A FEW WEEKS AGO, I DECLARED IT GROUND HOG DAY IN WEDGEFIELD, DUE TO THE LESS THAN LEGAL MOVES FROM THIS BOARD. LOOKS LIKE EVERY DAY IS GROUND HOG DAY WITH THIS BOARD IN CHARGE. THEY DUG THEMSELVES A VERY DEEP HOLE WITH THE TREE CUTTING ANSWER. IT CAME FROM TAINTED ILLEGAL, SHAKY GROUND, WHEN THEY FINALLY CAME OUT IN THE OPEN AND ANSWERED!
***************************************************
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.
****************************************************************************
I'm providing you my questions to the board, and complete quotes from board member Anderson's response.
HERE ARE THE QUESTIONS FROM MY LETTER:
HERE ARE THE QUESTIONS FROM MY LETTER:
After my review, I’m left with two questions for the board for clarification.
1) Did the board assess the private canal lot owners for their share of the expense for tree removal on their lots? If so, why weren’t we told, and how did you assign their share, when the scope of work details canals, but not lots?
Anderson's response. "No we did not."
2) If the board has not assessed the private canal lot owners, please reference the section, and specific language in the governing documents that allowed the board to use WPA funds, for the tree removal on private lots.
Anderson's response. NOTE: HE FAILS TO PROVIDE A QUOTE, AS ASKED?????? "I have spoken to John Walton and several board members about your letter questioning the tree removal of tree debi in the canals following the storm last October. All of this was discussed at a regular monthly board meeting and the vote was unanimous. We did not assess anyone. This was handled as storm clean up and was taken from the emergency fund. It was no different than a tree on the edge of a lot that falls onto the road or other Wedgefield common area. It was affecting navigation and enjoyment of the canal for anyone trying to use them."
Consider the following:
The only thing that was settled in the last canal dredging lawsuits is that the state claims ownership of the canals. I don't care how long you have lived here, you've heard the cry from residents, and indeed our legal chair Garrison, "we don't own them". With that said, how could they be common ground - for common enjoyment - hardly a road used by all? That becomes important, because here is what the by-laws say about use of our assessment dollars: "To levy and collect annual assessments.
FROM THE WPA POLICY MANUAL- REGARDING UNIMPROVED GROUNDS:
Anderson's response. NOTE: HE FAILS TO PROVIDE A QUOTE, AS ASKED?????? "I have spoken to John Walton and several board members about your letter questioning the tree removal of tree debi in the canals following the storm last October. All of this was discussed at a regular monthly board meeting and the vote was unanimous. We did not assess anyone. This was handled as storm clean up and was taken from the emergency fund. It was no different than a tree on the edge of a lot that falls onto the road or other Wedgefield common area. It was affecting navigation and enjoyment of the canal for anyone trying to use them."
Consider the following:
The only thing that was settled in the last canal dredging lawsuits is that the state claims ownership of the canals. I don't care how long you have lived here, you've heard the cry from residents, and indeed our legal chair Garrison, "we don't own them". With that said, how could they be common ground - for common enjoyment - hardly a road used by all? That becomes important, because here is what the by-laws say about use of our assessment dollars: "To levy and collect annual assessments.
To use and expend the monies collected to acquire, maintain, operate, lease, care
for and preserve the Common Areas, and to administer the affairs of The
Association. " Additionally, for those of you who live on the golf course, the board wouldn't even discuss options of care at the associations expense. Where was common enjoyment, and use to your properties?
At least two of the private canal lot owners, whose property was not cleared of trees at our expense, knew their responsibility and paid for tree removal, and wrote the board asking them to notify the others. The quotations are taken from the WPA correspondence file.
STORM CANAL TREE PROBLEM - # 1:
Here is the letter: "after all the rain, there is a tree in the canal in front of our house (street named removed). Would the HOA please contact the property owner so he can take care of this little problem, before it becomes a big problem." There is no response from the board in the correspondence file. What is important here is that a fellow resident recognizes that the board has a responsibility - according to our governing documents - to notify the resident who owns the lot to clean up the problem at that resident's expense.
STORM CANAL TREE PROBLEM, - # 2:
Here is the letter: "Additionally, as a result of the 1000 year old flood and recent hurricane, I paid a lot of money to remove several trees that fell into the canal from the canal bank adjacent to my property. As a friendly neighbor, I sent a letter via email (December 4, 2016) to my friend Larry McMillin (see below), asking the WPA to ensure (and deal with) the several trees that fell in the canal from the other side of the canal bank near the lot on (removed address) and surrounding unoccupied lot be removed. To date I've heard nothing."
Same resident's earlier email: "Please have WPA address this and contact the owners as the trees and brush are preventing the unencumbered use of the canal." There was no answer in the correspondence file from the board on either of this resident's emails. Again, what is important here is that a fellow resident recognizes that the board has a responsibility - according to our governing documents - to notify the resident who owns the lot to clean up the problem at that resident's expense.
At least two of the private canal lot owners, whose property was not cleared of trees at our expense, knew their responsibility and paid for tree removal, and wrote the board asking them to notify the others. The quotations are taken from the WPA correspondence file.
STORM CANAL TREE PROBLEM - # 1:
Here is the letter: "after all the rain, there is a tree in the canal in front of our house (street named removed). Would the HOA please contact the property owner so he can take care of this little problem, before it becomes a big problem." There is no response from the board in the correspondence file. What is important here is that a fellow resident recognizes that the board has a responsibility - according to our governing documents - to notify the resident who owns the lot to clean up the problem at that resident's expense.
