Last month, WIA directors invited homeowners and lot owners to read
and make suggestions to the Board's re-written guidelines for how
homeowners must comply with our community's protective covenants
(also known as deed restrictions).  These guidelines,
titled "Waterwood Policies", supposedly offer a dumbed-down version
of our protective covenants. The covenants are a verbose list of 39
rules for making homes and landscaping "aesthetically pleasing", and
if adhered to, provide community continuity, thereby preserving and
enhancing our investment in a house at Waterwood.

Waterwood Watchdog read the re-written "Waterwood Policies" and was
disappointed in the content and quality of some of the writing.
Hopefully, enough members will howl in protest and insist on a minor
re-write. If no one protests, the WIA Board directors at their
February 16th meeting will probably approve the guidelines as
currently written.

The problem with the re-written "Waterwood Policies" is that it
invites continued misunderstanding and controversy among homeowners.
For example, it doesn't address permissible design and construction
materials of prefabricated and homemade lawn artifacts, doghouses,
car ports, utility sheds, and greenhouses.  Last year, for example, a
prefabricated aluminum car port was blessed by WIA's architectural
control board (also known as the ACB which has enforcement powers to
uphold our protective covenants).  Their approval was clearly a
violation of the spirit of our protective covenants.

The protective covenant against removing native growth, for another
example, continues to be muddled in the "Waterwood Polices".  As
currently explained, it is still unclear whether a tree or bush with
a trunk less than 19 inches in circumference can be removed without
permission.  The re-written guidelines seemingly allow dogwoods,
palmetto, yaupon and other native understory plants to continue to
fall through the cracks of the ACB approval process and to be removed
without permission.  This is a flagrant disregard for the covenant
which requires us to "preserve as nearly as possible, the land in its
natural state".

Readers may be aware that the ACB has had a poor go of it lately.
Over the last four years, the ACB's purpose and structure has become
more aligned to a Keystone Cops policing body rather than as a
beneficial community program.  In fact, many WIA directors have
refused to serve on the ACB due to its poor community image.  Their
enforcement of our protective covenants has been viewed as heavy-
handed and arbitrary rather than as a beneficial service.  In the
last few years, the ACB has illegally demanded several homeowners to
move their satellite antennas to a roof, has approved a cheap metal
car port which doesn't blend harmoniously with the natural
environment nor is architecturally compatible with other structures
in the neighborhood, has failed to establish a limit on lawn
ornaments (resulting in at least two homes resembling roadside flea
markets), has overlooked or approved the removal of native trees in
non-construction areas, and has failed to make any progress in
persuading negligent homeowners to keep their homes or
landscaping "esthetically pleasing".  Despite the enforcement process
to turn negligent homeowners into conscientious homeowners, every
subdivision has at least one consistently negligent homeowner, and we
all know who they are, including the ACB directors.

Will these re-written "Waterwood Policies" solve these ongoing
problems and clarify muddled concepts?  Hardly.  Instead of
enlightening and educating homeowners about our 39 protective
covenants (which are supposedly hard to understand), Waterwood
Watchdog finds the verbose covenants easier to understand than the
revised and dumbed-down "Waterwood Policies".  One small example is
the erroneous usage of "satellite dish" and "antenna" as different
objects and therefore different rules apply.  The satellite "dish",
however, is an antenna so the rules don't make sense.

Here are other examples of poor writing which confuse us, rather than
enlighten us:

"Clear cutting, removal, or destruction of most or all trees or
native growth on a lot is expressly prohibited". Does this
mean "all", "some" or "most" yaupon and palmetto can be removed
without permission?

"Landscaping shall be maintained in a neat and adequate manner".
Does this mean dog kennels or doghouses, as long as the surrounding
landscape is "neat", need not be screened out of view from the
street?

"Soliciting or canvassing of any kind for commercial purposes is
prohibited.  Except for daily newspapers, distribution or delivery of
flyers . . . is prohibited."  The Supreme Court last year allowed
political and religious canvassers to visit homes in restricted
homeowner associations and to distribute flyers and other material,
but the writer of these guidelines apparently is unaware of this fact.

"Outdoors burning of any material . . . is expressly prohibited. When
a burn ban is in effect . . . open outdoor fires of any kind within
Waterwood are prohibited."  Does this mean that open burning is
prohibited but tolerated, but when a burn ban is in effect, open
burning will most definitely not be tolerated?

"No fences or walls shall be erected or maintained nearer to the
front of any lot than the front building line."  Does this mean the
front fence can't be erected closer than the required 25 feet in
depth from the front lot line, even if the house is only 26 feet from
the front lot line? Wouldn't it look funny to have a front fence
located one foot in front of the house?  Does this also mean that
side fences must also not be erected closer than the required side
setback of five feet, and that rear fences must also comply with rear
setbacks? What is the purpose of keeping fences on or behind required
housing setbacks?

All fences and walls on any lot shall not exceed six feet in
height. . and must be of ornamental iron, wood, or masonry
construction."  Does this mean it's OK to have a vinyl or metal car
port, but it's not OK to erect a vinyl or metal fence? Wouldn't that
look funny, if a homeowner were allowed to use incongruent
materials?  Why six feet high?  Wouldn't that resemble a fortress?
Just because one homeowner has already erected a fortress six feet
high around his lot doesn't mean we all should be allowed to erect
fortresses around our lots.

In its present form, the "Waterwood Policies" do a poor job of
clarifying and making sense of some of our protective covenants. Nor
do the "Waterwood Policies" explain how homeowners shall live up to
the spirit of our covenants – to "preserve as nearly as possible, the
land in its natural state". There is a certain irony in the ACB
allowing homeowners to import and grow non-native green lawns and
other non-native trees and vegetation, following the removal of
native plants, thus changing the character of our piney woods
community . . . the very reason most of us were attracted to
Waterwood in the first place.

The piney woods of Waterwood, by the way, to the west of Waterwood
Parkway are gone.  This week and last week, very extensive logging of
pines and hardwood is taking place, just out of view to the west side
of Waterwood Parkway.  For those of you who have never had the
pleasure of visiting those 3,000 acres of forest, you'll never know
what Waterwood has lost.  For those of us who have had the pleasure
of walking and riding in this forest, it is a sad loss for wildlife
and for humans. Since Jacinto Investments will reap millions by over-
logging (not selectively logging as they had originally stated) and
has no plans to replant, the desecration of this forest is one more
nail in the coffin of our piney woods environment.

If you would like to read and comment on the revised "Waterwood
Policies", contact WIA at toll-free 1-866-891-7711 or locally at 891-
7710 to obtain a copy of this document.  If you cannot attend the
meeting on February 16th, you can email your concerns to ACB director
Mike Burney at mburney@...

END

Complaints at Waterwood usually hone in on two issues -- WIA Board
ineffectiveness and high administrative pay.  Warren Buffett always has a lot to
say about boardroom ineffectiveness and high pay in an organization.  In his
widely read annual letter to his shareholders last year, he blames docile board
of directors who are too polite to ask tough questions or fire executives.

      "Why have intelligent and decent directors failed so miserably?"
Buffett asked in his 23-page composition released last year to his
shareholders. "The answer lies not in inadequate laws -- but rather
in what I'd call `boardroom atmosphere'."

      It is "almost impossible," he said, for a "well-mannered" board
to debate the firing of an executive director. He says the same paralysis of
politeness also applies to critical looks at agreements and executive pay.  A
board director who is brave enough to ask other board directors to reconsider
executive pay would be like belching at the dinner table - impolite.

      Jay Lorsch, professor at Harvard Business School, who has written
extensively on boards, said the problem of politeness does indeed exist.  "There
is no question that the problem in many boardrooms is that directors are too
polite with each other, said Lorsch, author of "Pawns or Potentates: The Reality
of America's Corporate Boards."

      Sometimes hesitating in the face of hard decisions is not a matter of too
much politeness, Lorsch said, but logistics. Boards usually have too little time
to become fully informed about issues, and to fully debate them.  Directors are
not always involved full-time, and as a result, he explains, having the time and
knowledge in hurried meetings to get into a good discussion is just not
possible.

      Buffett said directors "should behave as if there was a single absentee
owner, whose long-term interest they should try to further in all proper ways."
So they must be willing to terminate a manager or executive "who is mediocre or
worse, no matter how likable he may be."

      Icahn, the 1980s corporate raider best known for battles to control
Reynolds Tobacco, Texaco, TWA and U.S. Steel,  also has lambasted boards. What
is needed, he said, is a lot more activism on behalf of the membership or
shareholders.

      Waterwood Watchdog has been a good litmus test of how much activism the WIA
membership wants on its Board.  Each year, Waterwood Watchdog runs as a Board
director candidate and shares her recent activist activities with voters. Last
year, about one-third of the voting members cast their vote for activism.  This
year, almost one-half of the voting members cast their vote for activism (to see
the election results and read the minutes of the 2003 WIA annual membership
meeting, click on http://people.txucom.net/wia/oct2003canvass.htm).  Apparently,
more WIA members are beginning to recognize a need for directors who can break
through that "paralysis of politeness".

      Waterwood Watchdog would like to commend the WIA office, by the way, for
promptly cutting down and disposing of a dead tree along Latrobe Drive last 
week.  Three years ago, the WIA office, in response to similar requests,  rudely
told callers that dead trees were not WIA's responsibility.  To read more about
that history, click on
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waterwoodwatchdog/message/9
(Waterwood Watchdog message number 9, dated March 3, 2001).  For readers who
don't live here, Waterwood Watchdog would like you to know that WIA Board
Directors and the WIA office staff have come a LONG WAY in the past three years;
moral and services have noticeably improved in the community.

	 Special note to residents:  Winter is here and migratory birds abound.  Outdoor
writer Val Cunningham suggests leaving your flower gardens stand until next
spring instead of "cutting and raking".  A garden left standing is like a
supermarket and comfortable lodge rolled into one for wintering birds. One
Black-eyed Susan seed head can contain several hundred nutritious seeds.
Multiply that by a garden full of mature seed heads and you have many pounds of
seeds and a food source that can last a good part of the winter.

