BOARD MEMBER ANDERSON'S SECOND ATTEMPT AT ANSWERING THE QUESTION REGARDING THE BOARD'S $7,950 TO CUT TREES THAT FELL ON PRIVATE CANAL LOTS DURING HURRICANE MATTHEW. PLEASE NOTE: I've provided my question above his letter.
QUESTION: " I wrote the board on August 26, 2017. The subject of my letter “Two Questions Regarding Expenditure Of $7,950 For Removal Of Trees From Private Lots On The Canals”. I received a response from Community Liaison Anderson that did not address one of my very specific questions. Here is the question quoted from my letter: “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.” Please go back to your own records for board member Anderson’s response. Nowhere in his response, does he provide this
critical answer. He tells me that this was a unanimous vote by the board; therefore, he, or any member of the board should have been able to provide me with the information that I requested. Please, answer this question now, as I’m sure the failure to do so was an oversight. I can find no place in our governing documents that allowed you to vote yes, for that expenditure. I researched the governing documents before I wrote, and again, after I received his response, and cannot find it. In fact it appears that the board voted in violation of the governing documents. I attended the September board meeting and heard a golf course lot owner with a tree that had fallen during Hurricane Matthew on a neighbor’s lot and blocked the speakers drainage ditch, and caused 7 feet of flooding during Tropical Storm Irma. I listened to the board respond that the tree was the problem of the neighbor, and the board would notify the neighbor, and if they did not resolve the issue, the board would have it removed, and bill the neighbor. I knew the exact section of the governing documents that allowed the board to speak to that resolution. As asked in August, I’d like the board to quote “the section, and specific language in the governing documents that allowed the board to use WPA funds, for the tree removal on private lots.”
"October 28th 2017
Mrs. Claveloux,
Once again, I will address this question. (Comment: You did not answer the question in your first response.) This was handled as storm cleanup from hurricane Matthew. The trees in question are only a small portion of that total invoice that you refer to,(COMMENT: That is not true. I reviewed the bid, and the invoice related to the $7,950. All the work was done on the canal lots. Here is the exact language from the bid. JC'S Landscaping's bid was laid out as follows:
*tree removal canal 1 (by boat ramp) $3,500
*tree removal canal 2 500
*tree removal canal 3 650
*tree removal canal 4 3,300
$7,950)
At the time of the actual vote to approve, the board members mislead everyone when they stated in the motion that there were two bids. From the March 2017 approved minutes, “We received two bids to remove trees from canals; JC’s Landscaping of $7,950 and Thomas Bone Construction of $14,600. John made a Motion to Approve $7,950 to JC’s Landscaping for tree removal from canals with homeowner’s permission, Bob seconded and motion carried.” I reviewed the documents related to this motion. There were two supposed bids for this project - JC's Landscaping = $7,950.00 and Thomas Bone = $14,600.00. I couldn't tell who Thomas Bone's was sent to, but JC's Landscaping was sent to canal committee member - not a board member. Further indication of no statement of work, or request for proposal submitted to both was the fact that JC's Landscaping submitted their bid on 3/5/17, and Thomas Bone's on 1/25/17. When I read each of the bids, you would wonder whether there ever was a written statement of work, but it did explain the vast difference in cost, because it appeared that the bids were on two different projects.
Thomas Bone's bid:
This bid did not address the job by canals 1,2,3,4. It only spoke to 12 trees, use of barges, 60 feet of excavation, and dressing up the bank after tree removal. The total was for $14,600.
This board failed to follow the procedures required of them in the policy manual under Procurement, Purchases of $5,000 or More - Major Expenditures. There was no statement of work, request for proposal, or CONTRACT. We go back to black print, and continue with Anderson's letter:
and were blocking the canal along with several others that were prohibiting the navigation and beauty of the canal. (Comment: The WPA does not own the canals, a JUDGE RULED that the state of SC owns the canals. Navigation is not decided by the board. The state decides navigation. I called the state out to the canal behind my house when the trees were dumped into the canals by outside fisherman who have a right to use the state waterways. The trees were right in the middle of the canal. The State determined that there was plenty of room for navigation. The canals are not common ground. As to beauty and enjoyment, what did you do for the golf course lots when trees felled by Hurricane Matthew had fallen onto private lots? I have the record of the board telling a resident that wasn't the WPA's responsibility. Fallen trees on the golf course could be viewed from all the main roads in the association. Beauty?????) The specific language that would allow a board to do this project can be found in Covenant 9 and By law article V section 4.