STORM CANAL TREE PROBLEM, - # 2:
Here is the letter: "Additionally, as a result of the 1000 year old flood and recent hurricane, I paid a lot of money to remove several trees that fell into the canal from the canal bank adjacent to my property. As a friendly neighbor, I sent a letter via email (December 4, 2016) to my friend Larry McMillin (see below), asking the WPA to ensure (and deal with) the several trees that fell in the canal from the other side of the canal bank near the lot on (removed address) and surrounding unoccupied lot be removed. To date I've heard nothing."
Same resident's earlier email: "Please have WPA address this and contact the owners as the trees and brush are preventing the unencumbered use of the canal." There was no answer in the correspondence file from the board on either of this resident's emails. Again, what is important here is that a fellow resident recognizes that the board has a responsibility - according to our governing documents - to notify the resident who owns the lot to clean up the problem at that resident's expense.
As for the golf course lot owners, and storm tree damage, here is another resident letter:
STORM GOLF COURSE LOT TREE PROBLEM - October 22, 2016 :
Here is the letter: "I need help. Trees on the golf course, very, very, near my house are in a dangerous state. The one broke in half about 20 or 30 feet up. The 40 ft. limb is resting on my Live Oak, at the moment preventing it from falling on my house." There is no response from the board in the correspondence file. I had heard what happened to this resident. They were contacted by the board, and told that the offending tree was on golf course land, and not their responsibility. Frankly, that is the way it needed to be handled. Our governing documents do not allow the board to use our assessment funds to correct this situation. I believe the resident paid around $400 to have this problem resolved.
Here is the letter: "I need help. Trees on the golf course, very, very, near my house are in a dangerous state. The one broke in half about 20 or 30 feet up. The 40 ft. limb is resting on my Live Oak, at the moment preventing it from falling on my house." There is no response from the board in the correspondence file. I had heard what happened to this resident. They were contacted by the board, and told that the offending tree was on golf course land, and not their responsibility. Frankly, that is the way it needed to be handled. Our governing documents do not allow the board to use our assessment funds to correct this situation. I believe the resident paid around $400 to have this problem resolved.
***************************************************************
As to Anderson's statement, "It was no different than a tree on the edge of a lot that falls onto the road or other Wedgefield common area. It was affecting navigation and enjoyment of the canal for anyone trying to use them." Remember the only judgement that came out of the last canal lawsuits was that the state owns the canals. Navigation would be the state's problem. Much of the use of the canals since the last dredging has been the public. For quite some time, I provided you pictures of the boaters in my back yard. Additionally, when someone threw trees into the middle of the canal behind my house to make a good fishing spot, and I called the state out questioning navigation, their representative looked around, and claimed there was plenty of room for boats to navigate around it. A few weeks ago, I reposted an email circulated to several residents by the concerned citizens. Here is the quote, "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." Where are these people with this issue?
In the end, once again this board unanimously voted to spend $7,950 to take trees fallen during Hurricane Matthew, off private canal lots. It is illegal - against our governing documents. What should the board have done? Maybe the trees need to come out where ever they are, canal lot, or not in order to maintain Wedgefield according to our governing documents. Your board has the power, and the responsibility to notify those residents that they must be removed, and if they aren't, remove them, and charge them for the removal. Here is a quote from our governing documents:
In the end, once again this board unanimously voted to spend $7,950 to take trees fallen during Hurricane Matthew, off private canal lots. It is illegal - against our governing documents. What should the board have done? Maybe the trees need to come out where ever they are, canal lot, or not in order to maintain Wedgefield according to our governing documents. Your board has the power, and the responsibility to notify those residents that they must be removed, and if they aren't, remove them, and charge them for the removal. Here is a quote from our governing documents:
-
4.02 Unimproved Property – Grounds:
Unimproved property must be maintained in accordance with the provisions of the WPA
Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions Section 8, as follows:
“In order to implement effective insect, reptile and woods fire control, the grantor reserves for itself and its agents, heirs, successors and assigns, the right to enter upon any residential lot on which a residence has not been constructed and upon which no landscaping plan has been implemented (with prior written approval of the grantor for such plan), at the expenses of the grantee, his heirs, successors, distributes (sic), and assigns, such entry to be made by personnel with tractors or other suitable devices, for the purpose of mowing, removing, clearing, cutting or
pruning underbrush, weeds or other unsightly growth, which in the opinion of the grantor detracts from the overall beauty, setting and safety of the subdivision. Such
entrance for the purpose of mowing, cutting, clearing or pruning shall not be deemed
a trespass”.
If this is not complied with, the WPA will assume responsibility and bill the owners for the work.
FROM THE POLICY MANUAL REGARDING STORM CLEAN UP:
If this is not complied with, the WPA will assume responsibility and bill the owners for the work.
FROM THE POLICY MANUAL REGARDING STORM CLEAN UP:
5. HURRICANE DISASTER RECOVERY
5.01 Clean-up After Hurricanes:
- All owners/residents will be responsible for their own property.
-
If the storm is unnamed, residents will be required to transport their own debris
to the county landfill.
-
In the case of a named (category 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) storm, debris should be placed
along the roadside for pickup.
-
Street cleaning will commence as soon as possible following the storm by
volunteers and/or grounds contractor.
-
Only debris such as limbs, trees, etc. caused by the storm will be removed. No
personal pruning will be accepted.
***********************************************************************
As we end the article I will remind those individuals who have contacted me about bringing lawsuits on numerous issues against the board of a few pieces from the legal article I posted yesterday. Maybe this mess along with this information will help you decide to move forward.
***********************************************************************
As we end the article I will remind those individuals who have contacted me about bringing lawsuits on numerous issues against the board of a few pieces from the legal article I posted yesterday. Maybe this mess along with this information will help you decide to move forward.
I. Breach of covenant by the community association
Homeowners have a basis for an action for breach of covenant against their community association where the association fails to fulfill any of the duties it expressly agreed to perform in the community’s legal documents. "