          Wildlife columnist Stan Tekiela (to view his columns, see
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturesmart-column/)  advocates a backyard brush
pile for small mammals and birds to provide shelter to many bird species during
the cold winter nights. It can be nothing more than some branches and twigs
trimmed from trees over the past few years. A brush pile in the backyard near an
adjoining undeveloped lot shouldn't be an eyesore to neighbors. Flocks of Juncos
and Goldfinches filing into the pile just before sunset will burst out
the following morning at day break.  END

Last month, customers received a letter from Sam Houston Electric
Cooperative, Inc. (SHECO) about its plans to construct a 138 kilovolt
transmission line along or nearby FM 980; requiring an approximately
100-foot-wide right of way.  The purpose is to connect the Staley substation,
located a couple of miles north of Waterwood along FM 980, to a new substation
at Point Blank, south of Waterwood. Supposedly the new Point Blank substation
(as a result of connecting the proposed new transmission line from Staley) will
lessen the wide-spread impact of outages and other problems experienced by
customers of northern San Jacinto County.  In other words, if the new line takes
a hit and results in an outage, fewer customers would be negatively affected. 
The transmission line isn't being proposed due to a significant increase in
customers.

      When aesthetics are considered, a transmission line is about as picturesque
as a nuclear power plant. It's ugly; no one wants utility equipment within view
of their home.  Not only can a nearby transmission line negatively affect
residential real estate marketability but it can also negatively alter the local
wildlife habitat by removing trees and other plants to make way for the
transmission line.

      SHECO has proposed several alternative routes for the proposed transmission
line.  Only landowners affected by these routes have a right to be legal
"parties" to the case, but community citizens will have a right to mail their
"comments" to TX Utility Commissioners.  An individual or business or a group
who mails comments for or against any aspect of SHECO's transmission line
application will be considered a  protester." Protesters will be able to make a
written or verbal statement in support of or in opposition to SHECO's
application (not yet filed) and give information to the TX Utility Commissioners
that they believe supports their position.

      Waterwood Watchdog will recommend the proposed line be constructed out of
view of FM 980 on an alternative route where fewer trees will be felled. 
According to the map provided by SHECO, one alternative route is along an old
pipeline right of way several miles west of FM 980 (out of view from FM 980)
which primarily consists of pasture.  Although it would be more costly to build,
a transmission line constructed a good distance from FM 980 would be more
beneficial to Waterwood's future nature-based tourism than a transmission line
directly along FM 980.

      Waterwood Country Club's revenues from its marina and RV campground will
get a good boost from the Texas Parks & Wildlife. It is presently working on the
latest of its several trails, the Prairies and Pineywoods Trail (to be completed
in 2004), modeled after the popular Coastal Birding Trail. These wildlife trails
are immensely popular because they cater to the specific needs and interests of
nature tourists, providing them the information they need to explore the back
roads of Texas.

      Waterwood Wildlife Trail is seven miles of trails in the forest; it begs
and ends at the Country Club, crossing FM 980 at two points.  It was chosen for
inclusion on the Texas Park and Wildlife's Big Sandy Loop 3 of the Prairies &
Pineywoods Trail.  The "driving trail" of the Big Sandy Loop 3 will require
tourists to travel on FM 980.  It connects a nature site at Riverside, the
nature trail at Waterwood, and other nature sites east and south of Point Blank.
A transmission line along FM 980 could hurt this nature-based tourism in San
Jacinto County.

      FM 980's pineywoods environment (what's left of it) needs to be conserved
to protect the natural attractions in our area. Whether tourists hike the
Waterwood Wildlife Trail or participate in hunting, fishing, birdwatching,
photography and other nature-based recreational opportunities in our area, they
want to be immersed in a rich natural experience.  Building a transmission line
along FM 980 (and removing much wildlife habitat) will not only detract from
that rich natural experience but it will also change the environment, thereby
lessening the value of nature-based tourism along FM 980.

      In addition to negatively affecting Waterwood's future nature-based
tourism, a transmission line if constructed on the east side of FM 980 near
Waterwood will negatively affect an 81-acre cemetery of ancient oaks, hickories,
and pines where families can be buried naturally on large plots. There is a
hiking trail connecting the plots which can be used by the public.

      The public will be invited to submit comments to the TX Utility Commission
at a future date. Waterwood Watchdog will post a short message along with an
attachment of a form which can be filled out and mailed to Austin,TX. If you
would like more information or have questions, the best source is SHECO itself. 
Contact Robin Sory of SHECO at 936-328-1205. 			 -End-

Drive around Houston suburbs and golf courses, and you'll see mostly
manicured expanses of green.  Keep driving, and eventually you'll see
the latest landscape trend in the United States; to get away from the
manicured look by preserving the wild, scenic and natural. In fact,
the top four courses on Golfweek magazine's annual list of best
modern courses are all natural-style, and all were built within the
last eight years. Those courses include Tierra Verde Golf  in
Arlington, Texas, Pacific Dunes and Brandon Dunes (both in Oregon) as
well as Whistling Straits in Wisconsin (site of PGA Championship in
2004).  Increasingly, more golf courses in the United States are
working toward goals of the Audubon International Signature Status
Program.  This program promotes environmental awareness, sound land
and water management practices, and natural resource conservation.
Why the emphasis on nature?  Because in a business where only the
fittest survive, golf courses today are promoting wild life, nature
walks, wetlands, and native grass--a natural beauty reserve PLUS a
great game of golf.

Waterwood's initial developer, Horizon Corporation, was way ahead of
its time when they boasted in 1980 sales material that "protection
and enhancement of the magnificent environmental heritage of
Waterwood is a major goal of the developer."  It further claimed
that "carefully conceived restrictions assure that Waterwood will
remain unspoiled through the years."  Often, new homeowners claim to
buy a lot or home here because of Waterwood's unspoiled and
natural "curb appeal."  This restriction -- a protective covenant
also known as a deed restriction -- is unique to Waterwood simply
because most lot owners elsewhere have nothing to preserve when
building a home.  They have no wild, scenic and natural areas to
protect.

Ironically, Waterwood's most blessed natural resource is its most
under-appreciated one.  Supposedly, the Architectural Control Board
(ACB) which is composed of three people, is the entity that is
charged with preserving our natural wildness.  While it may seem
logical that one of the ACB directors should be an avowed nature
preserver (such as one of our more famous neighbors, Kenneth
Russell), politics always wins over logic at Waterwood.

That nature deed restriction states that "native growth on any lot
shall not be destroyed or removed from any lot, except such native
growth as may be necessary for the construction and maintenance of
roads, driveways, residences, garages, accessory buildings and/or
walled-in service yards and patios, unless written permission is
first obtained from the Board."

This year, the "Board" is Carol Winters, Dick Hansen and Damon
Thomas.  All three are elected WIA directors, although only one needs
to be a WIA director.  While it may seem logical to have two non-WIA
Board members serve on the ACB to ensure professionalism, fairness
and consistency, politics again wins over logic at Waterwood.
Supposedly, these three people visit and make final decisions about
which trees can be removed prior to construction.  It is
unfortunately a decision that changes from year to year, depending on
who serves as the ACB that year. If you can't do something this year,
wait till next year.

This year, however, Joe Moore (WIA's administrative employee who is
now readily accessible at Waterwood instead of 28 miles away in
Huntsville) has become powerful enough to obtain ACB permission for
several lot owners to remove all pine trees on their lots.  A clear
message has been sent to the community.  With a little bit of  "good-
old-boy networking", you can have a chat with Joe Moore to get his
help in circumventing this deed restriction. If you can convince him
that you're one of the good old boys in the community (or have the
potential to become one), he'll do you a favor and convince his pals,
Dick Hansen and Damon Thomas, to grant you permission to remove
native growth.  Furthermore, in the event that Hansen, Thomas and
Winters feel too guilty about allowing the killing of something
they're suppose to protect, Joe Moore will invite you to make an
appeal to the WIA Board at its monthly meeting.  This ingenuous
strategy created by Joe Moore allows the ACB members (Hansen, Thomas
and Winters) to dilute their guilt over killing trees among six of
their peers (similar to the way nine people on a firing squad are
chosen to share the guilt of killing someone; "it wasn't my
bullet").  Readers may recall that Waterwood Watchdog complained two
years ago about the political havoc and inconsistency created when
three WIA directors also serve as the ACB, and when there is no
written ACB appeal procedure.  Sadly, enforcement of our nature
preservation restriction will continue to be a community joke until
we are guided by a respected WIA president.

It is ironic that Joe Moore and the ACB, along with the WIA Board,
have begun an ingenuous practice of allowing lot owners to destroy
their piece of rugged natural beauty, while the rest of the country,
albeit a younger one, is becoming enlightened about natural
landscapes.  It is no surprise that struggles, sometimes dragged into
the courtroom, have begun between these two groups of people, not
just at Waterwood, but elsewhere, too.  There are the traditional
folks who want the manicured green look and then there are those who
are making an effort to get away from that unnatural, very contrived,
manicured look by simply leaving more untouched areas.

Here in Waterwood, a drive-through reveals just where a homeowner
stands on this issue. There are those who take the surgical and
medicinal approach to having a green, well manicured and irrigated
lawn, and there are those which take the leave-it-alone approach that
needs minimal intervention, less water, less maintenance and less
chemical intervention.  But, for all its virtues and its increasing
popularity, this leave-it-alone look (despite our 28-year-old deed
restriction) won't catch on at Waterwood until there's a change of
heart or change of staff and directors at the WIA office building.

Several new activities have surfaced at Waterwood. We all know a
handful of lot owners who have purchased adjacent lots, but thanks to
a new county regulation, more lot owners may see benefits in doing
so. Their motives to buy adjacent lots may vary -- some may want to
build a large home on two lots, some may want to expand their
landscaping around their existing home, and others may simply want
more privacy by keeping potential neighbors a safe distance away.

For the past quarter century, consolidating several lots into one lot
was a seldom-used practice because it was an expensive and time
consuming procedure. It involved a legal procedure (several hundred
dollars) which required a lawyer to draw up legal papers, send
notifications to all neighbors in that subdivision, obtain approval
from WIA's Architectural Control Board (ACB), and record the new, enlarged
lot with the taxing authorities. As of December 2002, however, the
county's new Subdivision Regulations make this do-it-yourself
procedure inexpensive and fairly easy by obtaining the County
Commissioners' approval. As of this writing, it's uncertain whether
lot owners will have to also obtain WIA's approval to consolidate
lots, but once consolidated, lot owners will still have to obtain
the ACB's approval if those additional lots involve landscaping,
remodeling or construction projects.