*tree removal canal 1 (by boat ramp) $3,500
*tree removal canal 2 500
*tree removal canal 3 650
*tree removal canal 4 3,300
$7,950)
At the time of the actual vote to approve, the board members mislead everyone when they stated in the motion that there were two bids. From the March 2017 approved minutes, “We received two bids to remove trees from canals; JC’s Landscaping of $7,950 and Thomas Bone Construction of $14,600. John made a Motion to Approve $7,950 to JC’s Landscaping for tree removal from canals with homeowner’s permission, Bob seconded and motion carried.” I reviewed the documents related to this motion. There were two supposed bids for this project - JC's Landscaping = $7,950.00 and Thomas Bone = $14,600.00. I couldn't tell who Thomas Bone's was sent to, but JC's Landscaping was sent to canal committee member - not a board member. Further indication of no statement of work, or request for proposal submitted to both was the fact that JC's Landscaping submitted their bid on 3/5/17, and Thomas Bone's on 1/25/17. When I read each of the bids, you would wonder whether there ever was a written statement of work, but it did explain the vast difference in cost, because it appeared that the bids were on two different projects.
Thomas Bone's bid:
This bid did not address the job by canals 1,2,3,4. It only spoke to 12 trees, use of barges, 60 feet of excavation, and dressing up the bank after tree removal. The total was for $14,600.
This board failed to follow the procedures required of them in the policy manual under Procurement, Purchases of $5,000 or More - Major Expenditures. There was no statement of work, request for proposal, or CONTRACT. We go back to black print, and continue with Anderson's letter:
and were blocking the canal along with several others that were prohibiting the navigation and beauty of the canal. (Comment: The WPA does not own the canals, a JUDGE RULED that the state of SC owns the canals. Navigation is not decided by the board. The state decides navigation. I called the state out to the canal behind my house when the trees were dumped into the canals by outside fisherman who have a right to use the state waterways. The trees were right in the middle of the canal. The State determined that there was plenty of room for navigation. The canals are not common ground. As to beauty and enjoyment, what did you do for the golf course lots when trees felled by Hurricane Matthew had fallen onto private lots? I have the record of the board telling a resident that wasn't the WPA's responsibility. Fallen trees on the golf course could be viewed from all the main roads in the association. Beauty?????) The specific language that would allow a board to do this project can be found in Covenant 9 and By law article V section 4.
9. In order to maintain the high standards of the subdivision, each lot in said subdivision, including the lots owned by the Grantor (Developer). which have been submitted to the subdivision in the manner provided herein below, is hereby subjected to an annual assessment which shall. after notice of pendency of action to recover the said assessment (Notice of Lis Pendens) has been filed with the Clerk of Court of Georgetown County by Wedgefield Plantation Association. be secured by a lien upon each lot described herein until the same is paid. This lien may be foreclosed in the manner provided for the foreclosure of mortgages in this state; provided, however. that until such lien is reduced to judgment it shall be junior and subordinate to any mortgage filed of record. Such assessment shall be set by the Board of Directors of Wedgefield Plantation Association and payable within thirty (30) days after written notice to the grantee. Such annual assessment may be adjusted from year to year as the needs of the subdivision may in the judgment of the Board of Directors of Wedgefield Plantation Association require and shall be assessed equally against each lot in the subdivision excluding any condominium sites, but including any area still owned by Wedgefield Associates which has been subdivided into lots and a plat thereof recorded in the office of the Clerk of court for Georgetown County. The funds derived from said assessment shall be used for the payment of maintenance expenses of the subdivision and for any other purposes necessary or desirable in the opinion of the Board of Directors of Wedgefield Plantation Association for the general benefit of the subdivision. The judgment of the Board of Directors of Wedgefield Plantation Association in the expenditure of said funds shall be final.
Section 4: Use of Assessments Revenues: The funds derived from said assessments shall be used for the payment of common area (Canals not a common area.) maintenance expenses of the subdivision and for any other purposes necessary or desirable in the opinion of the Board of Directors for the general benefit of the subdivision. The judgment of the Board of Directors in the expenditure of said funds shall be final. Provided however, no assessment funds shall be used for the original construction of subdivision streets, roads, water system, sewer system and canals.
