened word for word, AS IT HAPPENED, you'll understand how critical it was to provide complete information.
CANAL REPORT DECEMBER 2008
9. Canals-Jude Davis
On November 20, 2008, Judge Anderson of the SC Administrative Law Court found in favor of Wedgefield Plantation Association and denied the SC Environmental Law Project’s appeal of the SC Department of
Health and Environmental Control‘s decision to grant us permits to dredge our canal system. He ordered DHEC to issue Water Quality and Coastal Zone Management Consistency permits, as they proposed in 2007, thus permitting maintenance dredging of the Wedgefield canals. These documents are now in the hands of the US Army Crops of Engineers, which should issue the actual permits in 2009 after a legally required Public Notice period.
In the meantime, we expect to reactivate the dredging funding subcommittee. It will begin investigating possible sources of grants, assistance, and other funding strategies. As there are still a few unpaid bills another solicitation letter was send to canal lot owners in early December. Our thanks to those who have contributed money, time, and expertise over many years and helped us reach this important milestone.
We expect to hold an open informational meeting sometime in early 2009 to recap the project to date and map out what the next steps might be. It will be open to all interested Wedgefield residents.
CANAL REPORT FEB. 2009
Canal Report: Karl Gettman/ Mike Davis
On December 8, 2008, Heather Preston, Director of the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC), Division of Water Quality, issued the documents that will allow WPA to perform maintenance dredging of the Wedgefield Canal system, once published by the US Army Corps of Engineers. Attached are copies for the WPA files. Specifically included are 1)Certification in accordance with section 401 of the Clean Waters Act as amended, 2)Permit in accordance with the SC Code of Laws, 3)Construction in Navigable Waters Permit, and 4)Certification in Accordance with the Coastal Zone Management Program.
DHEC forwarded copies of these permits to the Corps office in Charleston last month and we are patiently waiting for formal issuance of the actual documents. Our Agent for the application, Bobby Riggs of Newkirk Engineering, is working with the Corps to try to
expedite the process. We understand however that a three to six month lag time is typical for routine permit issuance.
In the interim, the Canal Committee has several action items. The first is getting new firm bids for the project from interested vendors. In theory, the costs should have gone up since we got budgetary quotes in 2006. The current economic climate, lower fuel cost, and lack of business may actually result in lower bids. The second is reactivation of the “funding” sub-committee. This group’s mission is to investigate all possible funding strategies including seeking assistance from federal, state, and local agencies. We are also working with the WPA Webmaster to set up a Canal Committee sub page on the WPA website to post copies of all the important documents and Committee reports. Finally, we still are planning an open information meeting once the permits are received from the Corps of Engineers. It will recap the project to date and explore what the next steps should be and will be open to all interested Wedgefield residents.
On the legal issues, Judge Anderson of the SC Administrative Law Court issued an amended Final Order on January 22, 2009. A copy is attached for the WPA files. He modified his original order issued November 24, 2008 after the Environmental Law Project filed a motion for reconsideration. The fundamental findings were unchanged and he reaffirmed his order to DHEC to issue permits.
There are still some unpaid bills but we gratefully thank those who have contributed money, time, and expertise over many years and helped us reach this important milestone.
CANAL REPORT MARCH 2009
Canal Report: Karl Gettmann/ Mike Davis
On March 9, 2009, the US Army Corps of Engineers issued permit number 2006-03476-41V to Wedgefield Plantation Association allowing periodic maintenance dredging of our canal system over a ten-year life span. I have attached a copy for the WPA office and files. As soon as a PDF version is available, it will also be posted on the WPA website.
Specifically the permit allows for expansion of the existing previously permitted spoils site on WPA-owed property, to a capacity of approximately 151,000 cubic yards by raising the perimeter embankment by 1.5 feet. It also permits with certain conditions an immediate maintenance dredging of approximately 99,000 cubic yards, which will establish a centerline depth of 8 feet below mean low water in the main access canals and 6 feet in the finger canals. Finally, it provides for subsequent maintenance dredging of approximately 30,000 cubic yards before the permit expires on March 31, 2019.