Last winter, the Commissioners approved revisions to the county's
Subdivision Regulations by allowing property owners to combine two or
more lots into one lot (to download forms and information pertaining
to this procedure, click on "Files", then click "Combining Lots,
County Regs" on http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waterwoodwatchdog/).

Consolidating lots at Waterwood can be financially beneficial. By
consolidating several lots into one lot, the owner receives only one
tax bill from the county and one assessment bill from WIA (to be $150
per lot next year). Additionally, selling one large lot instead of
several little lots may also increase its marketability and perhaps
even its sales price (as well as its taxable appraised value).
Today's buyers often want one or more acres of land, preferably
lakefront or next to a golf course. One reason why Keystone Land and
the majority of Waterwood lot owners can't find buyers for their lots
is because they're too small (one-tenth, one-quarter and one-third
acre), and many don't border the lake or golf course.

The first person in Waterwood to take advantage of this new,
inexpensive
opportunity to consolidate lots is Phil Palmer. On May 13th, the
Commissioners met to discuss and take action on several matters, one
of which was the approval of Phil Palmer's request to combine lots 13
and 14 in block 5 of Greentree Village, lots 12 and 13 in block 3 of
Park Forest Village, and lots 20, 21 and 22 in block 6 of Whispering
Pines Unit Two. Last April, Phil Palmer also received the
Commissioners' approval to combine lots 23, 24 and 25 of block 1 in
Bay Hill. By combining these lots, Palmer reduces his WIA assessments
by six lots (a savings of ¤900 in WIA assessments next year); he also
reduces the number of votes his family can cast at WIA elections by
six units.

A buying spree of adjacent lots for consolidation purposes, however,
has the potential to jeopardize Waterwood's "piney woods" environment
which is supposedly protected by legal documents. Two months ago, one
Waterwood homeowner bought a heavily treed golf course lot next to
his home and proceeded to timber and sell eight 100-plus-year-old
pine trees on that lot. Although the owner had claimed the trees were
diseased and received permission from WIA's Architectural Control
Board (ACB) to remove the trees, further inspection after the fact
failed to prove all the trees were diseased.

A similar incident happened several years ago when a homeowner
harvested more than a dozen pine trees on his three lots adjacent to
his home by also claiming the trees were diseased. He failed to
obtain permission from the ACB, and yet he was never penalized for
violating the deed restrictions. Harvesting healthy large pine trees
in non-construction areas is a violation of Waterwood's deed
restrictions, but since there are no financial penalties for failing
to get permission, this deed restriction lacks teeth. Charging fines
of $150 per tree removed without permission would be a good way to
enforce this deed restriction.

Anyone who's concerned about this issue can email ACB Chairperson,
Carol Winters (nanya@...); or if you see a neighbor or other
person cutting down a large healthy tree, you can call WIA (891-7710)
to inquire if permission was granted. According to Joe Moore, WIA
administrator, requests for permission to remove diseased trees will
be scrutinized more carefully.

Another Waterwood landowner, Jacinto Investments, has discovered a
way to reduce the cost of land ownership by eliminating M.U.D. taxes
from their annual tax bills. After canceling eight Deer Creek units
and three Greentree Village units in the past 18 months, Jacinto
Investments now aims to get a bill passed by the Texas Legislature in
order to cancel its annual tax liabilities to Waterwood M.U.D.

House Bill 1541 includes amendments to add Sections 54.748 and 54.749
to the Water Code (go to http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/ and insert
HB1541 in the "quick bill status" field).  If passed as currently
written, Jacinto Investments will be able to petition the M.U.D.
Board of Directors before August 31, 2005, to be excluded from the
district. This bill states that upon reviewing the facts, to be
provided by Jacinto Investments at their own cost, the executive
director of the Texas Commission for Environmental Quality and the
Waterwood M.U.D. Board directors will consider, among other things,
the economic impact of the proposed exclusion. The Board will then
decide if grounds for exclusion have been met and if so, an order of
exclusion will be granted.

Assuming that Jacinto Investments is successful in pushing this bill
to become state law this year, we can expect prior to August 2005
that Jacinto Investments will be petitioning the M.U.D. Board to
exclude more than 1,000 acres of canceled undeveloped lots from
M.U.D. taxes.  What does this portend for the rest of us? Will our
M.U.D. taxes increase? Will Jacinto Investments' "gain" (paying less
taxes) result in our "loss" (paying more taxes)? Will an undeveloped
lot owner in a canceled subdivision be able to obtain water and
sewage hook-ups should she ever decide to build in a "former
subdivision" that was granted exclusion from the M.U.D. district? And
if M.U.D. taxes do increase for the rest of us, by how much will they
increase?

If this boggles your mind, consider the composition of the M.U.D.
Board (currently composed of Betts Horn, Henry Picklo, Donald
Thornton, Willie Wigginton, and L.A. Wolfskill).  If the Board
approves the exclusion, those 1,400 or so lot owners who could be
negatively affected by paying more M.U.D. taxes won't even get the
satisfaction of voting those directors out of office; M.U.D.
directors are appointed, not elected.  Consider, too, the undeveloped
lot owners who are still trying scratching their heads over their
newly canceled subdivision. As a result of Jacinto Investment's
successful cancellation of eleven undeveloped subdivisions, the
county's appraisal district threw out the word "lot" this year. What
was once known as "Lot 3, Block 1, Greentree Village Unit Three" is
now know as "A188 William J. Knight, Tract 9.9".

If you thought rural life in the piney woods of East Texas was going
to be unfettered and simple, think again.

As Valentine's Day draws near, it is fitting to put a spotlight on
two of WIA's sweethearts, Jacinto Investments and Palmer Management.

WIA directors got their perennial earful of complaints at January's
Board meeting about Waterwood's mail service provided by Palmer
Management.  Despite Agee's insistence the mail delivery system
cannot be changed, some residents still complain.  Every January,
when Waterwood mailbox recipients get a $30 bill for their annual
rental of one of Palmer's mailboxes, complaints are re-newed.

Unlike the vast majority of other planned communities which purchase
and then erect free mail receptacles for its residents, Waterwood's
mail receptacles have been purchased by a series of businessmen and
private businesses which then "rent" the boxes to residents.  The
latest owner of the mailboxes is Palmer Management, which receives
approximately $6,000 each year in rental fees from residents.  In
postal jargon, these mailboxes are a "premium" service similar
to "Mailboxes, Etc." and U.S. post offices simply because people can
access their box indoors, 24 hours daily, seven days per week.

The complaints aren't due to anyone disliking Phil Palmer or the
quality of the premium mail service. The complaints are that WIA
denies residents their right to get mail conveniently and at no
charge  -- either free rural delivery to individually installed
mailboxes in front of their home, or free mail receptacles (cluster
boxes) at convenient locations provided by the homeowner ssociation.
Waterwood's mail service is neither free nor conveniently
located.

Regardless what it is -- a "sweetheart deal" or "Southern extortion" -
- directors are reluctant to change a tradition and they don't want
to hurt Phil Palmer's feelings by taking the mail delivery system out
of his hands. Although half the residents have no complaints, the
other half aren't amused by this sweetheart arrangement.  They feel a
certain anguish when forking over $30 each year for the privilege of
driving two or three miles out of their way to get their "premium"
delivered mail -- mail which is delivered free of charge by a rural
carrier from the Huntsville Post Office.

Short-sighted directors believe $30 per year is cheap.  But money
isn't the issue.  The real issue is the denial of a service most
other planned community residents receive free of charge and at a
convenient place near their home.  This, coupled with the fact that
Palmer Management has complete autonomy and can increase the rental
fee without justification doesn't sit too well either.  John Agee may
have a good excuse for his incomprehensibility of the issues, but
certainly the businessmen and attorneys who serve on the Board should
be able to understand the potential abuse of the dominant market
position enjoyed by  Palmer Management.

WIA's other sweetheart is Jacinto Investments/CEM Partnership
(JICEMP).  This for-profit limited partnership intends to profit
someday by slowly logging 3,000 acres of commercial-grade timberland
in Waterwood's undeveloped subdivisions.  The only problem they face
right now is 528 owners of undeveloped lots who refuse to sell their
lots to them for $300 each.  Increasing their offer to $600 might
convince some of these stubborn lot owners to sell, but JICEMP like
Palmer Management enjoys a dominant marketing position.  JICEMP
doesn't need to increase their offer.

To entice lot owners of large lots to give up their undeveloped lot,
JICEMP has upped the ante by buying more developed lots at Waterwood
to offer as trades. That's why JICEMP has been buying Country Club
Estates developed lots at county tax sales.  But unlike other buyers
of Country Club Estates lots purchased at tax sales, JICEMP doesn't
get an annual WIA bill for $142 on each developed lot it buys.
Although the membership has been repeatedly told since 1995 that
JICEMP is not a developer, Joe Moore (our WIA administrative
employee) now claims that JICEMP is a developer, when asked why
JICEMP isn't being charged $142 assessments on each of those newly
purchased developed lots.

Clearly, Moore is stretching a technicality to exclude JICEMP from
assessments on those developed lots.  Agreements and deed transfers
in 1995 with Horizon Corporation specifically state that annual
assessments are excluded in JICEMP's purchase of 67 specific
developed lots in Whispering Pines Unit Two (lots to be used at
trades with undeveloped lots).  But WIA's Board of directors, under
Joe Moore's and John Agee's guidance, has graciously extended that
exclusion to Country Club Estates lots purchased by JICEMP at tax
sales after 1995.

Why are John Agee and Joe Moore graciously exempting JICEMP from
paying approximately $750 per year in assessments on its half-dozen
or so developed lots purchased since 1995?  With a $142 assessment on
each lot, it doesn't take a CPA to figure out that a trade with a
$300 undeveloped lot should happen within two years, preferably as
quickly as possible, in order to avoid a capital loss.  JICEMP,
however, could easily avoid a capital loss by trading quickly -
within six months.  But, because Moore and Agee have graciously
exempted JICEMP's assessments (without Board approval), JICEMP has
exploited this generosity by stalling trades.  Three or more
years can go by until a developed lot is eventually traded.  In fact,
stalling trades for several years benefits JICEMP.  By stonewalling,
frustrating and wearing down the patience of a lot owner, he or she
may finally agree to sell the undeveloped lot to JICEMP for $300.

