***************************************************
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.
***************************************************************************
This article was prompted by statistics that should concern the board. Your board has left you no access to fact. Their minutes when published were sanitized - cleared of anything that would reflect their true business - not in your best interests. That was not enough to hide. One and a half years ago they removed the official tapes of the WPA board meetings. Recently, they removed minutes and financial reports from our WPA website. Why? One can only guess that they are afraid, rather then proud of their actions. They never involved you because any observer of their actions would realize that they make all of their major decisions outside the board room, and just play at looking official at meetings - now they are hiding that. What are they afraid of?
I follow the blog through the back pages available to me as editor. Today I observed that 46 people had read a April 26, 2017 article. (Please note: for the second day in a row, over 100 people - total of 200 over two days, had read a September 13, 2017 article. I reported on that today.) I went to the April 26, 2017 article to see what it was all about. Earlier in April I had written a letter to the board. The April 26th article contained a response to that letter. Later I wrote an article containing my response to the board's response. What was this all about? I've provided all three articles below. If you live on the golf course, my concern was all about you. Recently, and over the last year, this board has done a lot of illegal things - benefits to canal lot owners, at our expense, and against our governing documents. I'm a canal lot owner. I want the canals dredged. I'd pay whatever it costs, as long as it is done legally. I've gone on the record many times letting the Wedgefield world know that I won't participate. Golf course, condo, and canal lot owners, our Wedgefield is deteriorating and house values decreasing, I want Wedgefield to be saved in every corner of our community - legally, ethically, out in the open, according to our governing documents.
In April 2017, I was concerned because your board was going to conduct a survey of SOME - NOT ALL property owners to determine if residents wanted to consider the county buying the golf course. I couldn't live with the travesty of SOME - NOT ALL, having a say. So we begin to follow the saga.
FIRST STATS FROM THE BLOG'S EDITOR INFORMATION BACK PAGE:
Posts
********************************************************************************
WE START WITH MY LETTER TO THE BOARD:
April 24, 2017
April 24, 2017
TO: WPA BOARD
FROM: Madeline Y. Claveloux
RE: RESIDENT OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR FIRST HAND FROM
BRIAN TUCKER, DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
FOR GEORGETOWN COUNTY
CC: The Wedgefield Examiner, undisclosed group of residents
organized to survey every member on the possible
purchase of the Wedgefield Golf Course by the county
NOTE: Please distribute to the entire board, and place a copy in the correspondence file.
There is obvious interest by the membership regarding the appearance of the Wedgefield Plantation Golf course, and the possible purchase of the course by the county. I, and many other residents would like direct information from a county representative, who would answer our questions with first hand information, provided directly from the source. Additionally, residents are concerned for a number of reasons, about how the board intends to survey, and petition the community for the county. Basically, we all want first hand information, and we want every member surveyed.
Immediately following the April 28th WPA Board Meeting, there were over 1,000 visits to The Wedgefield Examiner, in just a little over 24 hours. Additionally, since then the volume of visits, even on the weekend, has exceeded 100 visits per day, and residents are writing letters to the blog about the potential purchase almost daily, and they are being published. While the board may not like, or wish to acknowledge the blog, it appears that members are turning to it as a vehicle to both get, and put out information. Several residents have contacted me, and I have met with them in small groups, and they want to move forward with a plan to see that we get first hand information, and that every member is surveyed.
To date, I’ve spoken to Brian Tucker, and he has agreed that if a group of residents would like to hear from him, that he is willing to speak to them. The group has suggested that we develop a mailing to every member that would include a cover letter indicating a date time, and place of meeting, and a prepaid post card addressed to Brian Tucker, detailed with a “yes” or “no” on the potential purchase by the county, a place to indicate the # of lots owned by the member, and a signature line. The group is working on the mailing list now, and yes, we have recruited promise of donation of funds for mailing, printing, etc. The overriding question throughout our work has been, “why isn’t our board promoting this kind of open communication, and surveying on an issue that is so important to so many of us.”
This morning, I touched base with some of the people working on the project, and agreed to contact the board, present the fact that Mr. Tucker is willing to meet Wedgefield residents, and ask the board if they would consider taking over notifying every member of a date, and time to hear Mr. Tucker, and at the same time provide a survey tool to every member. Are you willing to do this to unify the sharing of information with every member, and seek the opinion to be shared with the county, from every member? Wouldn’t it be beneficial to the board, all members, in unification and providing answers to the county?