The Canal Committee met on March 15 to discuss several agenda items. First was whether the Canal Committee mission or “charge” needs to be redefined by WPA at this time. At various times since its inception in 2001, the Canal Committee was tasked with either “getting permits”, or “getting funding”, or some variation. We agreed to draft a set of recommended or suggested specific tasks or goals for the next phase of the canal dredging project, and ask the WPA Board to put it on the April meeting agenda as “new business”.
We believe the key tasks, as outlined last month, should be to:
1) Get up-to-date budgetary-only proposals from prospective vendors, to
assess the current cost of the project
2) 3)
4)
Restart the funding subcommittee, and charge them with exploring all possible scenarios for funding maintenance dredging before the Committee makes any specific proposals to the WPA Board.
Investigate the feasibility of "differential assessment". Our governing documents in one place imply that equal assessments are required, but they are contradictory and inconsistent. This may require advice from an attorney who is expert in HOA governance issues, and possibly a clarification to the Bylaws presented for consideration and voted on at the next annual meeting.
Hold an "informational meeting" open to all Wedgefield property owners, to present and discuss what options are available and possibly agree on one or more proposed plans of action.
Second was the issue of unpaid bills. Despite generous private contributions from many canal lot owners, there is a balance owed to McNair Law firm of Charleston. We agreed to have one last “fund drive”, now that permits are in hand, to try to raise enough money to close the books on this phase of the project.
Finally, we want to thank those who have contributed not only their money, but also time, expertise, and moral support over these last eight years. Your encouragement has helped us reach this important milestone, but it is just the first step in a still long and winding road. We recognize that restoring the canals is possibly the most contentious and difficult issue WPA will face over the next few years. We also believe our overriding mission is to find a way to get the job done in a way that is acceptable to the majority of Wedgefield owners, and without further litigation or malice. We are always open to constructive ideas on how to do that and look forward continuing the quest.
APRIL CANAL REPORT 2009
Canal Report: Karl Gettmann requested Mike Davis give the report.
The WPA Canal Committee is holding an open informational meeting on Tuesday, April 28 at 7:00 PM at the WPA office. We will briefly recap the history of the project to date, outline the various steps needed to restore the canals and their associated costs, suggest several scenarios for funding the work, and most importantly solicit feedback from residents as to how to best get the job done without resorting to expensive and time wasting litigation. All interested Wedgefield residents are welcome.
In the last 30 days, the Canal Committee has gotten updated budgetary quotes from prospective contractors qualified to perform the various tasks needed to restore the Wedgefield canals. After on-site meetings with them, it is becoming apparent that there should be four distinct phases to the process:
- Topographic resurvey of spoils site, hydrographic resurvey of canals, and preparation of Bid Specs and detailed engineering drawings
- Site preparation, including restoring the old spoils basin and providing access
- Hydraulic dredging itself, with oversight and management by 3rd party
4. Post-dredging cleanup and documentation; planning for future supplemental
maintenance dredging.
Now that the needed permits are in hand, the Canal Committee would like to move on to the next phase. To that end, we respectfully ask that the WP A Board tonight take the three following actions:
1. Reaffirm the Canal Committee as a regular standing subcommittee of the Water Amenities Committee. The "charge" of this group is to continue managing the technical aspects of the canal maintenance project, such as vetting of prospective vendors, development of specific action plans for WP A to consider, coordination of funded activities, and development of a 5 to 15 year plan for the long-term maintenance of the canals.
We propose the following members: John McBride, Mike Davis, Larry McMillin, John Walton, and Ed Wozniak. We also seeking at least two additional members, ideally non- canal lot owners, who may be named in the near future
2. Establish a "Canal Funding Committee" as a new sub-committee of the Water Amenities Committee. The "charge" of this group is to investigate all possible scenarios
for funding canal dredging, including but not limited to local, state, and federal grants, differential assessment strategies, voluntary contributions, and the establishment of a waterfront sub-association, with supplemental assessment rights. When this information is in hand, the Funding Committee will coordinate with the Canal sub-committee and prepare one or more action plans for the WP A Board to consider for approval and funding.
We propose Carolyn McBride to be leader of this group, and are actively seeking two or more additional volunteers. Candidates should be Wedgefield residents in good standing, ideally with grant writing or fund raising experience.
Both of these sub-committees, as part of a regular standing WPA committee should have access to WP A office support and be reimbursed for reasonable approved expenses such as postage, office supplies, and incidentals not to exceed an amount to be set by the Board for the balance of fiscal year.
