Open Dialog - Newsletter - Readers Respond

A forum for communication is not dividing the community.

Candidates wanting to run for the Board are not dividing the community.

Just because new owners want to run and owners want to introduce the slate of candidates they support (nothing the past or present Boards have ever done even though it has been suggested), that is not dividing the community.

The Board president saying at a public meeting, a certain “splinter” group has evolved? Sounds ominous. That is dividing the community.


It appears that a group of past and present Board members are spreading misinformation about residents being divisive just because others are supporting a certain slate of candidates as is their right. A candidate’s night is not dividing the community.

The statement that a candidate running for the Board, does not live here yet. That statement is divisive. A current Board member serving DOES NOT live here, but has been on the Board since Dec. 3, 2022.

Perhaps it’s “them” and their proxies, not the new candidates nor their supporters that are dividing the community.

Why is it divisive to have an end of the year picnic (all residents were invited) but the ones who accuse others of being divisive did not come.

Rather than complaining, have an open mind and meet the candidates, speak to neighbors and don’t consider people with a different opinion your enemy.

You have got to be kidding me--silence anyone who does not tow the party line is more like it.

Since 2016 this community has been dominated by a group of bullies that have attacked anyone who showed initiative or challenged the status quo with new ideas. The bullying has come in the form of anonymous letters to individuals, emails, public condemnation of individuals who dare to speak at public meetings and, more recently, in the form of memos presented on TIPOA letterheads signed by "The Board". These memos have been distributed using the "official TIPOA" email system and by mail using the "official TIPOA" mailing list. In fact, this email is suspiciously similar to the 4 page letter mailed to all 261 members of TIPOA and in which the Board took a candidate for the 2022 Board to task. This bullying has caused people elected to governing positions to resign, has resulted in individuals withdrawing from participation in public meetings, and has resulted in people to declining to pursue volunteer positions or putting their hat in the ring for Board member positions. The 2022 Board letter was, in part, the reason for a candidate deciding to remove himself from consideration for a Board position. Finally, the bullying has actually resulted in a few following the email author's suggestion move to "somewhere more suited" to their taste.

The SIG has exposed this bullying and I suppose this was necessary. Unfortunately, in the process, the SIG has given voice to the bully. Continuing to respond to the bully could dissuade people thinking about dabbling in a site that promises a kinder, gentler community with respectful discussion. It could also cause some who have registered to go silent.

Worse yet, giving voice to the bully could distract from the Board candidates platform for new ideas, transparency and community dialog. As per your newsletter, we know the problem lets stay focused on fixing it.

I strongly recommend that the SIG not post future emails such as the one above. Furthermore, I would hope that the monitor not approve posts that represent personal attacks on Board candidates or the group of owners that make up tolomatoowners.org. Posts like the above email cannot possibly result in any kind of respectful discussion and can only turn this site into the type of social media site that gives social media a bad name.

Respectfully, Ginny

If we do this right and stick to our guns the bullies will fade into obscurity where they belong.

Factually Inaccurate – Victoria Love Post – “Covenants”

The Victoria Love (VL) Post entitled “Covenants” contains factual inaccuracies.

The Tolomato Owners site is founded on the requirements that dialog be respectful / courteous and that information or comments be transparent and accurate. The Editorial Panel (EP) did not delete the post as the comments provided are common misinformation, at times even put forth by Board of Directors officers. The EP believes it is important that the misinformation be corrected.

VL - “It was stated that McIntosh County has already combined these 3 lots. As I understand it, this is not uncommon, but that the county does this for tax purposes only. It is unrelated to building purposes. Not the same thing.”

EP – This statement is inaccurate. There are two different ways to combine lots in McIntosh County.

- Via an application process where McIntosh County extends Georgia Law and offers owners a “Homestead Exemption”. The exemption may require a survey and may include additional property etc. aka combining lots for tax purposes.

- While not noted in the Love Post, persons may also request that their property evaluation for ad valorum tax purposes (property taxes) be frozen. Readers may want to investigate that ability, in this time of rising inflation.

https://mcintoshassessor.com/homestead-exemptions/

- A second method combines lots for various purposes including building. The County’s Building and Zoning requires a survey of the combined lots which usually shows the former lot line and the minimum property line setbacks established by county, state or federal regulations; a new lot description; and that a new deed be filed with the new description. Assuming Building and Zoning approves the combination, the new deed is recorded, and the survey is officially recorded in the Book of Plats,

- Neither method adversely affects the TIPOA Declaration of Covenants (assessments, voting, etc.).

- A note: according to the owner, 2 of the 3 lots were combined.