Please respond. We’ll continue our work if we must and make our decisions if we must. Shouldn’t we all be working together for Wedgefield?
******************************************************************************WE NOW PUBLISH THE BOARD RESPONSE THAT 46 PEOPLE WENT TO REVIEW TODAY:
BOARD COMMUNITY LIAISON, ANDERSON REPONDS TO MADELINE Y CLAVELOUX EMAIL REGARDING THE SURVEY/ PETITION FOR THE POSSIBLE PURCHASE OF THE GOLF COURSE
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
First, I thank board community liaison, Anderson for his timely response. HERE IS HIS LETTER
Mrs. Claveloux,
I will attempt to answer your questions as best I can.
There is obvious interest by the membership regarding the appearance of the Wedgefield Plantation Golf course, and the possible purchase of the course by the county. I, and many other residents would like direct information from a county representative, who would answer our questions with first hand information, provided directly from the source. Additionally, residents are concerned for a number of reasons, about how the board intends to survey, and petition the community for the county. Basically, we all want first hand information, and we want every member surveyed.
The board is very concerned about these issues as well. That is why Bob and Jacky attended the meeting with the county. That is why the petition is being prepared and a committee is being assembled to gather signatures. The idea is to see how much support there is for the general idea of the county buying the course. Details are scarce because they are unknown. The county is not in a position to give specifics until they know if the residents are even interested in this as a concept. That is all the survey is. As far as surveying every single member, that is logistically impossible.
Immediately following the April 28th WPA Board Meeting, there were over 1,000 visits to The Wedgefield Examiner, in just a little over 24 hours. Additionally, since then the volume of visits, even on the weekend, has exceeded 100 visits per day, and residents are writing letters to the blog about the potential purchase almost daily, and they are being published. While the board may not like, or wish to acknowledge the blog, it appears that members are turning to it as a vehicle to both get, and put out information. Several residents have contacted me, and I have met with them in small groups, and they want to move forward with a plan to see that we get first hand information, and that every member is surveyed.
To date, I’ve spoken to Brian Tucker, and he has agreed that if a group of residents would like to hear from him, that he is willing to speak to them. The group has suggested that we develop a mailing to every member that would include a cover letter indicating a date time, and place of meeting, and a prepaid post card addressed to Brian Tucker, detailed with a “yes” or “no” on the potential purchase by the county, a place to indicate the # of lots owned by the member, and a signature line. The group is working on the mailing list now, and yes, we have recruited promise of donation of funds for mailing, printing, etc. The overriding question throughout our work has been, “why isn’t our board promoting this kind of open communication, and surveying on an issue that is so important to so many of us.”
I would suggest that you and your group contact the office and join the committee already in place and discuss your ideas openly with the committee. We don't need two petitions going around. That would only create confusion.
This morning, I touched base with some of the people working on the project, and agreed to contact the board, present the fact that Mr. Tucker is willing to meet Wedgefield residents, and ask the board if they would consider taking over notifying every member of a date, and time to hear Mr. Tucker, and at the same time provide a survey tool to every member. Are you willing to do this to unify the sharing of information with every member, and seek the opinion to be shared with the county, from every member? Wouldn’t it be beneficial to the board, all members, in unification and providing answers to the county?
I feel the original idea was to do the petition first to see if the “concept” is something a large number of residents are open to and THEN have a meeting with Mr. Tucker. The petition spelled out the generalities of the concept. I am not personally opposed to anything that is a reasonable idea. Some of your ideas here seem good. Again, I would recommend you join the committee already in place and work with them to incorporate your ideas into what is already being prepared.
Please respond. We’ll continue our work if we must and make our decisions if we must. Shouldn’t we all be working together for Wedgefield?
We are not opposed to anything. We want to see the golf course re-opened as much as anyone else. We recognize there is a void of concrete information on this issue. It is the same for us. There are rumours all the time about potential buyers but nothing we can substantiate. Do you really want us spreading rumours? We can’t and won’t tell you anything we don't know to be a fact, nor would we withhold anything we know to be true. This concept of a county purchase is going to be a long drawn out ordeal. There is nothing we can really do about that. All the while the course is still for sale. It could be purchased at any time by another party. All of this is beyond our control.
I couldn't agree more that we need to work together. And that usually means compromise. I will already assume one of your responses to this letter will be that you cannot work with the existing committee because of its chairperson. To my knowledge Mr. Armistead volunteered to head this effort up. To refuse to work with his committee over a 10 year old disagreement on a completely different issue isn't indicative of a “let's all work together for Wedgefield” attitude. I will guarantee you he be willing to work with you and hear your ideas. So let's ALL put aside our differences and see if we can find some common ground on perhaps the most important issue Wedgefield will ever face.
