HomeMy WebLinkAboutLetter #09 from Kay Gaither (response to rebuttal)At the Nov.17, 2015 meeting of the full Plan Commission the representative for Brenwick was
given the opportunity to comment on and rebut statements made by the remonstrators. I am one
of the people who spoke and I have issues with several statements he made in both his
presentation and his rebuttal. I would like to take a moment of your time to express them.
The Owners Association of the Village of WestClay Board of Directors has functioned as an
independent board for less than a year. In the first several years the Owners Association was
run by Brenwick. As certain milestones of “percentage of completion”, as defined in the founding
documents for the Village of WestClay (VWC) were reached, the association has been gradually
turned over to the actual residents. Mr. Sweet and Mr. Huston each hold a position on that
board, in perpetuity. At a regular monthly meeting of the full board of directors a short version of
the petitioners request was presented. At the end of the presentation the board “endorsed” the
petition BEFORE all residents were made aware of the scope of the petitioners requests. I feel
they might respond somewhat differently now that a better picture is coming into focus for all the
residents of VWC. Little weight should be associated with this “endorsement”.
The petitioners representative gave the Plan Commission members several dates in the years
since 2000 that Brenwick has petitioned for, and received, changes to the originally approved
plans for VWC. It seems that when Brenwick finds itself in difficult positions, it finds that your
board is very amenable to their requests for changes that meet their needs. He then informed
the Plan Commission that “over 200” certified letters were sent to residents. That, as you know,
is to meet the requirements of the law. He also stated that “even though we are not required to’”
we held an open meeting and “only 40 residents came”. I am not sure what he was trying to
convey with that statement! All who attended were concerned residents who were seeking
information and respectfully expressing opinions. It seems that the residents are entitled to that.
The petitioners representative stated that he and his client had heard the concerns of the
residents concerning add pressures to the amenities in the neighborhood and were interested in
having meetings with them to address those concerns. I was at the meeting at the Meeting
House in VWC and that is NOT the message conveyed on Nov.12. When questioned by a
woman resident, Mr. Huston, in a loud and purposeful voice, said “ we are not spending any
more money on amenities in WestClay! We over-built amenities in the beginning and are not
doing anything more!”. Quite a different statement only 5 days earlier. And stating you are
interested in meetings changes nothing.
Finally the petitioners representative made a statement at the Plan Commission meeting
implying that the remonstrators thought Brenwick had been “under-handed” or “less than
professional”. I heard nothing of the sort. The remonstrators kept their comments confined to the
subject matter at hand and said nothing personal or judgmental. Implying otherwise is
inappropriate and disappointing.
Kay Gaither, resident