If you believe WIA directors should look more closely at these
sweetheart deals, email the chairperson of the Real Estate Committee,
Director Mike Burney, at mburney@... or John Shideler, Maintenance
Committee Chairperson at  johnshideler@...

Effective January 1 this year, Waterwood has no EMS crew conveniently
located at The Lodges near the Tree House. San Jacinto County refused
to re-new their contract with last year's private EMS provider, and
instead signed a new contract with Goldstar, the same private EMS
provider in Polk County, just over the lake. As a result, WIA's
contract with the county's former EMS provider also wasn't re-newed
and WIA Board directors began looking for a new EMS provider for
Waterwood.  Supposedly, WIA will sign a contract with Texas Air
Corps, a brand-new EMS provider that is still working on its
certification from the State Health Department.  More information
about this EMS crew will be passed along as it becomes available to
the community.  Meanwhile, residents who dial 911 will receive EMS
from Goldstar, compliments of the county EMS fund (paid by a special
county tax which Waterwood property owners don't pay).

Two events are coming up in April.  Put April 26 on your calendar for
the annual WIA Spring Picnic at Pools Creek Park.  Also, for those of
you who have horses, put April 19 (11:00 AM) on your calendar if
you'd like to join the Houston Walking Horse Association.  They'll be
trail riding in the undeveloped subdivisions.  For information about
the trail ride, email terrier77340@...
-END-

WATERWOOD IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION, INC.
ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP MEETING - OCTOBER 12, 2002

CALL TO ORDER - The 2002 Annual Membership Meeting was called to
order by WIA President, Jack Zimmermann at approximately 10:07 a.m.
on October 12, 2002 in the National Room of Waterwood Country Club.

QUORUM STATEMENT - Jack Zimmermann announced that the number of
eligible voters for 2002 were 1328 with 10 percent needed for a
quorum.  A quorum was declared present. Three hundred, forty-five
(345) voters were declared present in person and proxy.

At this time, President Zimmermann recognized each board member and
their accomplishments for the 2001-2002 year. He also recognized the
staff, Waterwood Security officers and  Firemen that were present.

APPROVAL OF THE 2001 ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP MEETING MINUTES - Reading of
the minutes of the 2001 Annual Membership Meeting  was waived as
members had received copies in the December 2001 newsletter. Earl
McVay made a motion to approve the 2001 minutes as written.  This
motion was seconded by Carol Winters and passed.

President Zimmermann reported that there were 369 Proxy Ballots
received by the October10, 2002 deadline.  The total number of valid
proxy ballots were 336.  There were 33 invalid proxy ballots due to
the following:  10 - No date; 19 No signature or date; 2 - Not signed
by Owner of Record; 1- No signature; 1 - Invalid date.

RECEIPT OF AUDITORS REPORT FOR 2001 - WIA President Jack Zimmermann
reported that total number of received proxy ballots cast were 336
voting for the Receipt of the Auditors Report for 2001 and 3
against.  Dick Beare made a motion to approve the Receipt of the
Auditors Report for 2001.  There were nine (9) floor votes voting for
and  zero (0) against.  Making the total 342 for  and 3 against the
receipt of the Auditors Report for 2001.  This motion was seconded by
Earl McVay and passed.

RATIFICATION OF AUDITORS FOR 2002 - WIA President Jack Zimmermann
reported that total number of received proxy ballots cast were 336
voting for the Ratification of Auditors for 2002  and 3 against.
Baldomar Garia made a motion to approve the Ratification of Auditors
for 2002.  There were nine (9) floor votes voting for and  zero (0)
against. Making the total 342 for  and 3 against the Ratification of
the Auditors for 2002.  This motion was seconded by Ethel Picklo and
passed.

ELECTION COMMITTEE REPORT - Jim Jemison, Election Committee Chairman,
thanked the members of the committee then gave a summary of the
election process and procedures for the election of Directors.   He
then announced the votes received for each candidate as follows:
Mike Burney (347), David Carey (221), Jim Kwiatkowski (312),  Terri
Reed (140),  John Shideler (262), and Carol Winters (247).  Write in
votes were as follows:  Dick Hansen (1) and Louie E. Rogers (1).
There were 406 ballots received.  The total number of valid ballots
were 402.  There were four (4) invalid ballots.  Three (3) with no
signature stub and one (1) voting for more than four (4) directors.

NOMINATING COMMITTEE - Jack Zimmermann announced that Donna
Bridgeford had agreed to chair the Nominating Committee for 2003.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS - President Zimmermann reported on the new
business from the 2001 Annual Meeting  and addressed each issue and
their result.  WIA member John Swartz questioned the future of Pools
Creek Park.

NEW BUSINESS -  WIA member Bob Boyle questioned having Alltel
replaced with another phone service.  WIA member Gayl Ganskow
requested that a clear explanation be given on who owns the Parkway
from 980 to the club.  WIA member Elly Beare voiced her concern of
the Lehtonen fence.  WIA member Kenneth Grimes questioned if WIA
could influence the club to clean up and repair the deteriorating
marina.

President Jack Zimmermann announced the candidate open forum to be
held at the Waterwood Resort and Golf Club on October 22, 2002.

WIA member Earl McVay voiced his appreciation for the leadership of
outgoing WIA President Jack Zimmermann.

There being no further business, Damon Thomas made a motion to
adjourn, seconded by John Shideler.  The meeting was adjourned at
approximately 11:30 a.m.

When Waterwood Watchdog retired at the Pennsylvania Department of
Education, she envisioned escaping six months of snow and spending
all year enjoying a golf course in the Piney Woods of East Texas.
That's why she bought a cottage at Waterwood, about an hour and a
half north of the Houston International Airport. Houses sell between
$20,000 and $250,000 and the par 75 course (designed by Pete Dye)
boasts such a high degree of difficulty, that it's considered among
the 50 most difficult courses in America.

But what Waterwood Watchdog liked best was the intimacy of a rural
hamlet in the middle of a vast forest teeming with wildlife and
native plants.  The developer had promised (in legal documents) that
the native plants and the magnificent environmental heritage of
Waterwood would be protected.

Waterwood Watchdog's idyllic hamlet, however, began to turn sour when
the Board of Directors claimed they couldn't prevent hundreds of pine
trees from being logged and hauled away by the golf course owner for
his own financial gain.  Soon after she joined two neighbors in a
political race to put fresh new faces on the Board of Directors, she
set in motion a series of events that bedeviled not only Waterwood
Watchdog but her neighbors and friends.  Powerful Board directors,
Agee, Carey, Beare, and others, tried to exert even more power by
attempting to discredit Waterwood Watchdog and her cohorts. They
issued letters, filed a law suit, and made flat-out refusals to
requests for information.

Waterwood Watchdog started getting e-mails, letters and phone calls
asking if she could continue to needle directors into doing the right
things. Thus began Waterwood Watchdog's electronic newsletter and
research into legal documents and agreements.  The community's
complaints are never-ending.  Last month, Waterwood Watchdog received
complaints about our security staff's lack of respect for residents
and our directors' lack of enforcement of deed restrictions with
regards to removal of native plants.  With our directors' nod of
approval, despite deed restrictions to the contrary, homebuilders are
permitted to remove all native plants from their lot, destroying the
very essence of what makes Waterwood different from other golfing
communities.

Although "activism" can be destructive to living in an idyllic
hamlet, discord in a golf community seems to be a phenomenon these
days. The lot owners and residents of Waterwood are not the only ones
who seem to spend more time grumbling than working on their golf
game. At the 28-year-old Grenelefe Golf Resort in Haines City, Fla.,
for example, more than 300 condominium owners have been staring at
three vacant championship courses, empty swimming pools, an unused
conference center and locked restaurants since the 1,000-acre resort
filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection in February.

At Forest Dunes near Higgins Lake in Michigan, a handful of residents
who snapped up the first available houses in 1999 watched as the
lender foreclosed on the property even before the golf course
opened.  And one of the ugliest disputes is on Fisher Island, near
Miami, where developers and homeowners have been fighting in court
for over five years.

Buying a lot located in a golfing community hasn't always been
fraught with peril. Ever since the Brookhaven Country Club in Dallas
successfully combined golf and real estate in 1957, vacation-home
hunters and retirees have flocked to similar developments. They go
for the love of the game as well as the real estate. Golf residences,
by definition, are almost always in scenic settings. And, often there
are plenty of amenities like pools and even riding stables.

But these days, homeowners are also finding that there can be a dark
side to golf utopias beginning with the game itself. Despite the
prediction that aging baby boomers would flood golf courses
throughout the country, the number of rounds played declined in 2000
and 2001 and continues to slide this year, down almost 3 percent
through July, according to Golf Datatech, a research company in
Kissimmee, Florida.  And numbers from the National Golf Foundation
show that the slowdown comes just after a record boom in building.
The number of new golfing communities increased 38 percent from 1996
through 2000. Although these figures may mean shorter waits on
popular courses closer to Houston, they may also mean that some
courses, such as Waterwood, are having a harder time making ends meet.

And when golf courses have a hard time making ends meet, the
community is indirectly affected.  What's happening at Beau Rivage
Golf Resort in Wilmington, N.C., could happen here at Waterwood.
Beau Rivage's developer died in 1997 and left the property to his
widow. The following year, she sold the golf course to a golf
management company. The big change came last year when she sold 2.27
acres across from the clubhouse to Carolina Green Estates, which is
planning to build 32 apartments for the low-income elderly.  The
homeowners' association is now in the middle of a court fight, since
the homeowners are seeking to block the apartment proposal.  It isn't
just the apartment building that has residents worried, there are
also plans for 200 condominiums to be built in three-story buildings
on either side of the entrance drive.


Mr. St. Pierre of the Heritage Harbor golf community in Lutz,
Florida, near Tampa, Florida never intended to become an activist
when he joined the five-member board; he and his neighbors are
getting a crash course in the business of golf to help save their
community.  And whoever said that golf was a gentleman's game has not
been to Fisher Island. At this tiny golf condominium community in
Biscayne Bay just south of Miami Beach, at least a dozen lawsuits
have been filed over the last five years, including one in which the
property's developer was accused of trying to run over a homeowner
with a golf cart when he spotted him handing out political
leaflets. Like Waterwood Watchdog, activists who live in a golfing
community never meant to become activists. But when they discover
that their idyllic hamlet is losing its real estate value and
desirability, they get active.