3. Fund the first phase of the canal restoration project, i.e. the topographic resurvey of the spoils site, the hydrographic resurvey of canals, and preparation of bid specifications and detailed engineering drawings immediately. Time is of the essence here; in our discussions with prospective vendors, we determined that our project might be eligible for Recovery Act (stimulus) funds if we can make it "shovel ready" in the next quarter. We have given the Board copies of proposals from prospective vendors that range from about $30,000 to $57,000. We respectfully request that tonight you approve in principle funding in an amount not to exceed a limit you set which would permit signing a contrac1 with one of these contractors within the next 30 days, after review of three or more bid proposals.
While this request is not a budgeted expense for fiscal 2009, we believe it would be a good investment in the project because of the possibility of reducing the overall cost to WP A over time. Based on our analysis of projected 2009 WPA expenses, economies to date would keep the overall WP A budget in line so a special assessment would NOT be needed and reserves would not be reduced.
Finally, we feel it imperative that WPA develop a "15 Year Plan" for the long-term maintenance of the Wedgefield canals, as recommended by the Compliance Committee Report for 2008. If we ultimately perform an initial maintenance dredging in the near future, there will be a need to establish a reserve fund for future canal maintenance. The goal would be to attain enough in reserve in 5-9 years, to fund the 2nd maintenance dredging as allowed by the current Corps of Engineers permit. It also needs to address in general terms how to accomplish future maintenance beyond the 10-year life of the permit. This does not require any formal action by the Board at this point, except to note that it is a long-term need and should be part of the charge to the Water Amenities and Canal Committees.
Larry McMillin made a motion to reaffirm the Canal Committee as a regular standing subcommittee of the Water Amenities Committee. The "charge" of this group is to
continue managing the technical aspects of the canal maintenance project, such as vetting of prospective vendors, development of specific action plans for WP A to consider, coordination of funded activities, and development of a 5 to 15 year plan for the long-term maintenance of the canals.
We propose the following members: John McBride, Mike Davis, Larry McMillin, John Walton, and Ed Wozniak. We also are seeking at least two additional members, ideally non- canal lot owners, who may be named in the near future. This motion was seconded by Madeline Claveloux. Discussion followed. Brenda Martin suggested that we included a diverse committee that includes both canal and non-canal residents, and also includes both retired and working residents. The motion passed unanimously.
Larry McMillin made a motion to establish a "Canal Funding Committee" as a new sub- committee of the Water Amenities Committee. The "charge" of this group is to investigate all possible scenarios for funding canal dredging, including but not limited to local, state, and federal grants, differential assessment strategies, voluntary contributions, and the establishment of a waterfront sub-association, with supplemental assessment rights. When this information is in hand, the Funding Committee will coordinate with the Canal sub- committee and prepare one or more action plans for the WP A Board to consider for approval and funding.
We propose Carolyn McBride to be leader of this group, and are actively seeking two or more additional volunteers. Candidates should be Wedgefield residents in good standing, ideally with grant writing or fund raising experience. This motion was seconded by Johnny Huggins, motion passed unanimously.
Larry McMillin made a motion to fund the first phase of the canal restoration project, i.e. the topographic resurvey of the spoils site, the hydrographic resurvey of canals, and preparation of bid specifications and detailed engineering drawings immediately, between $30,000 and $50,000, not to exceed $50,000.00. This motion was seconded by Johnny Huggins. Discussion followed. Brenda Martin stated that she supported this study so the community is working with facts based on a professional engineering study and can outline the scope of the dredging project accurately. The motion passed unanimously
MAY 2009 CANAL REPORT
Canal Report: Karl Gettmann requested Mike Davis give the report.
The WPA Canal Committee held a well-attended informational meeting on Tuesday, April 28 at the WPA office. A short slide presentation recapped the project to date, and outlined four proposed phases to restore the canals. It also covered preliminary cost estimates, along with some alternative funding scenarios being investigated, and ended with a lively question and answer session.
We apologize to those who had to observe from outside or could not attend the second presentation. Printed copies of the summary handout are available from Kathy at the WPA office, and copies of both the slide presentation and handout are up on the WPA website under Committee Reports-Water Amenities. As we try to build community consensus on to how to best get this difficult job done, we plan to hold similar meetings on a regular basis, and will use an appropriate larger venue as needed.
