Pages

Sunday, December 4, 2011

Letter to editor: Hybrid balloting is a source of concern in WPOA board election


There is a reason that Federal, State and Local Governments don't use e-mail balloting and this is a prime example of why they don't


Note: The letter to the editor is from WPOA board director Richard Sullivan. Sullivan served a brief stint on the board in 2010 and returned to the board later that year. He will be vacating his seat next month. Sullivan and his wife Pat have been regular attendees of board meetings and active WPOA members since moving to Woodcreek in July of 2008. Balloting is underway to elect three new members to the board. Ballots (by mail and e-mail) must be received by WPOA staff by 10 a.m. January 21, the day of the next members meeting. Ballots will be tallied and announced, at which time the new board members will be seated. Needless to say, a response or comments from the WPOA, board members and property owners to Mr. Sullivan's letter are welcomed by the RoundUp. For additional information, visit the WPOA website.

Send your comments and questions to roundup.editor@gmail.com, to Mr. Sullivan at rlsnpjs@anvilcom.com, to the WPOA office at woodcreekpoa@gmail.com,
512.847.9889, or click on the "comments" at the bottom of the letter

To the Editor:

Starting on December first, the Woodcreek Property Owners Association (WPOA) was supposed to have sent out ballots to the Property Owners in Woodcreek North and Eagle Rock for the annual Election of 3 new Directors for their board. The Board's Nominating Committee nominated a slate of candidates including a couple of familiar names, Sally Caldwell and Liz Sumter along with an unknown newcomer Col. Mike Regan.

More commonly, the Board would simply ask for a vote by show of hands of the 30 or so attendees present at the November Members Meeting and zap, their picks would be elected. Many property owners believe this scenario has created a board of cronies with a groupthink mentality. This time, a real election was forced on the board by additional nominations from the floor at the Members Meeting.

Property Owners, seeking a change from the status quo, nominated 4 alternate candidates, Pat Sullivan, Dottie Sweeton, Donna Hathway and last but not least, popular past president, Susan Howard. Much of this was brought on by the very unpopular stance of the board regarding their resistance to handing over some roads to the County.

As is usually the case with the 2011 WPOA Board, things are not going well for the balloting process. They decided for the first time to adopt a hybrid balloting system, where some property owners would receive paper ballots by snail mail while others would receive "electronic ballots" by e-mail.

After 4 days, several owners had not received their ballots by e-mail although the WPOA President Merry Merian and her Office Manager Janelle Delaney claim they were sent out to everyone. Coincidently, many of the ones reporting not to have received a ballot turn out to be the more outspoken ones in conflict with several recent decisions of the Board, e.g., Winton Porterfield, and Directors Duanne Redus and Richard Sullivan.

We really don't know how many were denied their right to vote since so many are unaware that they were to receive a ballot by e-mail or snail mail for that matter. If you don't know it's coming, how can you report it not arriving, a fact that seems to elude the individuals doing the balloting. There is a reason that Federal, State and Local Governments don't use e-mail balloting and this is a prime example of why they don't.

Besides the potential for fraud and abuse, as we can see here it is not reliable and subject to mistakes or operator error. Currently, I have no firm idea as to whether this dereliction was by accident or design.

Richard Sullivan

109 comments:

Janelle Delaney said...

Dear Mr. Sullivan:

You do realize there is a rather easy way to prove who received an electronic ballot. As a matter of fact I offered to sit down with you to go over the balloting process.

Instead you decide to speculate and insinuate that something fraudulent is going on.

You and Ms. Redus acknowledged receipt of your ballots. You claimed you talked to four property owners who did not receive a ballot but when asked for their names, so that I could assure they received a ballot, you refused to give me their names. That seems rather suspicious to me.

Re: Your comment regarding Winton Porterfield not receiving a ballot. For your information a ballot was sent via US Post to Mr. Mike Black, Registered Agent for Wimberley Springs Partners, on November 30, 2011.

As you know property owners have until the January Membership meeting to cast their ballots and as I mentioned to you, I intend to send out reminders to those property owners who have yet to vote.

There is nothing sinister going on with this election.

I continue to extend my offer to sit down with you or anyone else to explain the process.

Thank you,
Janelle Delaney
WPOA Office Manager

Richard Sullivan said...

Ms. Delaney,

I, as well as Ms. Redus did not receive an e-mail ballot until we emailed Ms. Merian and complained, then a "second ballot" was e-mailed. Mine came within minutes of my complaint, as if by magic. I sent my complaint at 6:02pm on the Dec. 2nd and received my "second ballot" at 6:31, 29 minutes later (2 days after it was said to be sent). If as you say, the ballots were sent on Nov. 30 at 6:30pm , what happened to my first Ballot? Ms. Redus' experience was almost identical.

If I had not complained, I am sure I would have never received a ballot. That first one has still not made it to my inbox. Can you explain that?

That is why I chose not to tell you who the others were but let them tell you in due time. I am hearing from more members that did not receive ballots by e-mail and one who has yet to see a snail mailed paper ballot, let's wait and see if they ever receive one. Since as you claim, "there is a rather easy way to prove who received an electronic ballot", check your source to find out who they are and send them a ballot; I'll be checking to see if they ever get one.

I like the statement that you "intend to send out reminders to those property owners who have yet to vote". Ma'am, If you do not see the irony in that statement maybe the problem is not the system.

You can't be sure who received the ballots or not or you would have sent a 2nd. ballot without a complaint from me. You can not prove either way who received a ballot and who didn't.

Daz;ed and Confused said...

I received mine via snail mail but sent it to WPOA via e-mail.

Or, no, maybe I received it via e-mail, printed it out, forgot to mark my selections and snail mailed it.

Or, maybe I didnt' receive it and I'm just old and forgetful - which is what so many people like me are these days.

Besides, I don't have a photo ID anymore so I shouldn't be allowed to vote in Texas elections.

Oh, wait, I have a gun license.

Never mind.

Anonymous said...

The publisher of the Roundup should consider whether this obvious petty bickering is of community value - or just plain a local version of gossip disguised as news.

Is the writer of the article related to the other "Sullivan" running for a seat on the Board.

If so, that tells us something right there about this spat.

But, then again, why all of a sudden is the WPOA using a "hybrid" approach?

Seems like one of these no-win stubborn to the core family squabbles to me.

Richard Sullivan said...

I and every other Board member received this message from Winton Porterfield this morning:

"WPOA Board members & staff:

It has come to my attention that there may be some confusion within the WPOA about who represents WSP, and where notices and ballots etc. should be sent. Since June 14, 2005, I have had the authority to make decisions on behalf of WSP. The attached unanimous consent form was previously provided to you and your attorney, and in past elections, ballots were sent directly to me. I would appreciate it if you would correct this “error” and forward me a ballot at your earliest convenience.

Thanks.
Winton
"

So much for Ms. Delaney's statement about WSP's representative. Another SNAFU, it would seem from the Head Shack at the WPOA.

Anonymous said...

WPOA says:

"Instead you decide to speculate and insinuate that something fraudulent is going on."

Seems like anyone with any sense can see that's what is going on here.

Well, at least it's not hidden behind some Anonymous BS.

Anonymous said...

This is great reporting - in the old newspapers from the 60's and 70's the Community page would talk everybody's visitors, who had a wreck, who was sleeping with who, and about them "colored" folks being seen in town...

Yep, earth-shattering and community important news, no doubt. Keep'em coming Bob'O.

M.M. Trent said...

It is gratifying to see that Mr. Sullivan is now giving a name to his complaints, allegations and personal attacks. A spot on the Sullivan Enemy List is an honor that will earn a star in your heavenly crown.

Anonymous said...

With Spoofing, Pfishing, and Hoaxing and the like infecting on emails, why would any sane person or group use e-mail for an election? Nobody else does. The WPOA News Letter said they saved $875 by using there "Hybrid" mail outs for the ballots. If the election runs into a law suit or an injunction it could end up costing them a lot more and delay the seating of 3 new directors. Has any one contacted Joyce Cowan at Hays County? She is the county election administrator?

A concerned voter said...

I read Mr. Sullivan's letter as straight up level headed effort to inform the woodcreek poa community of a very important election issue. I do not see a red herring. I do not see any personal attacks. In my view, the letter and the concerns that are voiced are only strengthened by attempts to distract or discredit the author. You would think the staff and board would work overtime to ensure as clean and all inclusive election as possible. I congratulate Mr. Sullivan for speaking out.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps more property owners will be getting rid of the burdensome and haughty WPOA corporation. This is the same organization where the existing board members and admin tried to force prospective nominees to be subjected to a criminal background check. The results of background checks would have been made available to the incumbents but not the nominees, of course, for "privacy" reasons. Yeah.

Well, the WPOA board had to pound sand on that one. Who wants or needs such an organization? The VENDORS and incumbents' egos need it but the homeowners certainly do not.

Anonymous said...

I am glad that you ran this story. I was in attendance in the November meeting when much of this had been addressed. I am also one of those who has not received a ballot of any kind. The accusations that ballots are not going out are...true.

Thanks to your story, I have submitted a request for a ballot. I rarely agree with the angle you take on things, but this time, I am glad you are there and reporting on local events. Although some may complain, the reality is ALL POLITICS ARE LOCAL. What happens locally is what is important to us, regardless of ideology.

Anonymous said...

Get rid of WPOA and WSP becomes the "homeowner's association" for our subdivision.

Don't be fooled by the local tea party like people who pretend they are just trying to help the small guy - but are controlled by development interests.

Watch the revolving beds here. Will Conley sleeps with David Baker. David Baker sleeps with WPOA. Will Conley sleeps with WSP.
WSP sleeps with the Sullivans. WSP sleeps with themselves - forever.

They all want a piece of your pocketbook.

Anonymous said...