Waterwood is no different from other golf "utopias" - it has
a few residents who are outspoken and opinionated about Board
directors and their decisions, or lack of decisions.  While Agee and
some other directors and residents find this disgusting, others find
it healthy.  Waterwood Watchdog would argue that the outspoken people
in the community represent the knowledgeable people who have taken
time to understand the issues, the documents and the threats to the
community.  Although some old-timers on the Board like to portray
this small group as dissidents and trouble-makers, often it is these
people who are the thoughtful ones who have done their homework.
Fortunately last month's election of directors resulted in
four more new faces on the Board; old-timers are now a minority.  If
there's ever been a right time for Board directors to cultivate
tolerance and a willingness to resolve disagreements, it is now.

With its increasing delinquent membership, increasing costs for
payroll and job benefits packages, and lack of a collections policy
for delinquent accounts, the WIA membership should be fighting mad.
But, it isn't.  Why not?  Because the Board doesn't routinely mail
its annual report to the membership with election materials in
September.  Although members receive the "auditor's financial
statement" with election materials, the more sophisticated member
knows this statement isn't the "real beef".  Sending the "real beef" -
   the annual report -  along with election materials would perhaps
wake-up too many WIA members.


One of WIA's biggest secrets is its assessments (annual dues, payable
by March 31st each year).  Only 2/3 of Waterwood lot owners pay their
annual dues.  For the past decade, the two-thirds of Waterwood's lot
owners who faithfully pay their annual dues to WIA has remained
stable around 1,400 with approximately 700 lot owners not paying
their dues.  At the members meeting held in October 2000, John Agee
announced that the number of eligible voters (lot owners who pay
their dues) was 1,404. At the members meeting held last year, Jack
Zimmermann announced that the number of eligible voters was 1,403.
These 1,400 voters contribute approximately $198,800 to WIA's
operational budget.  This is the budget that pays for our EMS
contract, Joe Moore's and Lisa Hayman's salaries, the maintenance
crew's salary, and the security personnel.   As of April 30th this
year, however, 121 formerly faithful dues-paying lot owners suddenly
stopped paying their WIA dues. This year, the number of eligible
voters could be as few as 1,280. Financially, this means WIA's
operational budget this year from members' dues may be $17,182 less
than the previous year.

  Although the loss of dues is partially related to undeveloped lots
being bought-out by Jacinto Investments/CEM and being donated to a
land trust, WIA's annual report has never fully explained its policy
or procedure for collecting unpaid assessments or for writing off
uncollectible assessments.  No explanation has been given as to how
uncollectible assessments from undeveloped subdivisions are written-
off and why a different practice is in place for writing-off
uncollectible assessments from developed subdivisions.

Data from WIA indicates that two years ago,  249 lot owners of
developed subdivisions hadn't paid their dues for several years.
With interest, their bill now totals over $200,000.   Liens have not
been filed against the majority of them.  Here's the break-down:
  Greentree Village, 31 lot owners with past-due accounts totaling
$56,150.58.
Whispering Pines I and II, 72 lot owners with past-due accounts
totaling $45,944.18.
Country Club Estates subdivisions, 49 lot owners with past-due
accounts totaling $40,103.88.
Park Forest, 46 lot owners with past-due accounts totaling $24,960.68.
Bay Hill, 20 lot owners with past-due accounts totaling $13,010.20
Lakeview Estates, 12 lot owners with past-due accounts totaling
$7,507.00.
Fairway I, three owners with past-due accounts totaling $1,407.94.
Bass Boat Village, 11 lot owners with past-due accounts totaling
$1,169.23.
The Beach, five lot owners with past-due accounts totaling $632.97.

What can a homeowners association do about collecting past-due
assessments?  Ideally, when a lot or house will be sold, the
association's administrators should have a strategy in place to
automatically obtain notice of the prospective sale.  If assessments
are delinquent, the association should immediately file a lien on the
lot to be sold and make every effort to collect the balance due from
the seller prior to the sale.  No such strategy, however, is in place
at WIA.

Another strategy is to ensure the statutes or legal documents
governing the association contain provisions for collecting unpaid
assessments. For example, one association includes a bylaw that
states Board of Directors "shall initiate actions to collect unpaid
assessments against owners personally obligated to pay same and to
enforce and file liens against delinquent units of unit owners."
Another association's bylaws include this provision -- "Any unpaid
assessments with accrued interest may, at the option of the
Association, be collected out of the sale of the unit. Unpaid
assessments shall become a Lien against the Unit."  No such bylaw,
however, is included in WIA's governing documents.  Nor does it seem
likely that 5% of the membership will propose to the full membership
to amend the bylaws with such a provision.

Some associations and local governing bodies, like San Jacinto
County, publish the names of delinquent property owners in a
newsletter or newspaper.  Last month, San Jacinto County published
the names of its largest delinquent tax payers in a local newspaper.
Such a practice may violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act,
and obviously WIA's counsel would need to be consulted prior to
publishing the names in its newsletter.  But the pressure to pay that
results from posting names may prove effective.

If you'd like to read a copy of WIA's annual report as you make
decisions to vote for directors next month, contact WIA at
wia@... -- or better yet, write to Board members and request them
to mail a copy of the annual report along with the
traditional "auditor's financial statement".  To email individual
Board members, see WIA's website at http://people.txucom.net/wia/

END

June is a special time at Waterwood.  It ushers-in the July 4th
fireworks (planned for July 5th this year), and there's patio and
backyard BBQs and pool parties.  But even more thrilling, June at
Waterwood is nature at its best.

Next to seeing an eagle or a flock of several hundred White Pelicans
flying over Lake Livingston, another awesome bird sighting
opportunity is the Purple Martins at The Villas.  Locals have only a
few more weeks, perhaps days, to go see and hear the Purple Martins.
Very soon now, their babies will be expert flyers and they'll be
flying north.  And after wintering in The Valley and in Mexico, they
won't return to their homeland, The Villas, until next March.

These talkative birds, when they're not chattering to each other
incessantly from sunrise to sunset about silly things, are flying,
and what a sight to behold.  Almost all shoulder and wing, these
little birds are animated F-10 flyers.  When you watch several
Martins gliding toward you at breakneck speed, and turning on a dime,
you know they're showing off and having fun.  The Villas, at the very
end of Pebble Beach Drive, is fast becoming known as the best place
to watch and listen to these lively, happy birds. They exude fun-
filled silliness, even when they're humorously squabbling with the
Chipping Sparrows next door to them.

The Martins have unique housing requirements; they perfer double and
triple-deck condominiums on a very long pole.  This summer, they
hatched another brood at Waterwood, perhaps 200 or so, almost
doubling their population. Last year, The Villas' human residents
responded to the Martins' increasing need for more housing by
erecting more condominiums.  But, the Martins are asking for more
subsidized housing, perferably in "move-in" condition next March.

Waterwood Watchdog promised the Martins she'd put a call out for
housing assistance.  The problem, though, isn't a shortage of
housing, but rather, location, location, location.  Martins refuse to
raise their babies in the wrong neighborhoods.  Well-meaning humans
falsely assume "If I erect it, Martins will come".  All too often,
humans will allow a once great-looking Martin house to go unused and
to deteriorate over the years because of failure to clean-out an old
sparrow nest.  If a Martin house has been empty for more than two
years, you can be sure it doesn't meet their rigid standards.  The
pole may be too short (think squirrels, racoons and snakes here), it
may be dangerously near trees where predators can hide (think
red-tailed hawks here), there may be no nearby body of water
(think supper - mosquitoes and other low-flying waterbugs), or maybe
there's too many obstacles for beginner flyers (trees) and not enough
meadow where tall, unmowed grass habors thousands of dragonflies,
bugs and butterflies.  These birds need plenty of scrumpious
delicasies for a-couple-hundred wide beaks.  Many backyards just
simply don't have all the unique conditions that Purple Martins
demand.

So, if you or someone you know has an empty, unused Purple Martin
condominium, consider donating it to the Villas.  Call Waterwood
Watchdog (891-5089) and she'll pick it up and deliver it to The
Villas' residents. The donated house will be erected by a Villas
resident who will buy a pole, concrete, and hardware to erect your
house this winter, with permission of the land owner.

When the Martins leave town, there's still more to see and hear at
Waterwood.  Up to a cricket concert?  The ravine south of Fairway
Three is your best bet; performances start at nine and last until
after midnight. The best frog concert, at 10 PM, after a good rain?
The bog near the intersection of Latrobe and Doral is a good place,
but the best concert takes place at Tournament Village (undeveloped
subdivision between Fairways Ten and Eighteen).

Love of nature, in fact, is the deciding factor between those who can
tolerate the remote, sometimes inconvenient lifestyle at Waterwood on
a full-time basis and those who can't. Those who can't tolerate
living here for too long claim the eight-mile Parkway is a long,
boring drive, while long-timers who love living here claim it's the
most beautiful drive in East Texas.

And, you may ask, what is the deciding factor between the old-school
residents and the new-school residents?  "The Fence" just off Route
190 wins this distinction, hands-down.  Old-school folks believe the
fence should be painted because it's "ugly".  New-school folks,
however, say the fence has an exquisite distressed antique look that
brings an old-world charm to Waterwood.  Beauty is, afterall, in the
eyes of the beholder, and Waterwood has plenty of examples to prove
that platitude is true, time and time again.

Not mentioning deer would be a grave ommission when sharing tales of
Waterwood's wonderful environmental heritage.  Need we ask who's been
pruning all the Junipers into lovely, curvacious female forms?  Need
we ask who's been eating deer-resistant plants, such as English Ivy
and Mexican Heather?   And if you've wondered why Waterwood doesn't
have a single Indian Blanket wildflower, a plentiful wildflower in
nearby Walker County, need you be told why?

Residents here chuckle when sightseers ask, "Where can I see deer?"
While we're sharing strategies for how to keep deer out of our
backyards, sightseers are begging to see them.  June is the time of
year when many fawns are born; they're well-hidden and don't travel
with the herd.  But next month, we'll see an increasing number of
fawns joining herds.  The most dependable and best place to watch
herds of deer is Fairway 15 (the dead-end of Augusta Court), daily
from 6 to 8 PM.

