WE SHOULD WANT HONESTY ON ALL OF OUR WPA BOARD DEALINGS, MOST IMPORTANTLY ON MAJOR EXPENSES LIKE UP TO $135,000 FOR THE TOM FOOLERY OF THE LAST CANAL DREDGING!
***************************************************
Do you have information, or an opinion - agree, or not, you can email The Wedgefield Examiner at wedgefieldexaminerthe@yahoo.com. We'll remove your name to protect the innocent, and publish it. P.S. If you would like your name published, please note that on your email, otherwise we leave your name out.
****************************************************************************
Residents, first sometimes a little research brings a point forward at an opportune time. I was preparing my points and back up detail for the article I promised early this morning on "I'm not inclined to pay", when I came across the article printed below in 2012, and it made me stop, read, and bring it to your attention. The article contains actual emails from a canal lot owner to the concerned citizens - the group organized by Zieske, Thomas, and Wilson, promoted by Garrison, to sue the board as a board, and as individuals.
Yes, as far back as 2012 the efforts to begin planning for this maintenance dredge coming our way soon, as ill legal as it is (according to the governing documents) using the canal reserve fund not included in the original Reserve Study, etc., was going on way back then. I repost it today, because you've been told that there was, or is no opposition to this plan. Look at the emails, the circulation to over 50 concerned citizen members at the time, and note they don't even want the canal lot owners to form a regime of their own, and they are warning about what ideas it might give the golf course lot owners. Read the article and the emails. Who was the mastermind on the board included then, and now? Garrison. Look at who will follow each other down the tangled hole of deception - many for years - the current canal lot owner board members - Anderson, Johnson, Walton (not prez), McMillin, then add the other current board members, who each get their favored projects done - allowed by each other, in order to get their projects through with poor bidding process, money moved here, and there like the project for trees cut on private canal lots, paid at this late date out of depleted emergency funds!
Canal lot owners, you have blindly followed without question for your board, no matter how it looked. You didn't mind that 4 board members - your canal committee, plus Garrison held a meeting for "canal lot owners only", against the governing documents, and accepted the offer from a board of up to $135,000 in WPA funds - from a reserve that wasn't established in the reserve study, without a vote from the board table and acted on it, by contributing your $400 toward the engineering study. What did Garrison tell canal lot owners from the board table before that meeting in 2016? He put fear in you by saying that in 2015 there was a proposed by-law amendment that stated the equivalent of "no WPA funds would ever be spent again on dredging". He went on to inform that as written it didn't pass the legal test of the attorney, but lesson learned, they now knew how to write it for proposal in 2016. Then he makes himself the hero by telling you that he had talked to that person, and they will hold off for now, but aren't you fortunate????? Of course, he kept the concerned citizen dogs down, because he is there connection to their plan - one last dredging, with no plans for the canals ever again, and you've bought it, and he's been working on this plan since the lawsuit!
Along the way, you've got Anderson hammering at me in writing telling me this is the best plan, and no one objects to it, like the last time. I ask him to show me where the board held the meetings to get that consensus, and he claims it has been open all along. I provide you all the minutes from all meetings during that time, and there are none, because they never had open consensus but these opposers. Of course not, because it appears Garrison keeps telling them - those underground opposed that he's got it under control. McMillin runs around telling people it will be the best dredge ever - and yet, he let the spoil site go to neglect - won't tell us why, and now we have a damaged spoil site, and you don't have questions. The duplicity, and illegality that would rule out common sense by board members is not a care. The neglect of governance, and the physical appearance has gone to hell here with no care, just to get this plan of Garrison and concerned citizen co-horts implemented. So, board member Anderson here is what has really been happening.
Enough said.
Enough said.
HERE IS THE REPOSTED ARTICLE FROM 2012:
Friday, November 30, 2012
THIS EMAIL FROM A CANAL LOT OWNER, DISTRIBUTED TO THE CONCERNED CITIZENS, BEGS THE QUESTION - WHO IS SUPPORTING THIS COHESIVE BOARD'S CANAL PLANS?
The following was written by a canal lot owner and sent to Ms.Z to be forwarded to an extensive Concerned Citizen email list (Their email addresses have been removed to protect their email accounts). It begs the question, "who is the board counting on to support the development of a sub association?" Even after the writer's three heroes sued the board they settled the suit in behalf of all those they claimed they sued in be half of, including the writer. Your board stated they were trying to make everyone happy. How are they doing? Looks like no one is supporting their ideas and they need to get back to governing in the best interests of Wedgefield Plantation Association. Those board members who like to call this mess cohesive, while following the lead of one, are shown to have no followers, need to stand up and govern, question, research, and raise their hands and vote in the best interests of our community. Those re-elected in our recent election may not have been re-elected for their performance, but their blind following of one board member. ( NOTE ADDED AUG. 29, 2017 - THEN AND NOW, THAT BOARD MEMBER IS GARRISON) Will the board now tell us that they are in the process of calling the State to do the maintenance dredging? Back to square one and THE CLOCK IS TICKING DOWN ON THE PERMIT THE CANAL LOT OWNERS PAID OVER $160,000 FOR. Your board appears to have been delaying, dragging this ridiculous plan out for months to speed the clock and run the permit out.