I agree with dazed & confused. This is a tempest in a teapot. I guess the only way Mr. Sullivan thinks that his wife can win is if he fixes the election.

WPOA Watchdog said...

If you believe being denied your right to vote is a "tempest in a teapot" you should move to China or Cuba. More than likely you are just part of the cadre of busybodies that hangout at the WPOA office and listen to the latest propaganda and character assassinations. These types of organizations have always been about a sort of modern Feudalism; not wanting their subjects to have any say about their homes and neighborhoods.

New Texas laws have forced the WPOA Feudal Lords to allow every property owner to VOTE or hold office. Before, the WPOA used to bar any owner that was not a "member in good standing" from exercising these basic rights. That tacky and insulting term no longer has any legal context and some of the Lords hate that impediment to their control. Losing their control over who votes and holds office was a serious setback to them. That and the threat of a law suit and foreclosure were the main tools of their trade. Even foreclosures by POAs have now been partially limited by the new laws; they now have to at least get a court order to do so. A little known fact is that in Texas, a POA can foreclose on your home even if it is registered as a Homestead. Hopefully more laws regulating POAs will be passed in the next legislative session. I hope to be there lobbying for their passage.

All of this and the present Ballot Scandal seem to be about maintaining the status quo and limiting the rights of Property Owners. Now, does that sound like a "tempest in a teapot"?

Anonymous said...

With so many negative fingers being pointed at the WPOA and its Board of Directors, how
will it be viewed if one of the nominees elected is found to have several resident adult family
members having fairly frequent run-ins with the law. One only has to live in the neighborhood
to find that disconcerting.

Anonymous said...

Anony said in her character assassination piece, "With so many negative fingers being pointed at the WPOA and its Board of Directors...". I think you left out the non-member overpaid WPOA Puppeteer of the puppets on the board. The rest of your comments are vile, hateful and unsubstantiated and frankly sound like something you'd expect from the Puppeteer.

Anonymous said...

WPOA (self-appointed) Watchdog implies that the WPOA people are from China or Cuba.

Talk about fearful ignorant nonsense.

Every time you hear some local yokel talk about people like they are communists or dictators, you know they are a can short of a six pack.

This type of talk is akin to the McCarthy era fear and hate opportunism and now the Tea Party like "unpatriotic" idiocy.

Allow yourself to be manipulated if you like. Just don't blame anyone but yourself when the "new boss is same as the old boss."

Anonymous said...

If you own property in the WPOA's victim area and did not receive a ballot by now, you are probably on the "Witches of Woodcreek" enemies list and you need to call 512-847-9889 and demand a Ballot. Don't listen to their lies and excuses or their claims that they know more than you do, (they don't) just Demand a damn Ballot and get away from them. Reporting your experience here would be helpful to your fellow victims.

Remember, every property owner has a right to vote regardless if they have paid their Maintenance Fees or not. They can't refuse you unless you let them. They are desperate to get their high power candidates elected so if they try to stop you, please report it here on this blog.

Emancipator said...

Hey Anonymous of December 6, 2011 8:20 AM.

Don't just leave us hanging with your sleazy innuendo. What kind of criminals are we talking about here?

C'mon. You brought it up. Now be specific - or go back in your hole.

Anonymous said...

This definitely is providing much comedic relief!

Richard Sullivan said...

Today I was contacted by a voter that received an e-mail ballot but when she tried to vote, it would not register. I advised her to go to the WPOA Office and demand a paper ballot. The same thing happened to another voter yesterday and she even demonstrated the problem to the WPOA office help but they were mystified and had no explanation and just gave her a paper ballot.

This procedure could not have been tested or the e-mail addresses confirmed. When the e-mails don't bounce that does not mean they went to the recipient. The WPOA e-mail system has a history of problems like this and no one can explain it. They always try to blame the would-be recipient or their E-mail client or ISP. It happened to me a few months back.

I have a friend that has no computer and has not yet received his paper ballot. Wimberley mail is one day service, rarely two day. He will take his time to go over to the WPOA office and get a ballot. Mr. Porterfield has still not received his ballot.

I finally voted yesterday by e-mail but I have no idea if my vote will be counted due to the problems and the possibility of it being deleted. What security if any is provided for the ballots?

There is a pattern of failure and incompetence in the balloting and it shows that they don't have control of the process and should have never tried to use e-mail ballots. The validity of this election is doomed and the result will not be trusted by anyone except those in denial over at the WPOA office. This thing is worse than I first thought.

On a related subject, I have received several complaints about the addition of (Nominated by who) being placed next to the candidates names only for those that were nominated from the floor. This has been called unfair by using the nominating person's name to affect the vote. That tag is not supported in the bylaws and it was not done in the election for 2010 (I have a copy of that Ballot)

Anonymous said...

Some people just can not accept change. Grow up Mr. Sullivan change is necessary for growth. If you can not or will not accept change then shut up! In every new process there are glitches. This does not mean that the process is bad just new. It is obvious that you do not like change. The Internet is the way of the future. So put up or shut up. I know that you will call me an idiot but I am not I am in favor of change not stagnation.

Anonymous said...

Unless you are getting bored, stick around to watch Sullivan drown in his own vitriol....quite a sight to see.

Anonymous said...

The word on the street is that the infamous WPOA is gearing up to try another Incorporation move next year. This is expected since they selected Sally Caldwell and Liz Sumter to run for the board. Ms. Caldwell was the wizard behind the curtain in the 2009 try for the ill fated "The Village of Jacobs well". Can things be so bad for the defeated County Judge, that she wants to be on the board of this small unpopular POA. Please notice that neither of these "Political" candidates lives in Woodcreek North or Eagle Rock.

Could this be the first step towards the fourth try to make North Woodcreek a city?

Anonymous said...

Why are property owners contacting Mr. Sullivan and not the WPOA? I would think that if you had a problem you would go to the source not someone else. I received my email ballot and had no problem voting at all.

Anonymous said...

As regards the "word on the street" about incorporation, the idea was killed last attempt by a massive infusion of money by developer and real estate interests and a whispering campaign against those in favor that bordered on slander. Now the antis seek to dig up the body, dress it in rags and set it up to be the Zombie boogieman when, indeed, the boogieman is the grab for potential control of the Association, its budget and its oversight of roads, building permits and of the committees whose job is it is promote the quality of architecture, size and spacing of future building in the area. The Association in these hands will have the power to determine future growth, set yearly maintenance fees and who knows what else?




Post as …

Anonymous said...

Because they don't trust you!

An Anti said...

Anonymous? at December 7, 2011 2:00 PM

Mickey, Are you denying that another Incorporation try is planned? You seemed to change the subject and started slamming the Developers and RE interests. Why else would Liz and Sally want to be on the WPOA?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said, "I received my email ballot and had no problem voting at all."

Well - I'm so happy for you; I guess we should just forget about the unknown number of people that either did not receive a ballot or the ones that did get one but it was non functional, and be happy for you.

I didn't get mine until I contacted the WPOA and after deflecting their accusations and explaining it to them, they finally sent me "another one". I voted for Hathway, Howard and Sullivan. I am sure that I am on that WPOA enemies list. I'd be willing to bet that there are some out here that still have not received a ballot. I think the WPOA people must have had a problem merging their "good guy list" with their "bad guy list". I was told that there were 2 Board members did not receive ballots, how did they explain that one?

Anonymous said...

Aren't those two Board members who didn't receive the ballots also against the Board?

And how do we know they aren't lying?

Anonymous said...

Does this Richard Sullivan ever have anything positive to say about anything. And he states that he's a Board member for the WPOA? How has that worked? It seems that there is an ego here that requires constant stroking, be it positive or negative. If he is so concerned about the workings of the WPOA, why is it that he did not nominate himself for another stint on the Board. Is he hiding something? Is he to act through his wife should she be elected? THAT ought to be very interesting!!!

Anonymous said...

You can not reason with people who have closed minds. The negative posters on this blog are the same bitter people who refuse to listen to anyone who does not agree with their narrow world view. In other words it is their way or the highway.

Anonymous said...

Just a couple of thoughts ...

Anybody want to join me in taking up a collection to underwrite the cost of medications for some of these folks?

Bob, you're handed over the keys to the aslyum. These folks need their meds. Take back the keys, Bob. Take back the keys.

Anonymous said...

@Janelle Delaney who said...

I intend to send out reminders to those property owners who have yet to vote.

Do you intend to send the reminder to the same place you sent the ballots?

Anonymous said...

@ Anonymous December 5, 2011 8:54 PM who said...

Get rid of WPOA and WSP becomes the "homeowner's association" for our subdivision.

Why do you need to be under the rule of a private corporation? You can initiate a petition on a section by section basis to free your property from the burden and liabilities of the WPOA. What value has it ever provided to anyone except a few board members, staff, and vendors like the HOA attorney?

Anonymous said...

As WPOA Watchdog said there's a new law in Texas. But who does it help? Who is the largest lot owner in Woodcreek North? Who hasn't paid their owner's fee's in years? But now get's to vote! When our legislature passes a new law it is NOT for the little guy, the single lot owner, it's for the Large developer who is stuffing money in their (reps) pockets.This NEW law just made Mr. Porterfield not a Lord but KING! Kick

Anonymous said...

@ Anonymous December 8, 2011 8:42 AM who lied and said...

Mr. Porterfield is paid up on his Maintenance Fees except for 2011 because the agenda driven majority on the WPOA board would not agree on which roads would be improved to turn over to the County thereby screwing the property owners. He does not need to pay the WPOA anything, just spend his fees on the roads agreed upon. No agreement, no fees due, therefore he is paid up.

It is obvious that you are with the evil WPOA and brainwashed or you would know that the new laws are for the benefit of the property owners not the POAs or the developers.

Anonymous said...

@anonymous 11:58am
So if you spend your maintaince agreement on something YOU think needs to be done then you do not owe any to the WPOA?
I guess I know who is on the developers payroll!