.
This month the Canal Committee also solicited sealed proposals from prospective Professional Services contractors for the phase one tasks. They were opened on May 8th by Karl Gettmann, with one other WPA Board member and the entire Committee in attendance. On May 11th the contract was awarded to The Earthworks Group of Murrells Inlet, and we held a kick-off meeting with them on May 15th to review contract details and establish a timetable. The spoil site topographic survey should begin this week.
We are still actively seeking additional volunteers. We need at least two additional members for the Canal Committee itself to help with the technical aspects of planning and supervision. The ideal candidates would be non-canal lot owners, so that we can get better input from that perspective, but we will gratefully accept anyone who is willing to pitch in, put in the hours, and help develop a workable action plan. In addition, the Funding Subcommittee is seeking two or more additional volunteers, ideally with grant writing or fund raising experience. Candidates should be Wedgefield property owners in good standing. Please contact Karl Gettmann if you would like to help with this project.
The Canal Committee appreciates the constructive feedback we have received since the information meeting. As always, we are open to your suggestions, comments, or questions.
JUNE 2009 CANAL REPORT
Canal Report: Karl Gettmann requested Mike Davis give the report.
Following the award of the Phase 1 contract and the kick-off meeting in mid May, our Engineering contractor, the Earthworks Group of Murrells Inlet, has been hard at work surveying the old spoils site adjacent to the Black River. They had to do a lot of bush hogging and clearing through 20 plus years of overgrowth to get clean sight lines across the center and around the perimeter. They set two temporary benchmarks along the north side of the landing road, which must stay in place until the project is completed; please do not disturb them.
All of the spoil site fieldwork is now completed. Their next task is to import all the measurements into the site database and begin designing the revamped basin within the permit guidelines to meet the required capacity for spoils. The preliminary drawings should be available in another week, and once approved by the Canal Committee, the topographic survey will be completed.
Earthworks also obtained the 2002 and 2006 canal system hydrographic survey data in electronic form from the previous Engineering contractor, GEL of Charleston. Those earlier surveys were paid for by voluntary contributions from canal lot owners. Earthworks’ preliminary analysis indicates that the old data, once correlated with the current survey, will be adequate to recompute the required dredge volumes and should make a new full hydrographic re-survey unnecessary. A final determination will be made next week.
Once WPA approves the drawings, Earthworks will generate a bid specification package. They will then solicit proposals from qualified contractors, and at last give us valid hard data of projected costs of spoil site preparation and dredging itself.
We are still actively seeking additional volunteers for both the Canal Committee and the Funding Subcommittee. Please contact our Chairman Karl Gettmann through the WPA office if you would like to get involved, or to submit constructive feedback, suggestions, comments, or questions.
JULY 2009 CANAL REPORT
Canal Report: Karl Gettmann requested Mike Davis give the report.
Since the last report in June, our Engineering contractor, the Earthworks Group of Murrells Inlet, completed the design for the rework of the old spoils site, which the Canal Committee approved after some minor changes. The design meets the capacity requirement of the US Army Corps of Engineers Permit with about a 10% surplus to allow for settling of the perimeter dike over time. It also includes a clever water quality baffle in the design, which should help meet or exceed agency standards for turbidity in the water returned to the environment.
Earthworks validated and successfully imported data from the 2002-2006 GEL hydrographic surveys into their drawing package, which eliminated the need for a new survey. This will substantially reduce the final bill for their contracted phase one services.
Last week Earthworks issued bid specifications packages for both the site work and the dredging work itself to over one dozen prospective contractors. The sealed bid reply date is in early August, and will provide the Canal and Funding Committees specific projected costs of spoil site preparation and dredging itself to work with. Once WPA and the Canal Committee have opened bids, they will make a summary available to interested residents.
The Funding Subcommittee has been hard at work seeking outside funding but recent negative publicity about Wedgefield is proving to be a major obstacle. Once they have the firm cost quotes, additional specific requests for aid will be made. They are also analyzing various funding strategies and should make a preliminary report to WPA with one or more action plans to evaluate and consider before the August Board Meeting.