We believe this project falls well within this section of our governing documents. There were many trees all over the plantation that were on private lots that were removed during the cleanup project. All of this was done above board with a unanimous vote and for the benefit of the plantation as a whole.
COMMENTS: Is this the old standby "The judgement of the Board of Directors of Wedgefield Plantations Association in the expenditure of said funds shall be final? You've already seen that the board has broken just about every procurement requirement. They've done more than that. We'll start with what they told all residents to do regarding Hurricane Matthew clean up. Initially, they followed the policy for storm clean up. All residents were told to get storm related debris to the curb. HERE IS THE POLICY:
5. HURRICANE DISASTER RECOVERY 5.01 Clean-up After Hurricanes: WEDGEFIELD "PLANTATION ASSOCIATION POLICY MANUAL SECTION VII 3 1. All owners/residents will be responsible for their own property. 2. If the storm is unnamed, residents will be required to transport their own debris to the county landfill. 3. In the case of a named (category 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) storm, debris should be placed along the roadside for pickup. 4. Street cleaning will commence as soon as possible following the storm by volunteers and/or grounds contractor. 5. Only debris such as limbs, trees, etc. caused by the storm will be removed. No personal pruning will be accepted.
The policy manual uses the COVENANTS to tell us what can happen to private lot owners who fail to maintain their property detracts from the overall beauty, setting and safety of the subdivision. If, as Anderson stated the board was so concerned "were blocking the canal along with several others that were prohibiting the navigation and beauty of the canal", why were these canal lot owners so different than the rest of us?
HERE IS THE SECTION OF THE POLICY MANUAL:
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 WEDGEFIELD PLANTATION ASSOCIATION POLICY MANUAL SECTION VII 2 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. The owners will contact the WPA yearly (preferably in the first quarter) to determine if the owners are going to maintain their lot themselves, or if they desire to have the Association handle it and bill them accordingly. Lot owners, who do not respond within the time prescribed will be considered to be included in our mowing and clearing schedule and will be billed accordingly.
The board must have initially lumped those canal lot owners with ALL of us, because they made a motion from the board table to remove all residents who had trees felled by Hurricane Matthew from having to seek a permit from ARC. Here are the minutes from the October 19, 2016 Board Meeting."ARC Report - Keith Johnson. Question: What do we do about tree removal companies from of town? Are they insured? Bob Garrison: Everyone should be extremely careful about who they hire. With tree removal in an emergency situation, would it be prudent for the board to waive application for the next 30 to 60 days. Keith: I would be in favor for downed trees related to storm damage. Keith made MOTION to waive ARC application for tree removal as long as the trees are down and caused by the storm. Seconded Bob Garrison. Amend the motion to extend the grace period to the end of November to not require a permit to downed trees. Bob seconded. MOTION to waive ARC application for storm damaged tree removal until end of November. Motion carried."
During a special open board meeting on November 17, 2016, McMillin chastises residents who brought their debris to the curb for the expense of cleanup. This is from the minutes of that meeting: McMillin - "Unfortunately, we cannot police all the private crews and residents who dumped additional material and added approximately 20% to our TOTAL BILL." It appears that we are all done with storm clean up at this point - mid November 2016, and we have taken advantage of the storm situation. But wait, the Emergency Reserve had been depleted, and we go 5 months, before your board changes all the rules and treats SOME private canal lot owners DIFFERENTLY thenrest of us. I say some, because at least one of the canal lot owners who have paid, write the board, and want them to make those canal lot owners near them, do the right thing. Here is the letter:
STORM TREE PROBLEM, - CANAL LOT OWNER - March 1, 2017
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 us of the canal." There was no answer in the correspondence file from the board on 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. We do know what the board has decided to do for these special canal lot owners by the March 2017 board meeting. Before we move to that, let's see what happened to a golf course lot owner who wrote right after the storm. Here is the letter:
COMMENTS: Is this the old standby "The judgement of the Board of Directors of Wedgefield Plantations Association in the expenditure of said funds shall be final? You've already seen that the board has broken just about every procurement requirement. They've done more than that. We'll start with what they told all residents to do regarding Hurricane Matthew clean up. Initially, they followed the policy for storm clean up. All residents were told to get storm related debris to the curb. HERE IS THE POLICY:
5. HURRICANE DISASTER RECOVERY 5.01 Clean-up After Hurricanes: WEDGEFIELD "PLANTATION ASSOCIATION POLICY MANUAL SECTION VII 3 1. All owners/residents will be responsible for their own property. 2. If the storm is unnamed, residents will be required to transport their own debris to the county landfill. 3. In the case of a named (category 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) storm, debris should be placed along the roadside for pickup. 4. Street cleaning will commence as soon as possible following the storm by volunteers and/or grounds contractor. 5. Only debris such as limbs, trees, etc. caused by the storm will be removed. No personal pruning will be accepted.