Anonymous said...

Why does everyone have to be so negative. The WPOA is not perfect but they do the best they can. They could do a better job if they were not forced to constantly defend every thing they do. If they try to be proactive then they are condemned for doing something new...if they do the same old thing then they are condemned for not doing anything new. Damed if you do damed if you don't. You negative people should be ashamed of yourselves. Instead of constantly shooting down the WPOA board try helping them. But I know you won't because you like constantly insulting people and putting them down. Belittling people makes you feel big. I am sure that one of you will take this post apart one sentence at a time and make me look stupid. By taking everything I have said out of context and turning it against me rather than actually answering in a normal logical. Manner.
I am not signing my name because I do not want my family embarressd by the likes of you. You sign your name and I will sign mine.

Anonymous said...

The WPOA is a worthless burden that offers nothing but a liability to the property owners. The WPOA has filed countless suits against its own members, foreclosed against its own members, and all under the pretext of "preserving property values".

Can the WPOA board indicate WHO the value is being "preserved for"? The WVWA? After all they've been the recipient of the property of many a former member of the WPOA courtesy of the WPOA. The HOA attorney? How many cases has he filed and gotten fees from homeowners for? The board members? Well they get immunity from the board and for their own actions - so that's sort of a benefit for the board members at everyone else's expense.

Homeowners would be far better off by voting to remove the burden of the WPOA from their property on a section by section basis. Get rid of the lawsuits. Get rid of the threat of foreclosure. Get rid of the assessments. Get rid of the constant, annoying hassle of the WPOA.

Richard Sullivan said...

To the Anonymous Commenter of December 8, 2011 8:14 PM,

I may be wrong but I believe from your tone, you meant every word and do feel the way you said. Thanks for your input. You are not an "Idiot" and I would never call you one. I have not called anyone on this somewhat contentious thread anything like that, though I have been tempted a few times. I can assure you that my original article/letter was not intended to be negative. It was just to inform the property owners of a very important issue with the present Election. I am certain you know that I have no control of what others say here.

My article was prompted by the WPOA Administration's unwillingness to accept the fact that their e-mail ballots were not working. They just wanted to blame me, my software, ISP, and my motive. The President even tried to belittle my knowledge and experience of over 40 years in the Computer Industry. This was never about me but they tried to make it so.

To her credit, Ms. Delaney did offer to sit down with me and explain their process but the subject had already become so contentious that I knew it would not be a productive meeting. I only wish we could have collaborated long before the election started.

I do not think that there was any wrong doing here just individuals with an ill-advised agenda and a poorly conceived and executed process. They were more concerned with proving themselves right than admiting the possibility of mistakes. It is easy for organizations such as the WPOA to become arrogant and self important and withdraw from reality then embrace groupthink to the point, they no longer accept input.

This Election is a first for the WPOA in that every property owner can vote. This is a big deal to me since the previous system denied the vote to many property owners for not paying their Maintenance Fees and other infractions. Next year you will be able to vote for Federal, State and local offices even if you are behind on your rent, car payment or homeless maybe even in prison and POA elections should be no different. Thanks to the 82nd legislature and countless freedom loving lobbyists this is now a reality. Some Board and Staff members had negative feelings about the new election law and felt it reduced their ability to force property owners to pay their assessments and obey their demands. I differed in that I believe with a few exceptions, if someone doesn't pay their fees or abide by legal deed restrictions they probably don't vote anyway.

I was very excited by the fact that we would for the first time have a free election, that I was shocked to hear the WPOA Staff and President were going to hold the hybrid ballot election . Knowing that e-mail balloting was a favorite of the big POA Management Corporation lobbyists for no other reason than to control elections, I was appalled.

When I didn't receive a Ballot, I emailed President Merian about it and this created a storm of defensive exchanges and accusatory messages from the WPOA. President Merian, in answer to my statement that I knew of several other owners that did not receive a ballot, sent this e-mail;

"Please send all names of property owners who did not receive ballots. If we do not receive these names we will then assume that they received their ballots. Our staff has a high level of expertise in email technology. Things have changed a great deal since you retired Richard. Plus have you ever used a consultant well we have. I state again our process will stand up to any legal scrutiny."

That intransigent e-mail said to me they were in denial and becoming accusatory therefore any further communications would be futile. This gave me no choice but to go public since we Property Owners should be aware of any possible Election Irregularities.
.

Anonymous said...

@Anonymous 12/8/2011 8:42 AM who said

As WPOA Watchdog said there's a new law in Texas. But who does it help?
This law helps every lot owner because it prevents unscrupulous HOA boards from denying people the ability to run for office (09/01/2011) or vote (01/01/2011) in HOA elections. Sad to say that a law was needed to prohibit boards like the WPOA from continuing "business as usual".


Who is the largest lot owner in Woodcreek North?
Do you mean the fattest person, the owner of the largest lot, or the owner of the most lots? If you mean the owner of the most lots, it's probably WSP.

Who hasn't paid their owner's fee's in years?

You need a reality check. First of all, the money collected is supposed to be going to road maintenance - but the irresponsible WPOA board has been wasting the bulk of the money on everything but road maintenance. Second of all, this very issue was the subject of a settlement agreement between the WPOA and WSP several years ago. The WPOA board is in violation of that settlement agreement - not WSP. WSP is still trying to ensure that the money is spent on the roads as it was supposed to be under both the restrictive covenants and the settlement agreement. But when you have ignorant board members who are not held personally financially responsible for their actions you end up with board members that are going to behave irrationally.

But now get's to vote!
The right to vote should never have been denied to members in the first place. When the WPOA board decides who gets to run for office and who gets to vote it should not be a surprise that the element of corruption is virtually impossible to eliminate once it takes hold. Time to clean house with the WPOA.

When our legislature passes a new law it is NOT for the little guy, the single lot owner, it's for the Large developer who is stuffing money in their (reps) pockets.This NEW law just made Mr. Porterfield not a Lord but KING!

The new law applies to all property owners. The WPOA board is not going to be permitted to screw ANY member with respect to the right to vote. As to WSP, it is amazing that you complain that they have taken action to ensure that the road maintenance fees are actually spent on road maintenance.

Your complaints could also be readily solved by voting to remove the burden of the WPOA on a section-by-section basis. Just think. No more dealing with corrupt board members, crooked elections, threats of foreclosure, actual foreclosure, the gifting of YOUR property to the WVWA, annoying board members, threats of litigation, assessments, etc.

Anonymous said...

To Anonymous 12/9 10:40 1 Who does the new law help. If a property owner was in good standing with the poa then they were aloud to vote and run for office. Now every dead beat gets to vote and run for office.2 who owes the most lots and gets 1 vote per lot. Yes WSP.3 There were a long time WSP did not pay their fee's, maybe in the last year or two they worked out a deal.4 New Law are not for the little guy and I'll stand by that statement. Everyone gets to vote, dead beats and ALL. KICK

Anonymous said...

To the Blogger on December 9, 2011 1:11 PM,

This comment has to be hoax since no one can possibly be that ignorant and uneducated. Every thing said is incoherent gibberish and then to end it with, "KICK" identifies the author. Using "aloud", instead of "allowed", you've got to be kidding me, nobody is that dumb. Thanks for the chuckle.

Anonymous said...

@ Anonymous "KICK" 12/09/2011 who said...
To Anonymous 12/9 10:40 1 Who does the new law help.
Apparently you cannot read or spell. Read the statement you refer to. The new law helps ALL property owners - particularly the individuals that unscrupulous boards would try to deprive of the right to vote.

If a property owner was in good standing with the poa then they were aloud to vote and run for office.
The POA is an involuntary membership corporation. The "good standing" malarkey is not a legitimate basis to deprive someone of the right to vote in an organization that they are involuntary members of. Who determines "good standing" ? The board that wants to ensure a particular election outcome, that's who.

A common practice among unscrupulous HOA boards was to accuse a homeowner of being "in violation" just prior to an election in order to deprive the homeowner of any ability to vote. Oh, that's only if they wanted to try to justify denying the right to vote. Due to the secrecy of ballots (from the members, not from the board), the boards could and would disregard votes with impunity in order to ensure a particular outcome. The members would never know. Boards would also refuse to disclose ballot tallies in order to help conceal these accounting improprieties.

Tell me, will the WPOA be publicizing the tallies for all the candidates - or will the WPOA claim that the tallies are "private" or "confidential". Ha.

Now every dead beat gets to vote and run for office.
There never was a legitimate basis for depriving anyone of the right to vote.

2 who owes the most lots and gets 1 vote per lot. Yes WSP.
Do you mean "owns" the most lots? Perhaps then they have at least as much if not more at stake than any other owner in the subdivision? What are you afraid of? Why shouldn't WSP be able to vote?

3 There were a long time WSP did not pay their fee's, maybe in the last year or two they worked out a deal.

Really? What fountain of knowledge did you get this information from? In reality, the WPOA board has been squandering the members' assessments largely on everything EXCEPT what the funds were supposed to be used on in the first place. WSP actually contributed a large lump sum of money to the WPOA and the parties agreed to additional payments from WSP - in return WPOA agreed to make certain changes and to identify roads that would be conveyed to the county for maintenance. WPOA wholly breached its end of the deal. The WPOA is the "deadbeat", not WSP. The current opportunity to eliminate the liability of the WPOA by conveying the roads to the county is a great deal for all the members - yet a few WPOA board members insist upon breaching their earlier agreement with WSP and pursuing a path that is detrimental to all the members.

4 New Law are not for the little guy and I'll stand by that statement. Everyone gets to vote, dead beats and ALL. KICK

You have your facts wrong. Consider the source. At any rate, people should always have the right to vote in an involuntary membership organization. An involuntary membership organization has involuntary membership because it was designed to operate against the interests of the vast majority of its members. No one would be a member if membership was voluntary - because the vast majority of the people over there want absolutely nothing to do with the WPOA.