We still need additional volunteers for both the Canal Committee and the Funding Subcommittee. The most important and difficult task of finding a way to fund restoration of the canals that the majority of our fellow residents can accept is now on the table. Please contact our Chairman Karl Gettmann through the WPA office if you would like to get involved, or to submit constructive feedback, suggestions, comments, or questions.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
ARTICLE 2, from 1/18, 2012 - 5 readers went back to review it.
TITLE: "RESIDENT JUDE DAVIS SPEAKS AT THE DECEMBER 17 WPA BOARD MEETING REGARDING THE "SETTLED" CANAL LAWSUIT"
BACKGROUND
Resident Jude Davis spoke at the WPA monthly Board Meeting last evening. She has provided The Wedgefield Examiner a copy of her presentation, which is provided below. Her presentation provides information to the Board and residents on the settled dredging lawsuit brought by Zieske, Thomas, and Wilson.
George Wilson spoke on the same subject during the December Board Meeting. You can read his transcribed presentation in the report titled, "WILSON INSTRUCTS THE BOARD ON THEIR FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY AS IT RELATES TO THE "SETTLED" LAW SUIT", at this site.
HERE IS JUDE DAVIS' PRESENTATION:
-------------------------
"Thank you for letting me speak tonight. I hope to clear up some of the misconceptions that seem to be floating around the Plantation. The lawsuit filed in October, 2009 by Carol Zieske, Fred Thomas, and George Wilson was DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE on November 16, 2011 by order of Judge Larry Hyman.
I have provided each of you with a copy of the signed order and would like to call your attention to a few salient points. I have highlighted and numbered each point.
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE A dismissal with prejudice is dismissal of a case on merits after adjudication. The plaintiff is barred from bringing an action on the same claim. Dismissal with prejudice is a final judgement. Since Carol, Fred and George brought this case 'on behalf of Wedgefield Plantation Association,' this means that all members of WPA are barred from bringing any other suit using the information presented in this case. This dismissal precludes additional supplemental lawsuits.
The second point that I would like to call your attention to is on page two.
2. "The State, Plaintiffs, and other named Defendants acknowledge that this order is no way
addresses any rights, duties or obligations of the Board of Directors for Wedgefield
Plantation Association regarding, the maintenance, dredging, or any other activity
pertaining to the canal and, therefore, this order in no way addresses or rules upon those
rights, duties, or obligations."
The defendants in this suit pushed to resolve this canal issue once and for all. We wanted to have the court rule on responsibility. Our lawyer, Mike Smith, approached Turner Perrow, the plaintiffs' lawyer about resolving, once and for all, the canal issues. Mike was prepared to argue on behalf of the defendants that we had a responsibility to maintain the canals, however, Turner informed Mike that his clients 'were not interested in going there.' Why not? After two years, they weren't interested in pursuing the charges THEY brought.
And finally, look at page three.
3. "The Defendants specifically deny any wrongdoing associated with the votes for the
dredging of the canals, the financing of the canals and the collection of assessments
from the members of the Wedgefield Plantation Association and for other acts allegedly
performed by these defendants and more fully described in the complaint and, therefore,
this Order, in no way, finds or establishes any wrongdoing by the Defendants."
According to THIS ORDER, the defendants did no wrong. This includes the assessments and the bank loan. Collect the supplemental assessments without worry of legal prosecution. Carol, Fred and George AGREED on behalf of Wedgefield Plantation that there was no wrong doing.
I heard George say that the Board had started legal proceedings against the bank. I do not know if Mr. Moody had a copy of this order before he made inquiries about possible action, but, hopefully, he has stopped any inquiries. When did the Board vote to sue the bank? I seem to have missed that action. The bank DID do their homework. At the August, 2009 Board of Directors Meeting, the Funding Committee recommended a plan to finance the dredging including the terms of the loan and the supplemental assessments. (This was one of four plans that the Funding Committee presented to the entire Board the night before and was the one that the Board felt was the most reasonable). According to the written minutes of this meeting, the entire Board VOTED to accept this plan by a vote of 7-2. Fred is yelling about wanting his money back. He needed to think about that before he signed the dismissal order. He lost his, and the WPA's, opportunity.
The two checks for $7500 from the insurance company were a cheap way for them to remove themselves from this suit, not an admission of the merits. They are no longer involved with Wedgefield.