The policy manual uses the COVENANTS to tell us what can happen to private lot owners who fail to maintain their property detracts from the overall beauty, setting and safety of the subdivision. If, as Anderson stated the board was so concerned "were blocking the canal along with several others that were prohibiting the navigation and beauty of the canal", why were these canal lot owners so different than the rest of us?
HERE IS THE SECTION OF THE POLICY MANUAL:
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 WEDGEFIELD PLANTATION ASSOCIATION POLICY MANUAL SECTION VII 2 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. The owners will contact the WPA yearly (preferably in the first quarter) to determine if the owners are going to maintain their lot themselves, or if they desire to have the Association handle it and bill them accordingly. Lot owners, who do not respond within the time prescribed will be considered to be included in our mowing and clearing schedule and will be billed accordingly.
The board must have initially lumped those canal lot owners with ALL of us, because they made a motion from the board table to remove all residents who had trees felled by Hurricane Matthew from having to seek a permit from ARC. Here are the minutes from the October 19, 2016 Board Meeting."ARC Report - Keith Johnson. Question: What do we do about tree removal companies from of town? Are they insured? Bob Garrison: Everyone should be extremely careful about who they hire. With tree removal in an emergency situation, would it be prudent for the board to waive application for the next 30 to 60 days. Keith: I would be in favor for downed trees related to storm damage. Keith made MOTION to waive ARC application for tree removal as long as the trees are down and caused by the storm. Seconded Bob Garrison. Amend the motion to extend the grace period to the end of November to not require a permit to downed trees. Bob seconded. MOTION to waive ARC application for storm damaged tree removal until end of November. Motion carried."
During a special open board meeting on November 17, 2016, McMillin chastises residents who brought their debris to the curb for the expense of cleanup. This is from the minutes of that meeting: McMillin - "Unfortunately, we cannot police all the private crews and residents who dumped additional material and added approximately 20% to our TOTAL BILL." It appears that we are all done with storm clean up at this point - mid November 2016, and we have taken advantage of the storm situation. But wait, the Emergency Reserve had been depleted, and we go 5 months, before your board changes all the rules and treats SOME private canal lot owners DIFFERENTLY thenrest of us. I say some, because at least one of the canal lot owners who have paid, write the board, and want them to make those canal lot owners near them, do the right thing. Here is the letter:
STORM TREE PROBLEM, - CANAL LOT OWNER - March 1, 2017
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 us of the canal." There was no answer in the correspondence file from the board on 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. We do know what the board has decided to do for these special canal lot owners by the March 2017 board meeting. Before we move to that, let's see what happened to a golf course lot owner who wrote right after the storm. Here is the letter:
STORM 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.
Remember, by the time we get to March 2017, we are about 5 months out from when all the Hurricane Matthew clean up is done. The fund was exhausted, we - all residents had been blamed for what the board claimed was an added 20% of total bill, because residents put out debris at the curb that McMillin didn't believe was related to the storm. We get to the March board meeting. If you attend meetings, and ever have a chance to see the board's vanilla agenda, you'd know that Officers of the board report first. The treasurer makes the following motion, Peggy Phillips "to transfer $9,500 from Landscape Reserve into Emergency Reserve." Motion carried. No one explains why. Read the minutes for yourself. Much later in the meeting John Walton, water amenities chair makes the following motion, “We received two bids to remove trees from canals; JC’s Landscaping of $7,950 and Thomas Bone Construction of $14,600. John made a Motion to Approve $7,950 to JC’s Landscaping for tree removal from canals with homeowner’s permission, Bob seconded and motion carried.” Again, no discussion as to why, and how these lot owners stand different then all those others, or why now after the books are closed on Hurricane Matthew? You ought to be asking yourself another question. Since there was no discussion when the treasurer made her motion about why the money was being transferred from landscaping reserve before Walton made his "no" discussion motion, when did the board meet, and discuss this action, that they all voted yes, for both? This open, informative (????) board just ignored their responsibility on an illegal move. What? Anderson quoted the section that allowed them to spend our assessment funds - just for those canal lot owners. Really???? He and your board told us the rules for clean up. You've read some of them above. Your board by passed some powers that make this move illegal. Here's what our governing documents say about their powers:
By-Laws:
Section 1: Powers - The property and business of The Association shall be managed by the Board of Directors, which may exercise all corporate powers not specifically prohibited by the South Carolina Statutes, the Articles ofIncorporation, or the deed Conditions, Covenants & Restrictions. The powers of the Board shall specifically include, but not be limited to, the following: (a) To prepare and approve an annual Budget. (b) To levy and collect annual assessments. (c) 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. (d) To purchase the necessary equipment required in the maintenance, care, preservation, and business administration referred to above. (e) To purchase such insurance as the Board of Directors may deem advisable. (f) To employ and compensate such personnel as may be required for the maintenance and preservation of the Common Properties, if any, and of property owned by the Association, if any. (g) To employ and compensate such personnel as may be required to man The Association office, provide clerical and administrative functions, and to maintain the financial records of The Association. (h) To make reasonable rules and regulations applicable to all owners.