Anonymous said...

@anonymous 6:03pm
Where did you get your info. The WPOA did not breach the agreement with WSP! Since you seem to know so much about the agreement between the two parties then how do you explain that the agreement specifies that both parties must agree to which roads to bring up to county standards. This year the WPOA and WSP were unable to reach an agreement ON WHICH ROADS to turn over to the county so the agreement was complied with. No win no foul!

Anonymous said...

@Richard Sullivan: if the WPOA is so full of corruption, inept staffers and Board members, why do you continue as a Board member. If all these things are true, why would you suggest your wife nominate and possibly subject herself and others to working in such a stressful atmosphere. Judging from your many negative postings on this blog and your "sour grapes feeling" at not being nominated for another term on the WPOA or in not having your wife nominate you from the floor, you must be finding this all very stressful for yourself. Why did you not fill out the first term of service on the Board? Did you resign? And then you quickly accepted to serve again? What is the ulterior motive? You seem quite comfortable in the company of Winton Porterfield of Wimberley Springs. That cannot bode well for the WPOA when one of its Board members seems to side in all things with Mr. Porterfield. Some things are not ringing true here and you seem to feel that YOU have an "axe to grind" against the WPOA. Your endless diatribes on any number of subjects and using numerous pseudonyms are serving to make this blog spot severely lacking in consequence.

Anonymous said...

Watch for the 2012 WPOA Budget due out next month at the January 21 Members Meeting and see how much they intend to spend on Administrative costs versus Road Work. In 2011 they budgeted for 42% of their income to be spent on Administrative costs. It will likely be even worse in 2012 since their personnel costs remain ridiculously high at nearly $100,000 and their revenue is shrinking.

Why do they call them Maintenance Fees?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous at 12/9/11 7:25 PM:

Since you seem to know so much about the agreement between the two parties then how do you explain that the agreement specifies that both parties must agree to which roads to bring up to county standards. This year the WPOA and WSP were unable to reach an agreement ON WHICH ROADS to turn over to the county so the agreement was complied with. No win no foul!

...This or any other year - and you failed to mention the other parts of the agreement that the WPOA board has also failed to comply with. There are also concepts of "good faith", "reasonable", and "fair dealing" that you appear to be unfamiliar with.

We can discuss the parts that the WPOA failed to comply with as well as whether the controlling interest of the WPOA board is acting in good faith (or not). Instead of arguing about it here on RoundUp, why not post the agreement so we can debate the merits of your statements? Why would the WPOA board want to conceal the agreement from its members?

If you can't convince anyone here, do you really think a judge and jury are going to buy the story from the WPOA board?

If the WPOA provokes litigation, I would bet that the WPOA board (or a majority of its board members) will be found: i) to have breached the agreement; ii) to have acted unreasonably; and iii) to have acted in bad faith. By the way, a settlement agreement is a contract and the prevailing party can get its attorney fees in a breach of contract action. I wouldn't put my money on the WPOA board to prevail.

One thing is for certain, at least one involuntary member of the WPOA is going to ensure that the WPOA board will not get the opportunity to divert that member's "road maintenance" fees to the board's own pet projects or favored vendors.

History has shown that the best way to do that is to ensure that the WPOA board never gets to lay its hands directly on the money. So buck up buttercup.

Anonymous said...

To the Anonymous WPOA supporter or Employee of December 9, 2011 7:25 PM ,

You said;

"This year the WPOA and WSP were unable to reach an agreement ON WHICH ROADS to turn over to the county so the agreement was complied with. This year the WPOA and WSP were unable to reach an agreement ON WHICH ROADS to turn over to the county so the agreement was complied with. No win no foul! ".

How can you say the agreement was complied with when the WPOA did nothing and refused to meet with WSP at their request for most of the year and then after the year was nearly over, made some really stupid arguments and refused to agree?

The "foul" is that the Property Owners Lost.

The Rule 11 Settlement Agreement of December 2008 that ended the long and expensive lawsuit between the WPOA and WSP, says in part:

"WSP pays the WPOA $202,000 in full satisfaction of the 2006, 2007 and 2008 assessments for lots owned by WSP, Wimberley Quicksand, Asset Management Trust and the remaining named defendants in the Assessments lawsuit. "

"In 2009 and each year going forward, WSP agrees to pay $15.43 for each lot it or its affiliates named above owns that is listed in the 1987 Settlement Agreement and the amount specified in applicable deed restrictions, as may be amended for all other lots, provided that Wimberley Springs receives a dollar for dollar reduction for assessments due for every dollar it spends on roads in the WPOA Sections or on main roads adjacent to the WPOA Sections. The parties will meet quarterly to discuss and agree on road projects. If WSP spends more on such agreed road projects than the total assessments due in any one year, then the excess is carried over to subsequent years."


WSP did pay the WPOA the $202,000 in December 2008. In 2009 WSP paved Valley Springs from the 2325 Entrance to Flaming Cliff for $50,000. In 2010 the WPOA, WSP and Hays County entered into a contract (MOU) that improved 10 miles of roads in Woodcreek North and handed them over to the County to maintain them in perpetuity for about $38,000.

This agreement worked just fine for the Property Owners until this year when a new WPOA administration took over.

The final part of the agreed upon repairs are the widening of the low water crossings on Valley Springs which is being finished right now. It is important to know that the 2011 WPOA tried to renege on the MOU and get a refund from the County instead of the widening. The County went ahead with the widening in compliance with the MOU. Those wider crossings that you enjoy today were almost taken away by the present misguided WPOA.

Since the new WPOA "Leadership?" entered the scene in January 2011, no agreement has been reached because the WPOA, through incompetence and delay tactics refused to meet with WSP and propose a list of roads to dedicate until the year 2011 was nearly over. No roadwork was performed so WSP will not be paying the WPOA anything for this year. The bottom line is that the WPOA WON and the Property Owners LOST. I guess you could say WSP kind of won by not having to pay the WPOA about $37,000 this year but that would be a hollow victory since Woodcreek North will continue to receive substandard roadwork paid for by funds ripped from the pockets of the Property Owners.

If the WPOA continues to block the terms of the Agreement they will certainly end up back in court, the Rule 11 Settlement Agreement will be voided and the WPOA will have to pay the $202,000 and more back to WSP. No roads will be repaired and the previous litigation will pick up where it left off in 2008 with the Property Owners footing the entire bill.

Does that really sound like," No win no foul!" as you said.

I'm not Richard said...

@ Anonymous 12/10/11 7:25 AM who said...

@Richard Sullivan: if the WPOA is so full of corruption, inept staffers and Board members, why do you continue as a Board member.
My understanding is that the board unilaterally changed the term of the position that Richard has. Richard is serving out the term. I'm glad Richard does not subscribe to the "groupthink" mentality promoted by a few other board members.

Judging from your many negative postings on this blog and your "sour grapes feeling" at not being nominated for another term on the WPOA or in not having your wife nominate you from the floor, you must be finding this all very stressful for yourself.
I'm not Richard. There are lots of WPOA members that have negative sentiments about the WPOA . Your other point is specious at best since Richard could have nominated himself from the floor if he wanted to. Also try reconciling this statement with the one you made above.

You seem quite comfortable in the company of Winton Porterfield of Wimberley Springs. That cannot bode well for the WPOA when one of its Board members seems to side in all things with Mr. Porterfield.
I'm not Richard. However, I find it odd that you believe that board members should act contrary to the interests of the other members of the WPOA as a matter of fundamental principle. Why not identify the issue and the position that you took and let the rest of the Readers decide for themselves whose interests that the other board members are acting in?

Some things are not ringing true here and you seem to feel that YOU have an "axe to grind" against the WPOA. Your endless diatribes on any number of subjects and using numerous pseudonyms are serving to make this blog spot severely lacking in consequence.
I'm not Richard. I cannot think of anything positive to say about the WPOA except that a bunch of property owners already overwhelmingly voted to exclude their property from the WPOA corporation and more are sure to follow. If the blog was "lacking in consequence" then you wouldn't need to post. I think the blog is helping to spread the word about the WPOA board's abuses of the involuntary members of the WPOA corporation. The rest of your comment is misplaced. Unscrupulous individuals use the "WPOA" corporation as their cloak of anonymity to carry out their personal agendas while trying to divert attention away from the wizards behind the curtain. The WPOA is a cancer on the rest of the property owners. Some owners have already found the cure by voting to remove their property from the WPOA on a section-by-section basis. More are sure to follow. The WPOA is not something that can be repaired. That would be like trying to "repair" a wart. The cure is to excise the WPOA corp.

Anonymous said...

Involuntary membership! Didn't all these people choose to buy property there and didn't they know there was a POA that they were required to paid dues to. And doesn't this include ALL lot owners. And Can't all lot owners run for office and don't the office holders represent the lot owners. Kind of like a mini Democracy. And if the lot owner do not like what the office holders do, then vote them out of office. Just because you don't like what the office holders are doing with the fee's doesn't mean that the majority doesn't like what the office holders are doing or they would be voted out of office. Kick

I'm not Richard said...

@ Anonymous 12/10/2011 12:55 PM who said...
Involuntary membership! Didn't all these people choose to buy property there and didn't they know there was a POA that they were required to paid dues to.

Pay "dues" for what? You aren't fooling anyone into believing that "choice" is a viable option for a large number of people. "Choice" is fleeting when the choice becomes which HOA you are forced to be a member of. Being an involuntary "member" of an HOA is nothing to brag about - it means you are a second class citizen.

And doesn't this include ALL lot owners. And Can't all lot owners run for office and don't the office holders represent the lot owners.