The original suit was dismissed, yet the counter suit remains. As some of you have come to realize, unsubstantiated charges of wrongdoing are actionable in a court of law."
PLEASE NOTE: I have retyped Jude Davis' presentation. If there are typing errors, poor alignment, etc. they are my deficiencies, not hers.
-------------------------
Jude Davis provided each Board Member with a copy of the final order. She also provided one to The Wedgefield Examiner. The blog program will only accept pictures of documents or jigs. I have typed the portions of the doucment that she has numbered or highlighted. The document is on file here and should be in the WPA office. Here they are:
# 1. "ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE OF PLAINTIFFS' CLAIMS"
# 2. "The State, Plaintiffs and other named Defendants acknowledge that this Order in no way
addresses any rights, duties or obligations of the Board of Directors for Wedgefield
Plantation Association regarding the maintenance, dredging or any other activity
pertaining to the canals and, therefore, this Order, in no way addresses or rules upon
those rights, duties, or obligations. "
# 3. "The Defendants specifically deny any wrongdoing associated with the votes for the
dredging of the canals and the collection of assessments from the members of the
Wedgefield Plantation Association and for any other acts allegedly performed by these
defendants and more fully described in the complaint and, therefore, this Order, in no
way, finds or establishes any such wrongdoing by the Defendants."
-------------------------
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
ARTICLE 3, from 2/20/2016 - 5 readers went back to review it.
TITLE: "MADELINE CLAVELOUX - PRESENTATION DURING THE SEPTEMBER 2016 BOARD MEETING"
Here is the presentation by myself, Madeline Claveloux, at tonight's WPA Board Meeting. Every member has a right to write the board, and request one of the two 5 minute speaker slots, available at every monthly board meeting. It is a timed presentation, and you are cut off at 5 minutes. I've done this before, and the presentation has been included in the minutes for that particular board meeting, and noted as a resident's presentation. I seriously don't know whether this board will provide the presentation in the minutes, or not - they appear to do what they want, when they want to, and if you aren't one of their favorites - they don't follow the same procedures they do for those in their favor. It is a test. Let's see what they do.
I did the best I could with 5 minutes. I've supported - documented everything I said, in previous articles. HERE IS THE PRESENTATION:
Madeline Claveloux, 168 William Screven. My presentation is: “Wedgefield Crisis – Canal & Golf Course Properties, General Maintenance, and Concerns Regarding Actions of The Board, Particularly – Legal, ARC, Water Amenities and Compliance”. I’m hearing dissatisfaction from every type of lot owner, and the statement, “This isn’t what we were told when we were buying our home, on the canals, golf course, or in the condo area.” Wedgefield is in a crisis when even the real estate listings have added the new term “buyer must verify”. Take a ride from the front entrance to every corner of Wedgefield. Would you expect anyone to pay top dollar for your property?
At the same time, our board makes broad statements, on key issues, without discussion, or vote. There is nothing in the minutes!
*From the Wedgefield Wragg: “There is currently no consideration for the WPA to take over control, operation, or purchase of either the golf course or the pool.” When did they discuss it at a meeting? You have asked for a meeting for residents to discuss the golf course situation. Your board has ignored you. Yet, there was a closed meeting held on September 12 with a prospective golf course buyer. Why the secrecy?
*From the printed handout provided at the August Canal Lot Owners Meeting: “We did this on May 12th 2016. We met with the president and vice president of the WPA to gather their ideas and support for the project.” Later:
“The WPA currently has $115,000 earmarked for dredging and by next year that number will be in the $135,000 range. Once we have our funding in place the WPA will contribute their funding earmarked for dredging and then enter into a contract to dredge the canals.” YOUR BOARD, IN A PRIVATE, UNNOTICED MEETING, ON MAY 12TH COMMITTED UP TO $135,000 OF OUR WPA FUNDS – UNRESTRICTED FUNDS, WITHOUT DISCUSSING IT AT AN OPEN BOARD MEETING, AND VOTING, FOR EACH AND EVERY MEMBER TO OBSERVE IT! Please remember this unauthorized promise to pay, as we will address it later.
