|
Wilson’s letter said:
The December/January issue of Kiawah Island Talk
contained a large incidence of misleading and untrue statements.
Joe Bunting has prepared a
letter to the Editor listing
some of the more serious misstatements. However, since I have
been involved in leading the land search process I thought it
appropriate if I responded to the errors and distortions put
forth in the President’s Corner section of Talk.
KPOG response:
Alleged “misleading and untrue” statements are discussed in
KPOG’s Response to the Bunting letter.
Wilson’s letter said:
Your analysis of the time line implies that the referendum was
“rushed” even though we knew that the Developer had agreed to
provide boat storage “into the foreseeable future”. This
is untrue. In fact, several months elapsed between when
this issue was raised publicly and the referendum. In my
opinion, that’s hardly “rushed”. You may be basing your
“foreseeable future” comment on a letter sent by an
administrative employee of KRA to a boat owner that suggested
ongoing boat storage from KRA. The KICA property owner directors
were dealing directly with Buddy Darby on this issue on the
assumption that Mr. Darby had a more influential role in KRA
than one of his administrative employees. The agreement by
KRA to extend boat storage until 2010 was not offered until
after the referendum. While I’m not a mind reader, I’d guess
that this accommodation was as a result of ongoing board-level
discussions with Mr. Darby and was not influenced by some of the
more strident “suggestions” offered at the August 21st open
forum or elsewhere.
KPOG response:
The
December/January President’s Corner
did, indeed, note a sense of “urgency” surrounding the problem.
While a number of months elapsed between when this issue was
first raised to the Board in December 2006 and the vote on the
referendum in September 2007, the opportunity for public
discussion was considerably briefer. Despite discussion at the
March and July Board meetings and documentation in minutes of
those meetings, the first general communication on this
topic to all property owners from KICA was in the August issue
of Digest. The referendum was held on September 23. There was
only one opportunity for public discussion – the Open Forum on
August 21 – between communication of the issue to property
owners and the September referendum. Here is the timeline as
KPOG has been able to document it:
• December 2006 – KRA notified KICA that the lease on the
Kestrel Court location was being terminated. There was no
general communication about the issue with property owners at
that time.
• March 5, 2007 KICA Board meeting - COO Bunting announced boat
storage at the Kestrel Court location would cease on March 15,
2007. Bunting’s announcement was recorded in the March 5 meeting
minutes but not reported in the
April Digest
article about the meeting. The
information was reported by KPOG in the April issue of
TALK.
• July 2, 2007 KICA Board meeting – KICA announced it would hold
a referendum on September 23, 2007. This was noted in the
minutes of that meeting.
• Early July 2007. KPOG obtained a copy of the boat storage
contract then in use by KRA.
The term of lease was from October 1, 2007 through September 30,
2008. At that time, KRA employees interfacing with boat owners
on the boat storage issue were telling them that storage would
be available “into the foreseeable future.” KPOG reported this
in the September issue of
TALK.
• KICA Digest, August 2007 - While information about
cancellation of the lease was included in the KICA
minutes of their March meeting,
there was no notice to all property owners from KICA until the
report of the July 2 Board meeting in the August issue of
Digest, which was published
approximately 9 weeks before the vote.
• August 3, 2007 – KICA sent an email
News Flash to property owners
soliciting input on the boat storage issue.
• Early August – KICA mailed property owners an information
packet for the September 21 referendum. The
letter from Chair Russ Warren
was dated August 10.
• Just prior to August 21, 2007 – KICA mailed a “reminder” post
card to property owners asking them to hurry and mail back their
ballots, even though there was five to six weeks between the
time the post card was sent and the date of the referendum.
Property owners began to receive these postcards before
the August 21 Open Forum.
• August 21, 2007 – KICA Open Forum. This was the only
opportunity property owners had in a live public forum to share
their comments, concerns, and questions about the September
referendum.
• August 23, 2007. KICA email
News Flash provides partial
summary of questions raised and answers given at the Open Forum.
• September 23, 2007 – Referendum regarding extension of
covenants to off-Island property purchased by KICA passed.
• November 5, 2007 KICA Board meeting – KICA announced KRA had
agreed to extend boat storage until 2010. This was noted in the
minutes of that meeting.
• November 19, 2007 - December/January issue of TALK is printed.
In its
coverage of the November 5 KICA
Board meeting, KPOG reported for the first and only time that
KRA had agreed to extend boat storage until 2010.
Wilson’s letter said:
Though you were not in attendance, you state that there was “not
a single property owner at the August 21st open forum who spoke
in favor of purchasing land off-island.” This is untrue.
I personally spoke with several property owners who commended
the board for its initiative on this issue. Also, I guess the
KICA board members who spoke, who by the way are property
owners, don’t count in your opinion. While you don’t mention
this anywhere in your editorial, you may remember that 80%
of the voting property owners voted in favor of the referendum
despite the highly vocal opposition of certain KPOG members.