Aren't you the same individual that complained a few posts ago about the board not being able to exclude people from running for office any more? Because of the conduct of boards like the WPOA and the attitudes of individuals like yourself, new laws were needed to prevent the WPOA from denying people the right to vote or denying them from being able to run for office. The right to vote goes into effect January 1, 2012.

Kind of like a mini Democracy.

Not at all. Democracies respect individual rights. The WPOA does not. "Majority rule" is not a "democracy". An organization where the board could deny people the ability to vote for board members or run in board elections is hardly a democracy and it isn't even a vote of the majority.

And if the lot owner do not like what the office holders do, then vote them out of office.

The myth of being able to vote board members out is truly a myth when the board can decide who gets to vote, duh. Getting rid of the WPOA is a better move.

Just because you don't like what the office holders are doing with the fee's doesn't mean that the majority doesn't like what the office holders are doing or they would be voted out of office. Kick

A truly ignorant statement considering that you wanted to dictate who is allowed to vote to begin with. Let's also not forget how the WPOA board controls knowledge of what the board members are doing by holding "executive sessions" and refusing to provide records when requested by homeowners.

When 42% of the owners payments are going to an administration that decides who votes and determines election results, I wouldn't expect the status quo to change by an "election". Do you think the board will divulge election tallies or just declare the outcome of the election? Might also be time to look at the general ledger to see where the other 58% is going.

Suggesting that the majority of homeowners "approve" of what you are doing is egotistical at best. Sounds like a conclusion reached among board members in a groupthink executive session.

Obviously, the WPOA board is intent upon provoking a lawsuit that all the other homeowners will be liable for. Insurance doesn't cover a breach of contract judgment. With "settlement agreements" going back to at least 1987, it's pretty clear that the WPOA corporation has been acting to the detriment of its members for at least 24 years.

How many more years should property owners tolerate dealing with this wart? It has done nothing of value for anyone except the vendors (whose bank accounts thank you) and a few board members (whose egos are only temporarily pacified).

If a section of owners votes to get out of the WPOA before judgment is rendered in the lawsuit that the WPOA is provoking with WSP, then only those owners in the sections remaining with the WPOA will be liable.

Anonymous said...

Hmmm...you are not Richard...Nixon was not a crook...hmmm....just sayin'.

Anonymous said...

Give it a rest, Sue!

Richard Sullivan said...

Getting back on topic ... check these 2 quotes;

"An Electronic voting system is to a mechanical system what a nuclear bomb is to a hand grenade. If someone manages to sabotage it, the results can be catastrophic"

"You know, comrades," says Josef Stalin, "I consider it completely unimportant who in the party will vote, or how; but what is extraordinarily important is this — who will count the votes, and how."

I guess some of the less accomplished readers will say I called the WPOA Board Communists.
`

I'm not Richard said...

Contrary to your insinuations, I am not Richard.

There are plenty of informed owners that are disgusted with the WPOA board.

Richard has only pointed out one of the latest improprieties by the WPOA board.

It's no surprise that the WPOA board would engage in various tactics to ensure the election results are what the incumbent board wants. I mean, if they can't dictate who can run for an election or who can vote any more, then they have to find more creative ways of controlling the outcome of an election, right?

I look forward to seeing the tallies publicized by the board. There will not be any legitimate excuse for refusing to divulge tallies.

Anonymous said...

OMG! The creatins are out in force! These posters know they are on the losing end of this debate so they are trying to fog the debate with extraneous data. They hate the WPOA for reasons of their own which they choose not to let the public know.
Let it go! The election results will show whether or not the method was viable.

Fellow Communist said...

Richard Monkey see Monkey do! Only a communist could recognize another communist.

Anonymous said...

To the Anonymous WPOA Blogger of December 10, 2011 11:39 PM;

You mistakenly said, "The election results will show whether or not the method was viable."

How can you say the results will prove anything?

In the 30s in Germany, the ballot boxes were stuffed to overflowing and Hitler won an election; did those results prove the method viable? It may have been proven effective or efficient and in keeping with nefarious goals but certainly not viable.

The present election is flawed either by accident or design, so the results will be tainted and subject to doubt and a possible legal challenge and investigation. If every voter's ballot is not counted correctly, and I can assure you they won't be, it is the same as stuffing the ballot box. It has recently been discovered the e-mail balloting method used by the WPOA in this election is in violation of a certain Texas Law. More on that later.

By the way, "hate for the WPOA" is not a phrase I would use, it is more like protecting the interests of the hapless Property Owners living under their incompetent rule. It is hard to hate people that are victims of their own propaganda and are suffering from delusions of adequacy. I really pity them, not hate them.

Note: To be clear, I am not comparing the WPOA with the Nazis or Hitler.

Anonymous said...

The WPOA Board's New Motto:

"None of us is as dumb as all of us"
:)

I'm not Richard said...

@Anonymous 12/10/2011 11:39 PM who said:

Let it go! The election results will show whether or not the method was viable.

How ignorant. The complaint is about the method or process being employed by the board this year for elections.

Exactly how will "election results" determine whether the "method was viable"?

If the result is that the candidates nominated by the board lose, then is the method viable? If the result is that the candidates nominated by the board win, then is the method viable?

The complaint is about the process of delivery (or lack thereof) of ballots to the owners. You might want to re-consider the process of discriminatory delivery of ballots.

Anonymous said...

Dear Richard and Not Richard,
There is an ancient and honorable saying about the outhouse. "The more you stir it, the worse it stinks." You are doing a great job of stinking up your cause. Keep stirring, fellows.

Not Anybody said...

I bow to your expertise on outhouses but I can't imagine why anyone would stir one. a more ancient saying is; He who smelt it, dealt it.

Anonymous said...

@anonymous 9:06 am
It sure sounds like you called the WPOA board nazis!
Lets see the posters have called the WPOA board communists and now nazis. Gee whiz don't you nuts know how to play nice. Your posts have guarantied that the WPOA board.will not do anything you want. But I guess that is what you want. I believe the term is divide and conquer! Well it won't work. It never has in the past so why do you think it will now.

Anonymous said...

"In the 30s in Germany, the ballot boxes were stuffed to overflowing and Hitler won an election; did those results prove the method viable?"

Anytime a side of the debate uses this type of crazy hyperbole to make their point, they are either insane or Nazis themselves.

"Just say No" to Sullivan and his Winter's Bone clan.

Anonymous said...

This is to the people who are calling names to Mr. Sullivan. It is very plane to see that you are shooting the messenger instead of arguing about the letter. I'm starting to think Mr. Sullivan may have really uncovered some wrong things with the Wpoa since you prefer to use personl attacks. He has not joined in as far as I can see and that is fine for him. I got my ballot in an email and followed the instructions to make Xs and send it. I have no way of knowing where it went or if it went anyplace and that is bothers me some. From what Mr. Sulivan said the system did not send all people a ballot so maybe this wasnt ready to use yet. I would rather have a ballot in a envelope by mail delivery next time. If you keep that personal stuff up here I will think there is some thing wrong with you.

Anonymous said...

To regain any legitimacy at this point, the WPOA needs to completely scrap their current election results and start over - only with a new snail mail ballot and a return snail mail vote card.

Anonymous said...

To the Anonymous of December 13, 2011 4:07 AM

I completely agree that this is the only honorable solution to the problem but I wouldn't hold my breath. The current Board does not have a record of doing the correct thing even when faced with overwhelming proof as is the case here. They and their surrogates are responsible for the vicious personal attacks on this blog because they have nothing else to offer. All of their excuses and claims have been shot down in flames.

If you were around last summer when they created the Eagle Rock Sidewalk Debacle which ultimately ended in a virtual property owner's revolt, you could have seen them at their worst.

Anonymous said...

The WPOA Maintenance Fee Bills are arriving in the WPOA Property Owner's mailboxes right now. They bragged about saving over $800 with their failed Hybrid Balloting system. It just occurred to me to ask why they didn't send the Bills out with the ballots? That would have saved a bunch more. Saving money was the whole reason they gave for the Hybrid System. Maybe they didn't combine the bills and ballots because they knew they wouldn't go to everybody?

This is just too easy.

:o)

Voice of Reason said...

There is a very vocal minority in this community whose sole purpose is to discredit the WPOA. For reasons of their own they attempt to disrupt every board and general meeting of the WPOA.

The smear campaign currently going on is a prime example of their agenda. They started declaring that the "Hybrid" balloting was not working before any BALLOTS WERE EVEN SENT OUT. The ballots were sent out, both email and regular mail on Nov. 30th. It has been only 2 weeks since balloting started. This is not enough time to determine if this method works or not.

Allegations have been made that if property owners did not get their ballot in their email then they were denied their right to vote. The ballots are not due until 10am on Jan. 21st. If someone did not get a ballot, either written or email, they have until the 21st of Jan to obtain another. I am sure, thanks to all the coverage, that everyone in the Hays County area knows by now that the ballots have been sent out. That was the one good thing that came out of their campaign.

The majority of the WPOA board voted to ballot by email and US mail. Despite this I am sure that someone will challenge this election no matter which side wins.

The community needs to standup and tell the people who are using the roundup for their personal agenda to SHUT UP. This site is for items of general public interest not local gossip and petty backbiting.
If you want to destroy the WPOA/WSP then do it elsewhere. I for one am tired of this foolish petty backstabbing.

If you are tired of it too then post a comment and tell them to "SHUT UP NOW".

Richard Sullivan said...

Well, it looks like this thread is winding down after a record breaking number of comments. Thanks to the Editor, Bob Ochoa for allowing the space for this important discussion. This is Democracy in its purest form.

Yesterday I found out about 3 more disenfranchised Woodcreek North voters did not receive ballots. It is now two weeks since the WPOA Staff and President made their apparent specious claims that they sent ballots to everyone and still we are hearing these troubling stories. It is clear to me along with many people that I have spoken to and at least one other WPOA Board Member that this thing is worse than we first thought.