It is also important to note that this email was sent to the resident member of the Legal Committee. Perhaps it went to our legal chair. I say perhaps, because some of the email addresses hide their owner's identity. I've asked repeatedly why we have members on the legal committee who were involved in sabotaging the collection of assessments, by writing letters to every resident suggesting they put their assessments in an escrow account. Is this just a misguided attempt by some on your board to deny any attempt at canal maintenance?
This survey took months. No date to return, no place for the canal lot owners to sign, no return self addressed stamped envelope, and now the writer of the email notes that the board didn't even bother to sign this half baked document.
It is also important to note that this email was sent to the resident member of the Legal Committee. Perhaps it went to our legal chair. I say perhaps, because some of the email addresses hide their owner's identity. I've asked repeatedly why we have members on the legal committee who were involved in sabotaging the collection of assessments, by writing letters to every resident suggesting they put their assessments in an escrow account. Is this just a misguided attempt by some on your board to deny any attempt at canal maintenance?
This survey took months. No date to return, no place for the canal lot owners to sign, no return self addressed stamped envelope, and now the writer of the email notes that the board didn't even bother to sign this half baked document.
From:
(Removed Name)
To:
wedgefieldexaminer@yahoo.com
FYI
Subject: Re: NO ONE should pay for State's canals AGAIN......................
Hi Everyone,
SCROLL TO BELOW THIS E FOR MY PREVIOUS E AND COPY OF LETTER ON WPA STATIONERY.
This is proposed to be a by-law amendment to be put up for vote at the annual meeting, so EVERYONE will have the ability to defeat it.
Why is the Board continuing to push for ANYONE to pay for more dredging. How responsible is that! Please encourage everyone you know to send a CLEAR MESSAGE TO THE BOARD THIS TIME!
Want the State's canals dredged again? Apply for State and Federal funding as originally presented to the community before the financing blunder. (Name removed)
-----Original Message-----
From: (Removed Canal Lot Owner Name To Protect Writer's Identity)
To: (Removed Z's email address to protect their email account)
Sent: Thu, Nov 22, 2012 9:38 pm
Subject: NO ONE should pay for State's canals AGAIN......................
Hi Carol,
Please pass this E onto the members of your mailing list and anyone else, with my permission.
I received this letter, below and attached, that suggests canal owners should form their own sub-association to pay for future dredging with a one time handout from the WPA. Don't fall for this. Don't allow the creators of this unsigned letter MAKE YOU THINK THERE ARE ONLY TWO CHOICES ABOUT THESE CANALS ----ANOTHER OPTION IS NO SUB ASSOCIATION, NO FUTURE DREDGING AT OUR EXPENSE, NO PAYING THE STATE'S BILL FOR MAINTAINING THE STATE'S PROPERTY.
To even suggest that canal maintenance should be included in our by-laws as part of individual assessments would then have placed maintenance of the State's canals on our shoulders. Why was that proposed amendment even fostered by the Board? And didn't the resulting defeat of the proposed amendment send a message? Why is the Board stilll pushing for who should bear the expense of more dredging?
DIDN'T THE BOARD GET THE MESSAGE, LOUD AND CLEAR, THAT THE FIRST DREDGING AND EXPENSE WAS OVERWHELMINGLY OPPOSED AND UNPOPULAR? Too bad they didn't solicit community opinions first before plunging the community in debt and then billing the residents for the Board's premature actions.
I suggest that NO ONE should be stuck with this again, and especially not JUST canal LOT owners, NOR ANY LOT OWNERS. ASK THESTATE TO PAY FOR THEIR OWN DREDGING, NOT THIS COMMUNITY, OR ANY ONE PART OF IT, AGAIN.
Carol Zieski, George Wilson and Fred Thomas fought for everyone to PROVE, IN COURT, BY THE STATE'S OWN ATTORNEY, THAT THE STATE OWNS THE CANALS. THREE PEOPLE FOUGHT TO PREVENT ANY OF US FROM PAYING FOR DREDGING AGAIN!
The FIRST DREDGING AND FINANCING FIASCO was FORCED on everyone, shoved down our throats was the best description, by the actions of two individuals without the required meeting and approval of the Board of Directors (there was no notice of meeting to some board members and there is NO RECORD of any such meeting !!) and MORE IMPORTANTLY WITHOUT FIRST LEGALLY DETERMINING THE OWNERSHIP OF THE CANALS.
What next? Golf course lot owners forming a sub-association to take over maintenance of the golf course in the event of the golf course owner's bankruptcy?? Why not? The community doesn't own the golf course either, but if people are forced to maintain State property that the community doesn't own, why not the golf course, too? Does this remind anyone how they felt when the course was in bankruptcy and bordering lot owners were extremely concerned about the future and values of their properties?
Why didn't the Board get a million dollar loan to save the golf course lot owners? Why didn't the Board do anything to maintain the golf course when it was in bankruptcy? They didn't because the community DOESN'T OWN THE GOLF COURSE, JUST AS THE COMMUNITY DOESN'T OWN THE CANALS.
I urge anyone who received the undated, unsigned letter to use good common sense and NOT SUPPORT ANY FURTHER EFFORTS TO FORCE ANYONE IN THIS COMMUNITY TO PAY THE STATE'S BILLS. NO CANAL SUB-ASSOCIATION, NO OTHER SUB-ASSOCIATIONS !!(Removed Canal Lot Owner's Name and email address)