June is also the time of year to look for snakes seeking cool hiding
spots for the summer months.  It's too late now, but next winter is a
good time to eliminate those wonderfully cool, hiding spots.  Canoes
that aren't used, wood piles, upside-down buckets, retaining walls
with holes, junk in the garage, an abundance of ground-hugging shady
plants, and low-level decks are great snake-hiding places.  And if
you've got a swimming pool where frogs hang-out, it's best to check
the basket daily to rescue frogs, otherwise a garter snake will make
your pool his new territory.

To see wildlife pictures taken in Waterwood, click on
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waterwoodwatchdog/
then click on "Photos", and select the nature album.
To include your wildlife picture in this album, email
Waterwood Watchdog at terrier77340@... with your email
attachment and a description of the photo.

Next month, Waterwood Watchdog will be back to her normal growling
self.

If you've felt vulnerable at Waterwood because there's no helipad
nearby for life-flight emergencies, relax. Thanks to the Point Blank
Volunteer Fire Department, located eight miles south of Waterwood,
the northern part of San Jacinto County will soon have a helipad.
Donations of money for concrete and materials will finish a helipad
construction project on Route 190.  If you'd like to contribute, send
a check to the Point Blank Volunteer Fire Department, P.O. Box 196,
Point Blank, TX 77364 and designate the donation for the helipad.

A reminder, if you want to protest the appraised value of your lot
and/or home, May 31st is the deadline to submit a protest form to
Linda Lewis, Chief Appraiser, P.O. Box 1170, Coldspring, TX 77331-
1170.  To submit a protest form, see "Files" on Waterwood Watchdog
site to download the form (must have Acrobat Reader), and
see "Bookmarks" to link onto the Appraisal District's website to
calculate unequal appraisals. Don't forget to include your daytime
phone number since the first step will be an informal phone call from
Ms. Lewis.

The Russell Family, by the way, recently donated to Waterwood M.U.D.
(Municipal Utility District) an easement of around 3 acres to allow
for future expansion of their sewer plant if need be.  The Russell
Family says the appraised value of the donation was approximately
$45,000. Speaking of the Russell's generosity, last weekend they
hosted an outing among the Sierra Club of Houston on their preserved
property, on the loop that goes to the Sanctuary at the Holy Trinity
Wilderness Cathedral and then follows the shoreline for around 1/2
mile through the prairies and back to the place of
beginning at the end of FM 135. Several club members also brought
their canoes and paddled the shoreline.

As the giant U.S. economy supposedly zooms out of its first recession
in a decade, doomsayers say Keystone Land and Waterwood lot owners
shouldn't expect to cash-in on investors who are moving away from the
stock market into hard assets such as gold and real estate. Who is
benefiting? The rural communities which are selling large lots, some
as large as 10-acres.  Although Waterwood's outdated small lots could
be resubdivided into larger lots in keeping with the general
character of the existing residential area, Keystone Land doesn't
appear motivated to get approval to resubdivide. Nor is WIA willing
to promote this concept by explaining to its membership how to
combine two, three or four lots into one lot for assessment purposes.

Some knowledge of history is required to understand why Waterwood's
real estate is floundering without a rudder, in the face of real
estate successes and growth elsewhere in subdivisions of San Jacinto
County.  Waterwood's strategic direction since its inception in the
early 1970s abruptly ended when Horizon Corporation, the developer,
ran into legal problems.  In May 1981, Horizon Corporation was cited
for violating federal laws involving interstate land sales.  The
Federal Trade Commission ordered Horizon Corporation to pay $14.5
million over a six-year period to a trust fund for the purpose of
refunding moneys to people who had purchased undeveloped lots as a
result of Horizon Corporation's misleading and illegal sales
tactics.  The refunds were ordered for not only lot owners of
Waterwood's undeveloped subdivisions, but those who had bought
undeveloped lots at Horizon City near El Paso, Rio and Paradise Hills
near Albuquerque, Arizona Sunsites near Tucson, and Whispering Ranch
near Phoenix.

In addition to refunding moneys, the FTC made several other
stipulations of Horizon Corporation.  One was to invest $45 million
over a 20-year period for improvements at the Horizon communities.
Where did the money go?  Unfortunately, nowhere.  The FTC's Final
Order lead to the so-called "bankruptcy" of Horizon Corporation, a
legal maneuver which exonerated it from adhering to all the
provisions demanded by the FTC.

But when Horizon skipped town, what happened to the lot owners'
perception of the FTC ruling, the goals of Waterwood, and the lot
owners' expectations of their real estate investments in Waterwood?
Twenty years ago, lot owners were told that because Waterwood was
designed as a recreational community, not a residential community in
the Lake Livingston area, "absorption" of Waterwood (growth) will not
occur before the year 2005 due to stiff competition from several
recreational communities in the same area.

Despite Horizon's legal problems and nearby competition, lot owners
were apparently willing to wait it out.  The majority of Waterwood's
lot owners were optimistic folks and hung onto their lots, both
developed and undeveloped lots, waiting for Waterwood to grow into
the recreational community that Horizon had intended it to be. After
all, the FTC had concluded that "the ponderance of credible evidence
indicates that substantial development in any of the undeveloped
properties probably won't begin to occur prior to the year 2000."

The majority of undeveloped lot owners, however, didn't realize that
Horizon Corporation's sales contracts cleverly omitted development
obligations.  Horizon Corporation never intended to develop any of its
undeveloped properties.  By "fractionalizing" the ownership of the
undeveloped subdivisions -- that is, selling individual lots scattered
throughout the 19 undeveloped subdivisions at Waterwood -- Horizon
Corporation actually hampered and frustrated any coherent development
plan that another developer might have otherwise wished to undertake.
The FTC contended Horizon knew that its undeveloped subdivisions, by
"fractionalizing" the ownership, would remain unused as residential
property throughout this century into the next century.

Indeed, in 1995, Horizon claimed it couldn't find a "developer" to
buy the undeveloped subdivisions, and instead, made a clever sales
deal with a nondeveloper, Jacinto Investments/CEM, a company which
hopes to dismantle and return all the undeveloped subdivisions back
to acreage for timbering purposes.

What is a homeowner association to do about the mess created by
Horizon? WIA's Board of Directors under Carey's leadership for the
past 28 years, has taken the "do nothing" approach, claiming that
Horizon made its own bed.  But, let's take a look at another
homeowner association affected by Horizon.  At Horizon's New Mexico
community, their homeowner association, called the Valley Improvement
Association (VIA), decided to take on the challenge of Horizon's exit
from development.  They established lot trades and acquisition
programs, trying to extend the benefits of development success to
members who had purchased undeveloped lots.  The Board also hired
DeLeuw, Cather & Company, consulting engineers and planners, to help
with a plan which was presented to, and ratified by, members.

One impressive element underlying VIA's entire long-term plan is the
VIA Board's insistence on quality community development.  Anything
else, anything less, the VIA Board states in its literature, denies
its responsibility to the membership.  Lowering its sights, they
claim, would hurt all VIA members and help none.

If anyone should know what happens when a homeowner association
lowers its sights after Horizon's exit, it's Waterwood's lot owners.
When Horizon Corporation left its homeowner associations with a mess,
VIA took the high road and WIA took the low road.  Instead of taking
responsibility for its membership, the WIA Board lowered its sights,
and in the process, hurt
all WIA members and helped none. Unlike their colleagues in New
Mexico, WIA Directors haven't shared with the membership any long-
term plan for development nor have they taken on responsibility to
undeveloped lot owners who will someday own a lot in a "former
subdivision" that has been logged, without protective covenants to
protect their subdivision's character.

Since Horizon's exit, there's been an absence of any consensus, or
even any credible, detailed financial and strategic picture of where
Waterwood is headed and how the Board of Directors intends to help
Waterwood get there.  The absence of a strategy coupled with
cancelling more than half of Waterwood's subdivisions at the risk of
losing half its original membership means Waterwood, under the status
quo leadership, no doubt will continue to flounder without a rudder
until more motivated members step up to the plate and are voted-in to
challenge the status quo directors.

A look at local politics says this feat can be done if enough lot
owners are aware of the problems.  Local citizens in San Jacinto
County this past election took the bull by the horn.  They voted-out
the incumbent judge, the incumbent district attorney, and the
incumbent commissioner of District #4.  In addition to voting-out the
status quo, they took advantage of a state law allowing them to
submit enough names to request state officials to conduct a special
audit of the county's finances, a feat supposedly never done in
Texas.

In other local news, several people have been killed in automobile
accidents on rural roads in the past few months, one involving
livestock on the road.  Waterwood Watchdog would like to remind
everyone that hundreds of fawns were recently born; please slow down
in anticipation of deer and other animals and their young ones on
roadways at Waterwood.

Special postnote: A new feature on the Waterwood Watchdog website is
Photo Albums -- one album includes property and homes for sale by
owners, and another album includes nature and wildlife photographs,
including newborn fawns.  To see the albums, go to
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waterwoodwatchdog and click
on "Photos". If you have a digital photograph depicting a house or
lot you want to sell, or Waterwood's wildlife or nature which you'd
like to post, please email it to terrier77340@...

March 31st is the due date to pay WIA annual assessments ($142 this
year).  Also known as "annual dues", how is this figure determined?
In a perfect world, it's a simple math equation.  Waterwood's annual
reserve fund (for projected maintenance and liability expenses) plus
its total annual expenses (personnel, EMS, etc.) minus annual
proceeds from $7 million invested in securities and bonds =
assessment requirements to be funded by the lot owners.  This final
figure is supposed to be divided by the number of qualified Waterwood
lots (approximately 2,100 lots).  But, since 33% don't pay
assessments, the directors long ago decided that assessment
requirements have to be inflated in order to be funded by 66% of the
lot owners.

In addition to the 700 or so lot owners who don't pay their
assessments, there are thousands of "unqualified" lot owners which
don't figure into the math equation at all. Jacinto Investments/CEM,
Keystone Land, Horizon, the Municipal Utility District, and San
Jacinto County aren't considered WIA members, and therefore, they
aren't charged annual assessments on lots they own. Jacinto
Investments/CEM and Keystone Land, however, do pay property taxes
just like everybody else.