The real shame of all of is that, this was supposed to be the first Democratic Election to allow everyone to vote in the history of the WPOA. It did not happen because far too many voters, we may never know how many did not receive ballots.

For the first time, due to new Texas Laws, All Property Owners in the jurisdiction would have been allowed to Run For office and Vote. Due to someone's incompetence or design this election is corrupted to the point it must be scrapped and a new election held using only Paper Ballots snail-mailed to a verified list of Property owners in the subdivisions. That list must be verified by an independent arbiter and made public or the credibility of the WPOA and those elected will forever be tainted. The damage to the WPOA by this very public debacle is yet to be determined but if not corrected it will certainly be severe.

The most suspicious thing is that the Bills for the WPOA Maintenance Fees are arriving in the member snail- mail boxes at this time. Since the Board claimed that the reason for the Hybrid Balloting was to save some $800+; then why were the Bills not sent at the same time as the Ballots to save even more money? Was it because, as someone suggested, they wanted the Bills to reach EVERYBODY?

Interestingly, I have yet to receive my Maintenance Fee Bill. I don't plan to pay it until the last legal minute anyway, as a form of protest. My action is to punish the Board and Staff in my small way, for this train wreck. I encourage others to do the same. If the Board agrees to abort this "election?" and start over, I may modify my stance on this.

The WPOA will be holding its monthly Board meeting tomorrow at 2:30 pm at the 109 Woodacre office. Everyone is invited to attend and hear first hand how the Board is going to handle or spin this mess. Hopefully they will not hide behind "Executive Session" but will discuss this subject in the open. It is my hope that they will allow guests to speak on this or any other subjects, like every other Deliberative Body in the County.

On a personal note, I will be stepping aside from the WPOA Board in January but will not be going away. Far from it, I plan to continue as a WPOA Watchdog and an unpaid Property Owners Advocate.

O^O

Anonymous said...

The humanoid calling itself "the Voice of Reason" is anything but... It is obvious to many who this is. How's that 50k job working out for you? You should be working hard to keep it instead of playing with the grownups on the blog. Your lies are simply over-the-top and you have demonized just about everybody that has commented here. The "very vocal minority in this community" of which you speak is called "The Property Owners of the WPOA" and they should be vocal and you know why, more than anybody. Your so-called facts are about as accurate as the WPOA's Balloting.

When you say," The community needs to standup and tell the people who are using the roundup for their personal agenda to SHUT UP." I completely agree with you, so you need to SHUT UP!

Anonymous said...

Right you are, Richard. Don't shut up. KEEP STIRRING...you're doing a superb job of fowling your nest.
Please don't stop now.

Anonymous said...

@ the alleged "Voice of Reason" who said

There is a very vocal minority in this community whose sole purpose is to discredit the WPOA.

Ha ha. The "vocal minority" is the board itself. The board members represent themselves, not the owners of the property in the subdivision. You do a great job of discrediting the WPOA corporation by affiliation on a regular basis.


The majority of the WPOA board voted to ballot by email and US mail.
Well there you go again thinking the WPOA board has such powers. The WPOA board does not have the authority to choose the method of voting for the owners. Allegedly having an email address for an owner does not equate to consent of the owner to receive a ballot or to vote by email. You might also want to read the new voting statute. The "gist" of the statute is not sufficient for compliance. No one should be voting by email because their votes will simply be disregarded.

Despite this I am sure that someone will challenge this election no matter which side wins.
"Which side"? Now you are showing your colors. Tell us more about the "sides". Do you mean the candidates nominated by the board vs the candidates nominated by the owners?

You should call yourself the voice of bias and identify your incumbent board position. No doubt you are counting on the nominees you nominated to return the favor when your time is up. It's pretty clear what "side" you are on.

Voice of Reason said...

@ anonymous 12/14 2:29pm
You have the wrong person. I wish I earned 50K a year. Do you know where I can get such a job?
You sir need to get back on your meds. Normally you make some sense but I am beginning to wonder if you are starting to feel like people are out to get you. When people resort to name calling it means that they know they are losing the fight.
I do not lie! Everything I said can be backed up with facts. Just go on the WPOA website and read the minutes of their meetings then go to the web and read the new HOA legislation that was just passed this fall. But I am sure that you won't do that you would rather name call and bully instead of look for the truth.

I'm not Richard said...

@ "Voice of Reason" who said:

Everything I said can be backed up with facts. Just go on the WPOA website and read the minutes of their meetings then go to the web and read the new HOA legislation that was just passed this fall.

The "minutes" of the WPOA aren't worth the paper they are written on. They do not accurately reflect the meetings. Who prepares those minutes? Hint: It's not the board members. Perhaps the office manager could come clean now.

Merry Merian said...

@I'm not Richard
The WPOA board minutes are prepared by the secretary not the office manager. They are recorded and typed then sent by the secretary to the board members. If you ever attended a board meeting you would know that.
We have been lucky to have a wonderful secretary the past several years and are sorry to see her leave the board. Our loss is other boards gain. Good luck Linda and many thanks!

Richard Sullivan said...

Merry, You and I don't agree about much theses days but you are correct in what you said about our Secretary, Linda. She has done an excellent job for the three years that I have been associated with the WPOA. Linda has been the one steady performer on the board and when others came and went or came and failed she went forth steadily with style and grace. She will be truly missed and extremely difficult to replace. I appreciate her long and loyal service and wish her the very best in her other pursuits.

I'm not Richard said...

@ "Merry"

you are correct only in that I was not at yesterday's meeting.

Who types the minutes, Merry?

Your equivocal comment reminds of the Stalin-esque quote cited by Richard Sullivan, paraphrased here as "he who casts the vote determines nothing; he who counts the votes determines everything"

Doubly applicable as an analogy in the present case- with respect to the election as well as with respect to the more recent topic of the WPOA minutes. Who types the minutes, Merry?

There is also a new state law relating to the manner of conducting elections - particularly as it relates to electronic balloting. Did you actually read the statute - because you certainly haven't complied. I said "you" because you aren't going to be allowed to hide behind the mask of the WPOA.

There is also a new state law relating to the documenting of "executive sessions" in the minutes that you should educate yourself about.

Do you really want to initiate an argument about the accuracy of the minutes of the WPOA? I maintain they aren't worth the paper they are written on as to either i) the accuracy of the information that is set forth; ii) as to the content of what was actually discussed [i.e., discussions omitted from the minutes]

Instead of incessant arguing and playing petty games with you and having to constantly deal with the abuses by your organization, however, residents are just much better off dumping the WPOA in the entirety, section-by-section.

By the way, who will count the votes in the "election", Merry?

Merry Merian said...

@ Richard Sullivan
Richard you are right we have not seen eye to eye on many topics lately but we do agree that Linda has served the WPOA board well and will be missed.
@ I'm Not Richard
The minutes were typed by Linda and she did an excellent job.
The votes will be tallied by independent tellers as required by the legislature's new rules.
If you wish to attend the next board meeting and learn who the tellers will be you are welcome Winton.

Richard Sullivan said...

Thursday, December 15th, the WPOA Board of Directors held their last Board meeting of 2011. In attendance were President Merry Merian, Vice President Duanne Redus, Secretary, Linda Germain and Directors, Sally Caldwell, Anita Fournier, Sue Csejka, Glynn Schanen, and myself Richard Sullivan. The WPOA's attorney David Junkin arrived a little later. Also present was the non- member, Office Manager, Janelle Delaney. Absent from the meeting was Treasurer, Keith Haney. Disappointedly, only two Property Owners/Guests showed up.

The Meeting was called to order at about 2:30 pm and after about 5 minutes, moved into Executive Session by President Merian ostensibly to discuss a sealed bid offer for the purchase of one of the WPOA's 59 owned lots and "other legal issues". No mention was made that we would be discussing the balloting problems.

I can not comment on the content of the discussions since we were hidden behind a veil of secrecy. The session lasted about 30 minutes or so. When we reconvened back into open session the only subject that was mentioned by President Merian as being discussed was the sealed bid issue that was postponed to the next meeting for lack of detail. There was no immediate mention of other issues discussed. I felt that the Balloting should have been discussed in open session, considering the present controversy.

Eventually we did briefly discuss and vote on a proposed "fix" for the Balloting problems arrived at in secret. It was decided by a unanimous vote that the WPOA will snail-mail out post cards to "every property owner" telling them that they should have received a ballot by now, and instructing them on how to obtain a paper Ballot. Sally Caldwell suggested the use of the services of Texas State University and their print/mail bulk mailing system for the cards. I would have preferred the election be aborted and restarted as a paper ballot only election, but this satisfies me for now. Now we'll have to see if everyone gets a post card. If not this whole thing will restart. There was no mention of the wording of the notice, so it will likely be left up to the Satff.

The Administration and Staff fell far short of admitting any mistakes or misconduct and Janelle Delaney entered into the record her unsigned version of how the Balloting was carried out. Her "narrowtive" is entertaining if not informative. To be fair, I will try to present her unedited account of the process here in a later post due to Blogger's document size restrictions.

The next notable item discussed was the performance reviews of the 3 WPOA Employees. I thought that all of these personnel subjects should have been discussed in Executive Session. As usual this year there seemed to be some confusion as how to proceed but it was eventually decided that each Director would fill out a form and submit it to the office.

The final item discussed in open session was the subject of giving the WPOA Office Manager, Janelle Delaney a Christmas Bonus and how much. President Merian allowed Delaney to be present for the entire discussion, which I felt was awkward and improper, probably intended to be an intimidation factor. After some discussions, pro and con, Ms. Delaney made mention of the fact that she received a Bonus of $1,500 last year and added she received $5,000 each of the previous years. When she said, "$5,000" a gasp could be heard in the room.