· The board’s management according to our governing documents – the promise of Wedgefield, as it relates to Grounds, ARC, Compliance, and Legal – all of which impact our property values, has been appalling! Lots with weeds 5 feet tall, vehicles parked in vacant lots –the tractor, sheds placed on lots inappropriately and ARC, and Compliance ignoring complaints for over 10 months, etc. Yet, your board sits silently by, while we re-up the grounds contractor’s contract, with an increase, and your board votes to approve, while it is reported that the contractor, now knows who the boss is!
·
We’ll focus on the most egregious, the promise of the $135,000 to the canal lot owners.
Almost everyone sitting on that canal committee, and those of you willing to write checks voluntarily, forget that we’d done that before. We collected over $162,000 to secure the permit to dredge, and when we got to within 30-60 days of securing it, that board threw the canal committee off the board – shut down the process. The only ruling by a judge ever directed at permit, or dredging came then. The judge basically said that the board had promised, the canal lot owners had complied with the board’s conditions, and they needed to be allowed to continue securing the permit.
Why would you trust this board? Why would you impact the future of all of the lot owners in Wedgefield by letting them tell you that there is no other way? I’ve checked the Legal, and Water Amenities Reports from 2013 through today, and there is no vote on the $135,000, no mention of any dredging. Every time there has been a dredging, there has been a lawsuit. Most sitting at the board table today, has either contributed to one side or the other in the last dredging lawsuits, or been deposed. During the last lawsuit depositions, the opposing side carried in a big notebook that contained minutes from meetings where there were votes, information provided at information meetings to all residents, WPA written legal opinions, copies of checks written to WPA attorneys, etc. Today, if the WPA was sued regarding the $135,000, the notebook would be empty, and you would be back to square one. This time the people who are urging you to do the wrong thing for Wedgefield aren’t looking out for anyone, at a time when all of Wedgefield is in trouble, and your board doesn’t have a legal leg to stand on. If you have any questions, or comments, you can email me: Wedgefieldexaminerthe@yahoo.com, and I’ll be happy to answer them.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
ARTICLE 4, from 12/7/16 - 5 readers went back to review it.
TITLE: "WEDGEFIELD PLANTATION WATCH IS ON FACEBOOK - SHOULDN'T THIS BE A WAKE UP CALL TO THE WPA BOARD?"
Last night when I went to Facebook to see what family and friends were posting, Wedgefield Plantation Watch came up, and I joined. This morning, they already have 111 members. THANK YOU, to the Wedgefield person, or persons who started this effort!
I won't begin to say that my opinion here, is that of the individuals who started the Facebook effort. The WPA board has left the members - association, with so many cracks, caverns, and sink holes in their governance, that we have reached massive earthquake status! Looks board, like residents - call it what they want, have decided to take matters into their own hands, and get the word out to help each other, when our safety is concerned. After all, your board has a website with dial up connection (never was that way before), where they claim that it takes too long to download items required by our governing documents, because it suits their closed - "we'll tell you what we think you need to know, if we think you need to know, when if ever - we think you need to know, governance."
This board has let the appearance of our once beautiful community become so rag tag, so disregarded by potential buyers, visitors - including those who may be preparing to rob us, that one of our suspicious male visitors last weekend, finding no one home, stood out in the middle of one of our streets, and urinated on Wedgefield!
The Wedgefield Examiner has had over 150 visits to the blog in less than 48 hours, as we've posted resident emails about the suspicious visitors to Wedgefield. Residents are looking for answers everywhere but to our board, because they could appear not to care, as board members move through their special projects, hidden agendas, and yes, cover ups. Beware, those who established the Facebook site, if your board becomes unhappy they organize a group of their followers to attack you publicly at the end of a board meeting, as they did the Wedgefield Examiner about a year and a half ago. Yes, they had a staged prominent resident stand up and talk about that deplorable blog. There was fist pumping, and statements from the floor that it must go. Get a tough skin. Don't shrink - stand tall, and tell them as I did, "the blog would go away, there would be no need, when they did what they were suppose to do - legally, ethically, in the best interests of Wedgefield - openly, and honestly."
Good luck to the Facebook group! Thank you.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
ARTICLE 5, from 1/27/16 - 4 readers went back to review it.
TITLE: "FROM THE SUN NEWS - JANUARY 27, 2017
Wedgefield Plantation’s new owner seeking buyer, assessing other options
The owner of Wedgefield Plantation Country Club in Georgetown continues to seek a buyer for the closed golf course and its many affiliated amenities as it continues to assess its options with the property.