Your board, including Anderson fails to answer the question legally and ethically, and their private canal lot tree cutting at all of our expense is a sham on every level of their operation. Why work so hard against all the rest of the association to please the canal lot owners? Perhaps, they are saving some of the private canal lot owners money, so they'll sign up to voluntarily pay for their illegal dredge using approximately $135,000 of all of our assessment funds.
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.
Remember, by the time we get to March 2017, we are about 5 months out from when all the Hurricane Matthew clean up is done. The fund was exhausted, we - all residents had been blamed for what the board claimed was an added 20% of total bill, because residents put out debris at the curb that McMillin didn't believe was related to the storm. We get to the March board meeting. If you attend meetings, and ever have a chance to see the board's vanilla agenda, you'd know that Officers of the board report first. The treasurer makes the following motion, Peggy Phillips "to transfer $9,500 from Landscape Reserve into Emergency Reserve." Motion carried. No one explains why. Read the minutes for yourself. Much later in the meeting John Walton, water amenities chair makes the following motion, “We received two bids to remove trees from canals; JC’s Landscaping of $7,950 and Thomas Bone Construction of $14,600. John made a Motion to Approve $7,950 to JC’s Landscaping for tree removal from canals with homeowner’s permission, Bob seconded and motion carried.” Again, no discussion as to why, and how these lot owners stand different then all those others, or why now after the books are closed on Hurricane Matthew? You ought to be asking yourself another question. Since there was no discussion when the treasurer made her motion about why the money was being transferred from landscaping reserve before Walton made his "no" discussion motion, when did the board meet, and discuss this action, that they all voted yes, for both? This open, informative (????) board just ignored their responsibility on an illegal move. What? Anderson quoted the section that allowed them to spend our assessment funds - just for those canal lot owners. Really???? He and your board told us the rules for clean up. You've read some of them above. Your board by passed some powers that make this move illegal. Here's what our governing documents say about their powers:
By-Laws:
Section 1: Powers - The property and business of The Association shall be managed by the Board of Directors, which may exercise all corporate powers not specifically prohibited by the South Carolina Statutes, the Articles ofIncorporation, or the deed Conditions, Covenants & Restrictions. The powers of the Board shall specifically include, but not be limited to, the following: (a) To prepare and approve an annual Budget. (b) To levy and collect annual assessments. (c) 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. (d) To purchase the necessary equipment required in the maintenance, care, preservation, and business administration referred to above. (e) To purchase such insurance as the Board of Directors may deem advisable. (f) To employ and compensate such personnel as may be required for the maintenance and preservation of the Common Properties, if any, and of property owned by the Association, if any. (g) To employ and compensate such personnel as may be required to man The Association office, provide clerical and administrative functions, and to maintain the financial records of The Association. (h) To make reasonable rules and regulations applicable to all owners.
Your board, including Anderson fails to answer the question legally and ethically, and their private canal lot tree cutting at all of our expense is a sham on every level of their operation. Why work so hard against all the rest of the association to please the canal lot owners? Perhaps, they are saving some of the private canal lot owners money, so they'll sign up to voluntarily pay for their illegal dredge using approximately $135,000 of all of our assessment funds.