The Board voted 4 to 2 to give her a Christmas Bonus of $1,500 and possibly even more after checking with Mr. Haney to see "what we can afford", as President Merian put it. Delaney was the only employee that was considered for a bonus at this meeting. DuAnne Redus and I were the only two Directors that voted against the bonus believing that her budgeted compensation (a salary of $41,600 plus some generous benefits) was already more than adequate for her position and the local economy.

Merry Merian said...

I wish to apologize to Winton. He notified me that he was not the poster. I still invite any one who wishes to attend the WPOA board meetings. Many thanks to Mrs Sullivan and Mr Frankmann for their attendance at the last meeting.

Merry Merian said...

The unauthorized minutes of the last meeting recently posted were not approved by the WPOA Board and as such can not be authenticated. The authorized minutes will be posted after approval of the board at the Jan meeting.

Janelle Delaney said...

Mr. Sullivan:

Your unfounded allegations against me have caused me great harm.

Your assault on my character and competence have caused me great harm.

I Googled my name and sure enough there your allegations are for the whole world and any future employer to read. As you know, all employers nowadays use the internet to vet any and all prospective employees.

Your attack on my character, my competence and your accusations against me are now and forever memorialized.

I have no idea why you have done this to me. None whatsoever.

Sincerely,
Janelle Delaney

Curious said...

To Merry Merian,

Will the actual tally (count) of the votes for each candidate be announced at the January 21 meeting or hidden from the members?

Anonymous said...

It seems that Richard Sullivan has become to the Roundup what his crony, Clint Frankman, is to Eagle Rock and its surrounds: verbose, annoying and "never done"!

I'm not Richard, I'm not Winton said...

Why are people threatened with the loss of their homes - compelled to pay assessments under threat of foreclosure - so that the money can be gifted to others at the discretion of the WPOA board?

This isn't about the merits of the recipient of those funds but rather questioning a thoughtless board that is so cavalier with funds taken by threat of foreclosure. These funds were taken under the pretext that the funds would be used for road maintenance.

Why not let the residents whose money you have taken decide whether they want to voluntarily contribute extra for WPOA employees to have bonuses?

The victims of around 50 lawsuits the WPOA filed against its own members since January 1, 2010 will probably be among those that "just say no". The WPOA board and its admin have cost those homeowners thousands and thousands of dollars.

Of course since the WPOA board has excused the WVWA from having to pay assessments on lots that the WPOA has donated (at member expense) to the WVWA, you will no doubt have the support of the WVWA for gifting the money paid by everyone else. He who robs Peter to give to Paul will always have the support of Paul.

Kick the miserable WPOA board and its "business" practices out of your section. Eventually, the WPOA will only burden the lots of the board members and we'll see how generous they are with their own money as opposed to everyone else's.

Anonymous said...

@Merry Merian who said...
The unauthorized minutes of the last meeting recently posted were not approved by the WPOA Board and as such can not be authenticated. The authorized minutes will be posted after approval of the board at the Jan meeting.

The January meeting is when the new board will be determined. Are you saying that the new board is somehow expected to authenticate the former board's minutes?

I'm not Richard, I'm not Winton said...

Isn't it arbitrary, capricious, & discriminatory for the WPOA corp board to excuse the WVWA from having to pay assessments while threatening other members with foreclosure for failure to pay?

Perhaps it is time to challenge the ability of the WPOA to demand fees from anybody. No doubt the WPOA realizes their "problem" when it comes to demanding fees from owners. Did anyone else get an early bill for assessments with no due date or late date?

Anonymous said...

-> Merry Merian who said...

"The unauthorized minutes of the last meeting recently posted were not approved by the WPOA Board and as such can not be authenticated. The authorized minutes will be posted after approval of the board at the Jan meeting."

What? So we will have to wait until the January meeting, after the election is over to hear what you say happened at last Thursdays meeting? How absurd! Weren't you at the meeting?

I guess I will rely on Richard's report which seems logical and no one including you has disputed it's content. The post card thing looks like a victory for the good guys. The bonus thing, not so much.

So it seems to me.

Merry Merian said...

Anyone who cares to know the facts about the lots WPOA deeded over to WVWA can come by the WPOA office and the staff and I will be happy to explain it to you. I am not going to rehash an issue again that has been explained to anonymous many times in this blog.
Anonymous you seem to have trouble understanding this issue, for which I am sorry for your disabilities.
At the other Anonmyous the WPOA will be having a board meeting in Jan prior to the general meeting in which the election will be determined. Also the board is only electing 3 new board members so the other 6 board members can review and approve the minutes.

Merry Merian said...

To all the posters on this blog:
I am signing off for the Holidays.

I am not going to read any comments until after Jan 2nd. If you need to contact me you can send an email to the WPOA or call the WPOA office and leave a message.

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all and to all a Good Night!

I'm not Richard, I'm not Winton said...

@ Merry Merian 12/18/2011 9:40 PM who said:

Anyone who cares to know the facts about the lots WPOA deeded over to WVWA can come by the WPOA office and the staff and I will be happy to explain it to you.

Merry Merian is free to openly explain openly (not behind closed doors with selected individuals):

i) why the WPOA posted its members' properties for foreclosure

ii) why the WPOA purchased the same members' properties at foreclosure sale (thus costing the rest of the members even more money)

iii) why the WPOA is conveying property to the WVWA

iv) why the WPOA is excusing the WVWA from having to pay the very assessments that the WPOA threatens to foreclose other members' properties over

v) why ANY member should continue to pay a dime to the WPOA instead of challenging the WPOA's authority to collect in view of its history and arbitrary, capricious, and discriminatory conduct regarding collecting assessments.

I am not going to rehash an issue again that has been explained to anonymous many times in this blog.

Considering that you didn't "hash" it to begin with, your ongoing refusal to explain is no surprise. All you have done is deny that the events ever occurred. You've only "invited" people to come to the office to discuss the matter when confronted with the undeniable truth that you recorded with the Hays County Clerk the documents conveying the properties to the WVWA and excusing the WVWA from having to pay assessments. The real reason you want people to come to the office is so that you can identify them and harass them.

I find it disingenuous that you "thank" Ms. Frankmann and Ms. Sullivan for having showed up at the last board meeting. The WPOA has sued the Frankmanns and the board and/or its admin have threatened to sue Richard Sullivan on multiple occasions. Your "public meetings" are a ceremonious facade.

Anonymous you seem to have trouble understanding this issue, for which I am sorry for your disabilities.

Wow, Merry. Sticks and stones... You are "sorry" alright... just plain sorry. Contrary to your statements here, you initially denied that these events ever occurred. Then when confronted with the undeniable truth (you couldn't ignore the records filed with the Hays County Clerk), you resort to name calling and try to claim that you already addressed the issue. Feel free to point to the post where you "explained" the actions of the WPOA board. Weren't you on the board that signed off on excusing the WVWA from paying assessments, Merry?

At the other Anonmyous the WPOA will be having a board meeting in Jan prior to the general meeting in which the election will be determined. Also the board is only electing 3 new board members so the other 6 board members can review and approve the minutes.

This is almost too easy. You intend to hold a board meeting to determine the outcome of the election prior to the general meeting. Ha ha. I have no doubt you already determined the outcome that you want.

Your "approval" technique denies the 3 incumbent board member any opportunity to object to the minutes and the new board members can't really vote on them - what are you trying to pull here, Merry?

Since you are now going to have a board meeting prior to the general meeting, and since the current board members will hold office until such time as their replacements have been elected, it's pretty obvious that you should have the current board decide whether to approve the minutes prior to the general meeting (i.e. prior to their replacement). After all you did say you were holding a "board" meeting prior to the general meeting. Merry, are you capable of generating something besides nonsensical excuses?

Anonymous said...

@Merry Merian 12/18/2011 9:40 PM who said...

At the other Anonmyous the WPOA will be having a board meeting in Jan prior to the general meeting in which the election will be determined. Also the board is only electing 3 new board members so the other 6 board members can review and approve the minutes.

What a confession. Unbelievable.

The board is going to be electing 3 new board members ??? The OWNERS are supposed to be electing the new board members, Merry. I guess that's why you believe the outcome will determine if the new process "works" as stated in earlier posts.

The prez' latest confession should remove any doubt about the existence of improprieties regarding this "election".

Anonymous said...

Gee whiz any person of some intelligence can understand that the board does not elect and that Merry just misspoke. But then again not all of us are perfect like Anonmyous is. Give it a rest Perfect ...

You have already made up your "mind" that this election is rigged and nothing any one can or will say is going to change it so I am stating that I am voting for the WPOA board candidates and encourage all property owners to ignore this "person" and vote for the nominating committee candidates.

Anonymous said...

=> Anonymous of December 19, 2011 3:02 PM who said...

"I am stating that I am voting for the WPOA board candidates and encourage all property owners to ignore this "person" and vote for the nominating committee candidates."

You are very likely one of the "Witches of Woodcreek" that are already in the tank for the three candidates nominated by the Board. It should be known that two for those candidates, Caldwell and Sumter do not live in either Woodcreek North or Eagle Rock.

Sumter has not attended a meeting of the WPOA for years including the one where she was nominated by the Board. Why would she or Sally want to run for Director of a subdivision they do not even live in? Even more curious is, why is Liz running for the board of an organization which she sued back in 2002-2006?

It is surely to attempt to incorporate the subdivision into a City as has been tried 3 times before. Sally was the Wizard behind the curtain in 2009/10 and was very active in the rush to incorporate Wimberley ten years ago.

Anonymous said...

Actually the 3 "Board's Candidates" are really the "President's Candidates". The WPOA rules state, "The President will appoint, a nominating committee in September. "

The Office manager has nearly always been the main recruiter for Candidates.

For years, Mickey Trent, has been the crony committee member of choice of the admin for just about everything for which the Board needs an "independent" member. She is not independent but very partisan and pro incorporation.