Paramont Capital of Phoenix, Ariz., acquired Wedgefield and two other Grand Strand properties late last year after foreclosing on a defaulted loan to Wedgefield’s former owner, Ray Watts, a real estate developer and owner of Apex Homes who splits time between the areas of Charlotte, N.C., and the Strand.
According to Gary Roberts, who is involved in Wedgefield as vice president of business development for Coldwell Banker Chicora Real Estate, one sales contract for Wedgefield lapsed in the past two weeks and was not extended, and negotiations have begun with a new potential buyer.
Roberts said the lapsed contract involved a local builder and architect, along with an additional investor.
“We’re looking to sell for sure. We’re looking at all options right now,” said Paramont chief financial officer Kevin Wolfe. “We’re kind of testing the waters to see what’s out there and looking at all options. No decisions have been made.”
WE’RE LOOKING TO SELL FOR SURE. WE’RE LOOKING AT ALL OPTIONS RIGHT NOW. WE’RE KIND OF TESTING THE WATERS TO SEE WHAT’S OUT THERE AND LOOKING AT ALL OPTIONS. NO DECISIONS HAVE BEEN MADE.
Paramont Capital chief financial officer Kevin Wolfe
In addition to about 175 acres at Wedgefield, Paramont also acquired through foreclosure about 70 acres at Island Green Country Club in Myrtle Beach that formerly comprised the Dogwood nine, which closed in 2005 to drop the number of holes at Island Green from 27 to 18, and some property at the Sun Colony multifamily housing development near Colonial Charters Golf Club off S.C. 9 in Longs. The Island Green property is zoned for single-family homes.
“It’s tough to say what we’ll do until we complete our due diligence and see what we have in all these locations,” Wolfe said. “It’s the same status on all three.”
Wedgefield’s golf course has been closed since June when Watts said business was too slow in the summer to warrant continued operation. He said he hoped to reopen in the fall, but the course has yet to reopen and is now in disrepair, as there has been no upkeep for several months and damage including downed trees remains from Hurricane Matthew.
Another course Watts owned and closed in June, Island Green Country Club, also remains closed and has been foreclosed on by its lender.
Redevelopment options at Wedgefield are limited. It is part of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) that requires much of the property to remain green space, though not necessarily a golf course. Extensive redevelopment would require rezoning. “We are aware there are development restrictions there,” Wolfe said.
Watts purchased Wedgefield in December 2013 from the Marlowe family, which had acquired it out of bankruptcy.
Wedgefield is a 7,034-yard Porter Gibson and Bob Toski design that opened in 1972 on the site of an old rice plantation. Watts' purchase included a manor house, guest cottage, several buildings including one that contains a snack bar and another that houses the golf pro shop, a swimming pool, maintenance barn, restaurant that seats more than 100, and two tennis courts.
Watts renovated the Manor House but it has been closed since June, and the golf course would require investment before it reopens.
Jacky Walton, president of the Wedgefield Plantation Association of homeowners, said he and several residents have been cutting grass, weeds and bushes on parts of the course to “keep things in a little bit better manner than what they had been at one time,” and residents cleaned up Wedgefield’s entrance following Hurricane Matthew.
“We would still like to see it operated as a golf course from the standpoint of beautification and recreation, that’s what we keep hoping for,” said Walton, who estimates the HOA encompasses about 370 homes, including 69 condos.
WE WOULD STILL LIKE TO SEE IT OPERATED AS A GOLF COURSE FROM THE STANDPOINT OF BEAUTIFICATION AND RECREATION, THAT’S WHAT WE KEEP HOPING FOR.
Wedgefield Plantation Association president Jacky Walton
Walton doesn’t know what support the golf course would receive from residents if it were to reopen. “It goes back to whoever is looking into purchasing it and what they can actually offer the residents,” he said. “The marketing side is what will convince the residents – if they will offer some type of a package.”
Roberts’ father is a Georgetown resident and the two have regularly played Wedgefield for many years.
“I’d love to see somebody take it over and put money back into it and bring it back as a member course and get the members back involved the property,” Roberts said. “We need the local community to support it. The [Georgetown County] planning commission, property owners, HOA and county council – if they all work together we can save Wedgefield, in some form.”