Adam Anderson
Community Liaison
***************************************************************************
WE NOW GO TO MY RESPONSE TO THE BOARD RESPONSE:
RESIDENT MADELINE Y. CLAVELOUX RESPONDS TO THE EMAIL RECEIVED FROM THE BOARD EARLIER TODAY (4/26/17)
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
HERE IS THE RESPONSE:
April 26, 2017
TO: WPA BOARD
FROM: Madeline Y. Claveloux
RE: COMMUNITY LIAISON EMAIL DATED 4/26/17
CC: Wedgefield Examiner, undisclosed groups of residents
involved in a resident project pertaining to the possible
Wedgefield Golf course sale to the county
Please place a copy in the correspondence file, and distribute to the board.
I appreciate the board’s timely response to my email. Thank you. I took a little time to contact the various people working on the project I described to you, to gather feedback. I, and they, want the unity that the board wants, open communication, and a presentation of unity to the county in any information provided.
First, I welcome the opportunity to be considered by the board, to be a member of the committee. I realize that it is only an invitation to be considered, as the board votes on committee members. Yes, I couldn't agree more that we need to work together, and that usually does mean compromise. That is why I wrote the board.
The project I described to you has been put on hold. We won’t move forward with printing of a letter, and post card, and mailing. We will continue the work in progress on the mailing list to all members, not as a threat, but because a few of the groups have discussed other projects that may require it. I hope that will confirm for you our interest to cooperate. One of our groups is working with involving new residents in projects. While I stay out of their finite business, two names – fresh perspectives have been suggested of individuals who appear at this distance willing to work to improve Wedgefield. I’m told one has been contacted, and would be willing to be considered for your committee, and another has been left a message. There is no demand, but if the board is interested, I would be happy to provide their names.
I agree that we can’t function on rumors. It appeared most of the concerns of the individuals who have written to me, either to have their letters (names removed) published, or stating their concerns, but asking that their writings not be published, or comments on Face Book, were negative regarding the possible county involvement. That is why I took the time to call Mr. Tucker, and the realtor, and have taken calls from residents asking what I knew about this, or that group of people walking or driving on the golf course. I have no stated opinion on the county’s possible purchase. My inquiry has been to the process & value of a survey, and how it would have any value, drove me to make those calls. I found Mr. Tucker was willing to talk, put the possible county’s very early stage consideration of involvement - to put things in perspective to be helpful. It appeared to me, and the people who were working on the project I described, that it would be helpful to have that prospective outlined by the county directly to all residents, to benefit residents’ survey answers.
In the frankness required to work together, you have assumed incorrectly, when you state: “ I will already assume one of your responses to this letter will be that you cannot work with the existing committee because of its chairperson. To my knowledge Mr. Armistead volunteered to head this effort up. To refuse to work with his committee over a 10 year old disagreement on a completely different issue isn't indicative of a “let's all work together for Wedgefield” attitude.” When I wrote the board in a cooperative spirit, I did not even bring that discussion to the table. While your reference to a “10 year old disagreement” does not begin to describe the situation that is documented in WPA records, I suggest in the spirit of working together that we not jump to conclusions of one another’s reactions. Having worked with unions and management in large company shut down situations, providing outplacement facilities, and services for both under the satisfaction of both, I learned to study the issues and personalities of both, meet with them together in meetings, without prejudicing the outcome of common goals. We have common interests and goals, and shouldn’t assume, and taint an open working relationship.
Again, I appreciate your email. No response is required, except to let me know, what my next steps are to be considered for the committee.
***********************************************************************************************
WE END WITH THIS THOUGHT: NOTICE THAT THE BOARD INVITES ME TO SIT ON THE COMMITTE, AND NEVER FOLLOW UP. NOTE THAT ANDERSON CASTS ASPERSIONS ON WHO I WILL WORK WITH (ARMISTEAD), AND WHEN THEY ANNOUNCE THAT ARMISTEAD HAS CONTACTED THE COUNTY, I GO TO ARMISTEAD AND OFFER TO DO ANYTHING I CAN DO TO HELP. I'M NEVER CALLED ON TO HELP. NO BIG DEAL, I HAVE PLENTY TO DO, BUT THIS IS JUST MORE OF THE BOARD'S SNEAKY, TWISTED BEHAVIOR. 