Mickey Trent said...

Since Sullivan has called me out personally, here is my reply...thanks for the opening, Dick.
Your friendly neighborhood "witch"

By now most Woodcreek North and Eagle Rock  residents are aware of the manufactured “crisis” concerning the election of three new members to the board of our property owners association. The loudest and most persistent voice in the assault on these candidates has been relentless in his accusations, personal attacks and out and out fabrications about the WPOA, its current board members, office staff and everyone else in Christendom who disagrees with him and dares appreciate our fellow residents who have stepped forward to serve the community. He would have us believe that board members are somehow profiting from their positions and are dishonest, corrupt and heaven knows what else.

The truth is this and it is simple enough for even the naysayer and his followers to grasp. Members of the board are our neighbors. They care about their homes, the community, and living conditions enough that they are willing to serve without concern for reward of any kind. Rather than being vilified, these people are due thanks for their service.

The Ridgerunner has previously endorsed this slate of candidates: Caldwell, Regan and Sumter and sees nothing in this man’s accusations, personal attacks, and rants to prompt a withdrawal of that endorsement. On the current board we have representation by persons who own property and homes in Woodcreek North. With the addition to the board of Sally Caldwell and Liz Sumter both of whom own property in Eagle Rock, those members of the WPOA family will be well represented.

It is a sad fact that we have no way of knowing who would be represented by the opposing slate of nominees.

~~ Mickey Trent, Editor

Richard Sullivan said...

The President of the WPOA Board, Merry Merian made the following announcement to the Board yesterday by e-mail;

"NOTICE OF MEETINGS

Board of Directors Meeting
January 19, 2012 2:30p.m.
109 Woodacre Drive

General Membership Meeting
January 21, 2012 10:00a.m.
109 Woodacre Drive

On January 21, 2012 Immediately following the adjournment of the
General Membership Meeting
A Board of Directors meeting will be held
at 109 Woodacre Drive"


The first meeting listed is the Board meeting where the much touted minutes of the December 15 Board meeting will be presented for approval by the Board. If approved, they will become official and could be at best posted on the WPOA website for less than 48 hours prior to the end of the Election.

The second meeting is the "biggie" where according to the WPOA's Bylaws, "tellers, appointed by the President, and who will not be members of the Board, will open the sealed ballots, tally the votes and announce the names of the elected Directors to serve for the ensuing term". New Texas law had to add that the tellers can't be candidates or kin even remotely to the candidates. Hopefully the announced results will include the number of votes for each candidate to add some credibility to the Election. It is important to realize that the results, therefore the Election can be challenged by a recount request up to 15 days after the result is announced and the actual recount must be performed within 30 days. In order to allow a lawful recount, the tally numbers must be announced.

I don't know of any deliberative body that does not release the numbers for each candidate. The WPOA did however; refuse to announce the numbers in the 2010 election where a sitting Board member was defeated. The rejected candidate was given a "do-over" a few weeks later when the Board temporarily increased their number of Directors form 9 to11. (ref. March 18, 2010 WPOA Board meeting minutes). A little later, after a couple of "opposition" Board members resigned, they reduced the number back to 9 Board members.

The third meeting listed here will be for the "new Board" to elect its 2012 Officers and Committee Chairs for the ACC and Roads. I don't see why that has to be a separate meeting from the Members Meeting unless they want to go into Executive Session to discuss something in secret. I plan to stick around for that meeting as a spectator. I hope others will attend as well. The one last year was a bumbling exercise that one former Board member likened to a "poorly scripted coup d'├ętat". The entertainment value of the WPOA Board has no equal in the Wimberley valley.

I assume these announcements will eventually be posted on the WPOA Website but I place them here where individuals that have shown interest in the Election will be made aware. Before President Merian chimes in and says this is "not approved by the WPOA Board and as such can not be authenticated", let me make mention of the fact that the members of the Board were neither consulted with, nor asked to approve this schedule before it was sent out.

The Grinch said...

Well a Very Merry Christmas to the lot of you. At least I now know where Scrooge retired.

Anonymous said...

Boy I don't see any Christmas spirit on this blog.
This is Christmas fellows give the slander and name calling a rest until after the first of the year.

Richard Sullivan said...

As promised in an earlier post and in the spirit of fairness and openness, here is an unedited transcript of PART 1 the report that Office Manager, Janelle Delaney entered into the record of the December 15, 2011 WPOA Board meeting. This report was also handed out to all Directors present at that public meeting thereby releasing it into the public domain. Although she did not sign this document, during the meeting she took ownership for it and even offered to read it aloud. To be presented here, it had to be broken into two parts due to Blogger's 4096 character limit on document size for one comment.


"Report on the Balloting Process for 2012 Board of Directors Election
Following the Board's decision on November 17th to email ballots to property owners who we had email addresses for and mail ballots via US mail for those property owners we did not have an email for, here is the process we used:

Waiting until after the November General Membership meeting on November 19 th and having received the biographical information from all nominees except Susan Howard , we quickly emailed Susan and asked her to send us her bio. She got back to us right away. Every bio was typed word for word as was presented by the nominee or the nominating committee for inclusion on the ballot. Then we put the ballot together along with balloting instructions for both email ballots and US mail ballots. A newsletter was also written to accompany the ballots as is required in our bylaws.

On the 21st day of November a notice was sent to our email address book advising those property owners they would receive an emailed ballot from a special email address set up only for the election that being wpoaballot@gmail.com.

Per the Texas Property Code (enacted in September 2011) and per our bylaws, once we had our draft of the ballot and the instructions, we had David Junkin, review the ballot, instructions, etc.

The next step was to review all property owners records in my Access database to make sure every property owner had a checked box which assured each property owner was a qualified member (prior to the new Texas laws only property owners who were current on their maintenance fees could be members).

Then we created new labels in the Access program. These labels had to be in alphabetical order. Once a printout for the labels was printed, we proceeded to mark off every property owner who we showed we had an email address for. Those property owners' labels who did not have an email address did not receive a mark. Then we took the copy and copied it to actual labels during this process the copier feed was off a little so some of the labels on the left side were askew and on these labels we hand wrote their account number, name, address. The copier also malfunctioned that day which required maintenance and delayed printing ballots and newsletters.

Once the copier was repaired we proceeded with copying.

Meanwhile we found we could not clone or send our address book to the new gmail election account and Sue had to reenter every email address in to the new email account. We also discovered gmail does not offer the read-receipt option.

After Sue entered all the email addresses into the election gmail account we tested sending the ballot by sending it to her. She received the ballot and voted without incident."

[To Be Continued in Part2]

Richard Sullivan said...

[Part 2]

As promised in an earlier post and in the spirit of fairness and openness, here is an unedited transcript of PART 2 of the report that Office Manager, Janelle Delaney entered into the record of the December 15, 2011 WPOA Board meeting. This report was also handed out to all Directors present at that public meeting thereby releasing it into the public domain. Although she did not sign this document, during the meeting she took ownership for it and even offered to read it aloud. To be presented here, it had to be broken into two parts due to Blogger's 4096 character limit on document size for one comment.

"Report on the Balloting Process for 2012 Board of Directors Election

(Continued from PART 1)
Meanwhile we were processing the US mail ballots which included a ballot with their account number and label (or handwritten in some cases as mentioned above) on the actual ballot, a return envelope, balloting instructions and a newsletter. Those ballots went out before 5p.m. on November 30th thus meeting the 'by December 1st' deadline as is required in the bylaws.

When we felt secure that all systems were go with the electronic balloting and facing the November 30th deadline at approximately 6:30-7:00pm we begin to send out the electronic ballots. The email addresses are segmented into groups according to the Sections in Woodcreek North. EagleRock and Fallbrook. The ballots were sent out section by section with the last section having the greatest number of email addresses sent last and that section was 9B.

We discovered the next day that 9B was not sent due to the great number of ballots sent within a small span of time. Once we realized this we resent Section 9b. We tagged this by adding the word: Resending to the subject line. As was to be expected a few email addresses were no longer valid or were rejected. In these cases we have contacted the owner to obtain a correct email address or sent a US mail ballot.

In cases where folks have called us or emailed us and said they didn't get a ballot we have sent them one via their preferred method.

When we receive undelivered ballots back in the mail we have checked our addresses against the county records and where they are the same we are checking via 411. When we have found a new address we have resent their ballot.

All of this can be proven as we have kept a paper trail for review.

As previously stated we intend to send out a voting reminder. This is just part of quality control as experience shows people are busy during the holidays and the deadline to return ballots is not until January 21st so property owners may put off voting and forget about returning their ballots.

Keep in mind, all of this had to be done between the General membership meeting and November 30th by midnight.

The next step will be for the appointment of a judge and two tellers to count the ballots at the January 21, 2012 General Membership meeting."


END

Anonymous said...

Yeah, Bob! Can you make this stop. I think everyone has gotten the picture!! It is the Christmas season and this has gotten so ugly!!

Anonymous said...

To the Anonymous of December 20, 2011 5:10 PM that said...

"Yeah, Bob! Can you make this stop. I think everyone has gotten the picture!! It is the Christmas season and this has gotten so ugly!!"

You know you can stop it right now for yourself, just don't come back here. No one made you click to get here. What "picture" did you get? It is probably just getting too hot for you! Especially, if you are a pro-incorporation type or a WPOA crony.

There are lots of other posts that you can read and even comment on. Happy Birthday Jesus and Happy Hanukkah!

The Grinch said...

I agree Bob everyone knows by now that Richard hates the WPOA and is out to get Ms.Delaney and Ms. Merian. Can you please stop this blog enough is enough. It is Christmas please restore Peace and good will. The paranoid rantings of a few people are getting too much.

RoundUp Editor said...

We are all For a Christmas cease fire. Maybe you guys can follow up with some face-to-face peace talks after the new year.