Supposedly, county property records are obtained annually from the
appraisal district and WIA's records are updated accordingly to make
sure every qualified lot owner pays their fair share of assessments.
However, Waterwood Watchdog stumbled upon eight lot owners in
Whispering Pines II which haven't been listed in WIA's books nor
charged assessments for the past few years.  Oops, someone slipped.
Who slipped? If you ask WIA, they blame San Jacinto County's
records.  If you ask San Jacinto County, they say their records are
updated monthly and WIA must have goofed.

It's our directors' duty to know exactly how many lot owners are
charged assessments and how many pay their bill.  It's also their
duty to make sure employees update property ownership records each
year in order to accurately charge assessments. Sadly, the majority
of WIA's directors aren't familiar with how WIA figures its
assessments, how it keeps assessment records, or the accurracy of its
property records.  Our directors have excused their lack of
involvement by explaining that they are volunteers.  Yet, these
crucial numbers are a homeowner association's bread and butter, and
our bylaws establish that it's directors' duty to supervise employees
to ensure bookkeeping and lot ownership records are current and
correct.

Another due date coming up for lot owners is May 31st.  You have until
May 31st to file a protest if you believe your property is valued too
high or unequally by the Appraisal District (San Jacinto County).
Many lots in Waterwood are unequally valued.  For example, Jacinto
Investments/CEM owned several developed lots in Whispering Pines II.
Two years ago, approximately 18 of their $2,500 lots were devalued to
$280 (property numbers R66430, R66542, R66686, R66713, and R66722).
This means a multi-million dollar partnership managed to lower their
taxes to about $8 in annual taxes instead of $80 per developed lot.
Meanwhile, over 200 Whispering Pines II lot owners, predominantly
senior citizens on fixed incomes, could have seized this opportunity
(but didn't) to protest their $2,500 lot as "unequal" in value to the
neighboring $280 lots owned by Jacinto Investments/CEM. It's unknown
why the Chief Appraiser of San Jacinto County (no longer employed in
our county) devalued only 18 Jacinto Investments/CEM's Whispering
Pines II lots to $280, while leaving another 200 other Whispering
Pines II lots unchanged at $2,500 each.  Foul play comes to one's
mind.  Waterwood Watchdog was informed that the only recourse
Whispering Pines II lot owners have to seek justice and equity, is to
file protests to get the same low value.

But, in order to protest and seek justice and equity, one needs to do
their homework. The Internet makes this job a lot easier and cheaper
than it used to be. To see appraised values in San Jacinto County, go
to http://www.txcountydata.com/county.asp?County=204 (also listed in
the Bookmarks section on Waterwood Watchdog's homepage).  At this
website, click on Owner Search, enter your last name, and copy down
the R-number and the appraised value for your lot.  Then, click on
Property ID Search, enter R-numbers higher and lower than your number
to get your neighbors' lot values.

For example, Mr. and Mrs. Jarvie's R-number is R60667 (Bermuda Dune),
and their lot is appraised at $9,530.  They would enter R60666 and
continue entering decreasing and increasing R-numbers to get property
values for everyone on Bermuda Dune.  In Mr. and Mrs. Jarvie's case,
they'll discover that the lot across the street from them is valued
at $2,000 but is 33% percent smaller in size.  Mr. and Mrs. Jarvie
will have convincing evidence and good reason to protest and ask the
Appraisal Review Board to lower their lot's value by 50% to $4,500 or
less.  This inequity, coupled with the fact that no lots have sold
and no houses have been built on Bermuda Dune in over two decades,
will offer Mr. and Mrs. Jarvie a poignant case to lower their lot's
value and taxes by 50%.

Mr. and Mrs. Jarvie aren't the only lot owners paying higher taxes on
unequally valued lots.  Inequities abound at Waterwood, with low
values and low taxes mysteriously being awarded to Horizon, Keystone
Land and Jacinto Investments/CEM.  Jacinto Investments/CEM owns a
developed lot on Poland Spring Way (R61013) which is a developed lot
valued at $120.  Two lots down, however, is a lot valued at $1,760
(owned by Mr. Punch (R61016).  Mr. Punch also has a strong case to
lower his property taxes by 90% by requesting his $1,760 lot to be
devalued to $120, on par with Jacinto Investments/CEM's lot. Mr.
Favaloro and Mr. Reber (R60645 and R60643) are also good candidates
for protesting their property taxes and asking for a 90% reduction.
In between their $2,200 and $3,620 lots located on Spy Glass Court is
a developed lot valued at $100, owned by, you guessed it, Jacinto
Investments/CEM.

Because most property at Waterwood involves absentee lot owners who
live out of town, the Internet is a "must have" tool for researching
comparable property. For example, one golf course lot adjacent to the
third fairway with a view of the lake is valued at $6,750 (R60660,
next to Dave Carey's home) while three lots away, adjacent to a
ravine with no view of the lake, is a lot valued higher at $9,250
(R60664).  Even more puzzling, an identical lot next to the over-
valued $9,250 lot is valued at $7,860 (R60665). Waterwood Watchdog's
lot (across the same ravine, opposite R60665) is smaller than most
lots and is valued at $2,200 (land only, 67354).  But her lot is
flanked by two Keystone Land lots; one is valued at $920 and the
other is valued at $770!  GRRRR . . . . . . . . Waterwood Watchdog
will growl and protest of course.

How does one protest? You only have two weeks to do this.  When forms
become available in mid-May, get a form by calling the Appraisal
District at San Jacinto County (936-653-4481) and submit it by May
31st.  According to a representative at the appraisal district, when
they receive your protest form, they'll informally resolve the
protest in a telephone call (you'll need to provide them your daytime
phone number).  If the protest isn't resolved satisfactorily, lot
owners can request an appearance before the Appraisal Review Board.
Those who live out of state can appoint an "agent" to appear on their
behalf (a notarized letter appointing someone by name).  Three people
on the Appraisal Review Board (business persons in the community who
are certified to hear and resolve property valuation disputes) will
then attempt to resolve any perceived inequities.  If the lot owner
is still unhappy, he or she can appeal the decision at the district
court level.

In the local news, Donnie Marshall, Chief of our Fire Department,
attended a grantwriting conference in order to submit a grant to the
US government.  He recently submitted a grant requesting $159,622 to
buy a new "main pumper" (fire truck) to replace our 20-year old
pumper that's becoming a high-maintenance problem.  The Assistance to
Firefighters Grant Program, managed by the US Fire Administration
(under FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency) has $360
million for these grants.  Thousands of fire departments across the
country have applied for funding for equipment and personnel training
programs. Applications are competitive and will be scored in April.
By mid-May, we should know if Waterwood's grant made the cut.

A new word was heard last month - ageeism.  What is an "ageeism"?
It's a contorted statement to disguise the whole truth.  How so? For
example, Directors Agee and Stanley met with Pat Halloway, the
Huntsville Postmaster, to discuss changes in the way mail can be
received at Waterwood.  Agee announced that as a result of their
discussion with Halloway, the current delivery method (private
service via Phil Palmer's office) cannot be changed because it is the
method originally established by Horizon, case closed. This a classic
ageeism.  What Agee failed to reveal is that although the Board can't
change the "Method of Delivery", it can request an "Expansion of
Delivery Method" from the Huntsville Postmaster.  The Board could
erect a mailbox clusterbox in any neighborhood where there are 12
people who want to receive mail closer to their home.  For
example, a minimum of 12 residents of Greentree Village could request
the Board to erect a mailbox cluster in their subdivision.  The Board
would be able to submit an "Expansion of Delivery Method" request to
the Huntsville Postmaster. Those 12 residents' addresses would be
changed, for example, from "457 Waterwood" to "457 Greentree Village,
Huntsville, TX 77320".  Ageeism, however, will prevent expansion of
mail delivery from happening, much in the same way that ageeism
prevented hazardous dead trees from being cut down in the mid and
late 1990s by claiming that it was "illegal" to do so.  Fortunately,
Board directors in 2001 rejected that ageeism, and authorized
hazardous dead trees to be cut down.

If you're in town this weekend, consider these local events.
Saturday morning, there will be a Walk in the Woods, 3 and 7 mile
walks, 9 to Noon (meet at the County Club parking lot near the
granite sign).  There's an Easter Egg Hunt for children ages 10 and
under, Saturday afternoon, 2 to 4 PM, at the Point Blank Volunteer
Fire Department on Rt. 190. And on Sunday, there's a Sunrise Easter
Sunday Service at the Wilderness Cathedral, 6:15 AM.  For those who
can't walk a mile to the Cathedral, four-wheel drive service can be
arranged by arriving a bit earlier, 6 AM.


Editor's note: The Waterwood Improvement Association now has a website
where Board minutes, bylaws, and information are posted; see
http://people.txucom.net/wia/   As a courtesy to subscribers, minutes
will continue to be emailed from Waterwood Watchdog.  The posted copy
will remain on Waterwood Watchdog's website for 30 days. To research
prior months' Board minutes, you'll need to visit WIA's website (also
listed on the Bookmarks section).

In the local news this week, it was announced that an interfaith
chapel will be built at the corner of FM 980 and Waterwood Parkway.
It will be constructed on the existing foundation where Horizon's
sales office was located prior to burning down about 20 years ago.
Keystone's sales office (trailer) was located on that tract of land
until a few months ago. The Universal Ethician Church received the 10-
acre tract of land as a gift from George and Sue Russell. Plans are
to construct a glass structure, but construction won't begin until
perhaps next year.  Tax-deductible donations to help construct the
chapel can be sent to The Universal Ethician Church,1401 19th St.,
Huntsville, TX 77340.

Speaking of construction, what's the growth rate at Waterwood and how
does it compare to our neighboring golf resort community, Cape Royale?
Ten years ago (1991),there were 364 water connections at Cape Royale
and approximately 395 at Waterwood.  Since then, Cape Royale has
grown by 177 and Waterwood has grown by about 18.  Cape Royale's new
connections were all custom homes built by lot owners. Like
Waterwood, Cape Royale doesn't have a developer. Annual dues at Cape
Royale are $293 per year and basic monthly water bills start at $35,
much more than Waterwood's $142 annual dues and basic water bill of
$23.50 per month. Obviously, there's a demand for homes in the Lake
Livingston area, but Waterwood's "bargain rates" aren't attracting
customers.