VL - “Tolomato Island is governed by a set of Covenants which do not allow for the combining of lots for building purposes. You can’t build across the lines. People have varying opinions about that, but those are the rules……”

EP – This statement is misleading. Building across lot lines is not prohibited in the Covenants. This TIPOA Board in particular, has interpreted the Covenants to say you cannot build across lot lines. The Board has a disputed legal opinion to that effect. There are 3 other lawyers who disagree and conclude that owners can combine lots (via the county process as required) and build on their combined lots. The matter will be resolved in court or through a property worded amendment to the Covenants.

VL - “…..and that we already have 16 existing homes that are over 3800 square feet in size. Apparently, 7 of them are actually over 4500 square feet. Each of these homes, as I understand it, is built on one lot.”

EP – This statement is inaccurate and misleading. Lots have been combined by both current and previous owners including a home that has been built on a combined lot. It should be noted that most of the homes mentioned were built during the time of initial development. Proximity of homes to each other was probably not a major developer concern.

VL - “So. Someone has recently purchased 3 adjoining lots and wants to build a 3800 square foot home. Spanning TWO of those lots…….”

EP – This statement is misleading. – While this and other posts have been directed at a candidate, there are at least 3 homes in the planning stage that would take advantage of combined lots. One is St. Joseph’s point, one is in Sugar Mill, and one is in Thicket 1.
There are other locations that probably cannot be built on, unless they are combined, and there are lots that should be combined, else truly beautiful community views and ancient trees will be destroyed.

Readers should remember the former ARB announced the need for and rationale behind combining lots, way before it became an issue, or any candidate submitted plans.

It should be noted that no homes proposed "span" two lots. The footprint of proposed homes do not change when set on a combined lot. The placement of a home on a combined lot usually takes advantage of its natural features, as opposed to destroying them.

VL - “No one is being “denied an opportunity” to do anything, either by our Board (which is obligated to enforce the Covenants as written) or by our current ARB.”

EP - This statement is inaccurate – The current ARB and the ARB prior to the 2022.5 ARB have denied persons both the ability to build on their home’s lot and on their adjacent lots.

“… there are at least 3 homes in the planning stage that would take advantage of combined lots.” Floodgates. I am glad we have good leadership. Thank you, again.

Who makes up the editorial panel?

Go to Groups, look at the editorial panel--the members are listed.

So are you saying you would prefer 261 homes on half acre lots as opposed to fewer homes on bigger lots?

Are you saying that 261 homes on half acre lots preserves our green spaces?

If not, and if you don't encourage combining lots and placing homes a location that preserves trees, etc., then how do you propose we maintain more of our green spaces? Please be specific.

ps I forgot, you were lucky enough to find that the owners of the lots on either side of you were willing to sell so you have your green spaces and aren't restricted to having your home within 30 feet of your neighbor.

You are ignoring the fact that their is support for the conflicting legal opinions regarding the interpretation of 10.15 of our covenants. The EP stated that there is one home that has been built on multiple combined lots.

Does your failure to acknowledge this fact indicate that you think the statement is false?

Or is your failure simply the result of not wanting to admit that the Board may not be interpreting the covenants correctly and thus is not abiding by the covenants?

Does good leadership ignore data presented to them? As per above, the Board has ignored facts that support different interpretations of the covenants--we do have a home build on combined lots.

As another example of ignoring data. On several occssions, the 2022 and 2023 Board stated that Tolomato was a POA in name only. On several occasions I stated that an amendment to opt into the Georgia Property Owners Association Act had been filed at the court house in 2013. The Board ignored this. In March 2023 the Board authorized the Attorney on retainer to file the amendment required to opt into the act. Upon doing his research the Attorney confirmed that the amendment had been filed in 2013.

A Board showing good leadership would have asked the Attorney on retainer to check my facts. Alternatively a Board showing good leadership would have gone to the court house and checked for the amendment. The Boards failure to follow up on the information I provided cost the TIPOA money and put the TIPOA at risk by not adhering to the requirements of the Georgia Property Owners Association Act.

In my opinion these failures of the Board (both current and 2022) do not represent good leadership. In fact, these failures of the Board border on negligence.

The Editorial Panel (EP) and Special Interest Group (SIG) are closed groups. The origins of the Tolomato Owners Organization, ED and SIG are discussed in the Newsletter supplement of October 12. Members joining the Group are automatically announced by the system, in other words those members identities are already in the public domain. The Editorial Panel usually consists of 6 editors, all persons of integrity. Some have chosen not to register. They are not the whole group. There are contributors, and Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) that we call upon when needed. They include lawyers, engineers, officials.

The focus of the Editorial Panel in regard to Blogs and Comments is on factual information and tone, not on who wrote it. Owners and members of groups are free to register on the web site or not, their choice, which we all should respect.