While the search for boat storage land on or off Island has lost
its immediacy, we continue to have discussions with various
landowners regarding suitable land as 2010 is in the very
foreseeable future.
KPOG response:
Wilson is correct in saying I did not attend the August 21
Open Forum. While KICA did set up audio conferencing for the
forum, despite several attempts to join the meeting, I was
personally unable to link up and hear any of the speakers. I was
in touch with KICA staff during the meeting and reported the
problem after the meeting. We have no way of knowing if other
property owners attempted to join the meeting but were unable to
do so.
Unlike KICA Board meetings, the August 21 Open Forum was not
recorded. Notes taken by KPOG’s reporter and another KPOG member
indicate 15 different individuals spoke from the audience that
evening, one of whom spoke twice. Wilson is technically correct
in saying the statement “no one spoke in favor of the vote” is
untrue. While no property owner with whom we have spoken since
receiving Wilson’s letter interpreted that sentence the same way
Wilson did, it may have been clearer to say, “no one from the
audience spoke publicly in favor of the vote.” KPOG
was not privy to any private conversations Wilson might have had
with other property owners before or after the meeting.
The column did note the September 23 referendum passed. Wilson’s
statement that 80% of the voting property owners
supported the referendum is correct. It is also correct to say
the referendum was passed by only 48.7% of all available
votes. While the perspectives may be different, neither
statement is inaccurate.
While KPOG raised a series of questions about the referendum,
KPOG never took an official position either opposing or
endorsing it and no one spoke on behalf of KPOG at the meeting.
Since approximately half of Kiawah’s property owners belong to
KPOG, it is not surprising that some of those highly opposed
either to the process or to the referendum were KPOG members.
Two former KICA Board members, one current and one former Town
Council member also publicly expressed concerns about it,
either at the August 21 meeting or on the KICA listserve. Since
the August 21 meeting was limited to only 90 minutes, no one can
ever know what additional comments might have been made (pro or
con) or questions raised had the meeting time been extended.
Wilson’s letter said:
You voice the complaint that the August 21st open forum was held
at a time when many property owners were absent. Actually, my
informal observations suggest that the Island tends to have more
property owners present in August than most of the winter. In
any event, KICA and its board does not suspend its operations
awaiting the return of members from their summer homes and the
overwhelming positive vote was handled primarily by mail.
KPOG response:
Regarding KICA’s selection of the August 21 date for the Open
Forum, “informal observations” are just that. It is a fact that
approximately 80% of Kiawah’s property owners permanently reside
elsewhere. KPOG’s concern was predicated on the fact that many
school systems begin classes before Labor Day so that “summer”
residents with children are likely to leave the Island before
the end of August. My personal, informal observation about
“resident” property owners who leave the Island during the
summer is they are unlikely to return before Labor Day.
KICA’s August 23
News Flash summarizing the
August 21 Open Forum included the following exchange: “Q: Isn’t
the timing poor to seek a vote, with resident and nonresident
members traveling and unable to review the materials? A. Due to
our demographics, there are no perfect times at Kiawah. Those
traveling for the summer generally are resettled by early
September.” KPOG also included this question in its summary of
the Open Forum in the October 2007 issue of
TALK.
Wilson’s letter said:
Property owners did, in fact, suggest at the August 21st open
forum that we consider the “Little Pig” location for commercial
pass operations. To clarify, this option and several others were
in play by KICA well before the August forum. We typically don’t
publish the details of live negotiations as this can create
problems with our negotiating partners.
KPOG response:
The December/January President’s column noted several
speakers at the Open Forum proposed the use of the former Little
Pig for commercial pass operations. The October issue of
TALK, which provided coverage
of the September 23 Special Meeting, reported this option had
already been explored by the Board.
Wilson’s letter said:
It’s axiomatic that in purchasing or leasing land (or anything
else), the more flexibility you have the more likely you are to
strike a favorable deal. The referendum has helped in this
regard by giving KICA the flexibility to act when an opportunity
presents itself. Unless you have a deep distrust of the property
owner directors of KICA, I really can’t understand why the KPOG
leadership was so radically opposed to the referendum. It
appears that 80% of the voting property owners share my view.
KPOG response:
The September 23 referendum did not give KICA the right to
purchase property off-Island. KICA had that right without the
referendum. The referendum allows them “to submit such property
to the KICA covenants and to deem such property as a common
property under the KICA covenants.” (Notice
of Special Meeting, August 10, 2007.) Contrary to
Wilson’s statement, while KPOG raised questions about the
referendum and the process, we did not come out against it.
Diane Lehder
President, Kiawah Property Owners Group |