Why is Waterwood's ten-year growth rate anemic, five percent, in
comparison to Cape Royale's 50 percent growth? Perhaps there are
clues inside WIA's annual report. Yes, annual reports, the scourge of
reading material.  They're being dusted off lately and given a second
look, thanks to Enron's and Halliburton's recent stock price
collapses.  Investors have taken a re-newed interest in financial
reports. Even President Bush claims new corporate disclosure rules
may be necessary to protect investors' interests.

Enron, Halliburton and WIA have something in common -- all three have
played down the extent of their problems and liabilities to
"shareholders" (members).  If a potential homebuilder scrutinized
WIA's financial reports, what clues indicate things may have gone
awry over the years? When real estate values are stable or
increasing, like stock prices, there's little reason to scrutinize
reports and second-guess Boards of Directors' decisions.  But, when
real estate values plummeted at Waterwood during the late 1980s and
early 1990s, and when growth slowed to nearly a halt for several
years, instead of voting in all-new Board members to get the
community out of a rut, as most other communities would have done,
WIA's membership consistently trusted and voted in the status quo
Board of Directors.  Nor was the membership's trust shaken over the
years when directors didn't mail annual reports to the membership
with their election material.

Most homeowner associations mail annual reports to their members, as
a courtesy and show of respect to a membership which pays for the
community's bills.  WIA directors, however, contend that the Texas
Nonprofit Corporation Act doesn't require mass mailings of its annual
report to the membership. This stance, in itself, can be viewed by
potential investors (the future homebuilder) as a red flag. An
unwillingness to mail the annual report to the entire membership may
indicate arbitrary management decisions. Mailing cost shouldn't be
WIA's concern.  Dave Carey's two campaign letters last October cost
the membership $1,500.

A major reason why WIA's membership consistently votes for the status
quo Board of Directors despite little community growth to show for it,
is Waterwood's largely absentee membership, including weekend
homeowners.  The 250 or so full-time homeowners are in the minority
here, approximately 150 part-time homeowners, and of the 1,700 lot
owners, about 1,000 are current in their dues and thus eligible to
vote. Homeowner association consultants claim an absentee membership
is a major disadvantage for the full-time homeowners who are in the
minority.  Problems in the community aren't conveyed to absentee lot
owners including the occasional weekend homeowners.

And since Waterwood's absentee lot owners and weekend homeowners
don't receive or request WIA's annual report, they're prone to accept
WIA's "blame game" as reported in their "Inside WIA" newsletter.  For
twenty years, directors have blamed decreasing home values, lot
values, and slow growth rates on situations beyond their control.
During the 1980s, Carey said it was Horizon's fault.  During the
1990s, Agee said it was the Country Club's fault.  Some say it's
Keystone's fault. This coming year, the economy will be blamed.  None
of these excuses sit well, however, in view of the fact that 25 miles
south, Cape Royale, another golf resort that was smaller than
Waterwood in 1991, is now much larger than Waterwood.

Smart investors ignore Board of Directors' lame excuses.  PR hype
printed on glossy expensive paper gets tossed, preferring to
concentrate instead on annual reports for the real beef.  Because
most Americans can't make sense of annual reports, the Securities &
Exchange Commission put together a handbook for corporations several
years ago on "how to create Plain English documents", one that would
enlighten readers about a corporation's financial matters rather than
befuddle them.  This publication may gain more respect as a result of
Enron's debacle. But, for the most part, nonprofit corporations such
as homeowner associations (HOAs) have already adopted this "Plain
English" approach. Pick up any HOA annual report, often proudly on
display at an HOA office, and you'll get a good inside view of that
community's priorities and projects.  Many offer detailed lists of
expenditures by using numerous accounting codes so that readers can
quickly identify unexpected higher costs or problems.

But, Waterwood doesn't disseminate a "Plain English" annual report to
the members or to prospective homebuyers or homebuilders because the
Texas Nonprofit Corporation Act doesn't require it. A quick look
inside WIA's annual report, however, reveals it falls short of HOA
standards. Instead of enlightening its membership, it raises more
questions.

If you haven't already read this report, contact wia@... and
request a copy. If there was a contest, WIA's annual report would win
first prize in the category of worse annual report issued by an HOA.
It not only omits certain information and lacks sufficient
narratives, the information it does include is presented in an
unprofessional, visually unappealing format. Line-item descriptions
are located on one page while corresponding figures are located on
the next page. The reader must remove the staple, draw lines with a
ruler on eight pages, and then overlap and line-up eight pages
horizontally with scotch tape across a long desk in order to make
sense of it. Some of the more cynical membership claim this is just
another shrewd mastery of obfuscation by our community's leadership.

One telling and critical number in HOA annual reports is its
attrition  --  the percentage of members (both lot owners and
homeowners) who don't pay their annual dues.  When members don't pay
annual dues, red flags wave. The directors must devise a strategy to
either bring the slackers back in line or compensate by raising
annual dues among those who do pay. In fact, realtors advise
potential homebuyers and homebuilders to look at a low or nonexistent
attrition rate as one aspect of determining good HOA management.

WIA's annual report doesn't specify the attrition rate, but the data
is there if you know which numbers to calculate. According to the most
recent report, of the annual assessments totaling $357,361 which were
billed to the membership, only $238,539 was collected. That means 33
percent, or 700 WIA members, are in default (known as "unpaid
assessments determined to be uncollectable"). By HOA standards, 33
percent is excessively high, an indication of poor HOA management.

But, some history is required here to understand why Waterwood is an
anomaly.  Some 20 years ago, almost half of WIA's membership was
composed of undeveloped lot owners (lots located in the forest along
the seven-mile parkway).  The initial developer, Horizon, like the
dot.com companies that went public in 1999, was amazingly successful
at selling promises of better things to come -- 1,000 "shareholders"
snapped up undeveloped lots for $2,600 to $5,700 and more per lot,
many of them buying two lots. But Horizon's marketing promotions
shaded the truth, promising much more than it could deliver.  As time
went by, nearly half of the undeveloped lot owners saw the writing on
the wall. Instead of protesting and voting in a new Board of
Directors, they quit paying dues. To add insult to Horizon's injury,
WIA's directors refused to construct  secondary dirt roads to their
lots.  The Board made decisions that clearly neglected the
undeveloped subdivisions, in addition to penalizing those lot owners
with high capital improvement charges (now as much as $9,000) to
discourage homebuilding. That's why WIA's high attrition rate is
primarily composed of undeveloped lot owners.

But, WIA's Boards of Directors during the 1980s were prepared for a
high attrition rate when Horizon fell through on its promises. They
took steps to stuff that cushion against future loss of revenue by
increasing annual dues in the 1980s, to $250 and more in some years.
That money was plowed back into bonds, not into community amenities
or recreational facilities, for fear that the continuing fall-out of
undeveloped lot owners over the years would be an increasing burden
to the developed lot owners. Amazingly, the fall-out of undeveloped
lot owners was not as severe as directors had expected. As a result,
David Carey and his colleagues' "save for a rainy day" philosophy to
protect themselves against a high attrition rate has resulted in a
second source of revenue each year -- approximately $435,000 worth of
proceeds from $7 million that was saved and invested in bonds.

The undeveloped lot owners have been the Board of Directors' skeleton
in the closet for many years.  When someone at the members meeting
asked Zimmermann about the excessively high attrition rate (one-third
of the membership), he confused those at the meeting by claiming that
there was no attrition problem.  By normal HOA standards, an attrition
rate of 33% would be a severe problem.  The reason Zimmermann and
many others believe attrition isn't a problem is because the high
attrition rate has remained stable at 33% for the past ten years.
That's why the Board reduced annual dues over a decade ago -- as the
attrition rate stabilized, there was less need to "save for a rainy
day."

But, the Board's 20-year "save for a rainy day" solution to the
attrition problem, under the careful watch of Carey, created another
problem. Like any other corporation which doesn't plow back earnings
into growing the company, the Board of Directors lost sight of its
mission.  It lost customers (undeveloped lot owners), lost new
markets  (homebuilders), and became stagnant (very little or
nonexistent growth).  By concentrating solely on the attrition
problem, the Board began to view itself as Waterwood's "Departments
of Slush Fund, Roads and Street Lights".  Under Carey's leadership,
they established a history of fiscal conservatism at the expense of
promoting growth and quality of life at Waterwood.

Some members mistakenly believe fiscal conservatism is a good thing.
Without our Department of Slush Fund, dues would be approximately
$425 per lot in order to cover the community's increasing expenses.
But, according to HOA experts, the Board's job is not to keep
assessments low. Their job is to maintain or increase property
value.  Cape Royale is proof that high dues and lack of a slush fund
won't scare away homebuilders or lower property values.  In fact,
Waterwood's Department of Slush Fund may have inadvertently caused
Carey and other directors to lose focus of the Board's purpose --  to
increase property value by improving quality of life at Waterwood.
One often heard criticism in the community is that WIA directors
perform their duties not as community visionaries looking for ways to
improve residents' quality of life by providing amenities and
services, but rather as trust fund officers.

And, like trust fund officers with millions of dollars in the bank,
WIA directors, too, have become somewhat smug, particularly toward the
undeveloped lot owners.  Now that WIA has weathered the attrition
problem with plenty of money in the bank to protect itself against
the second wave of attrition (the remaining undeveloped lot owners),
WIA directors under Carey's leadership have been focusing for the
past six years on how to painlessly get rid of 18 undeveloped
subdivisions.  They're motivated by a desire to keep the $1.17
million in the "Undeveloped Liability Fund" for developed
subdivisions rather than spend it on undeveloped subdivisions.

Last month, Zimmermann at the urgings of previous directors signed an
agreement which resembles a prenuptial contract with a timbering
conglomerate.  WIA promises to sell and trade WIA land in the
undeveloped subdivisions, including greenbelts and common areas, only
to the timbering conglomerate, to assist, honor and obey, till death
do they part, in moving the undeveloped lot owners out. This
agreement extends to all future Boards (visit Waterwood Watchdog's
website, see new features on left column, click on Files to see
highlights of this agreement).

What red flags are waving in the annual report and in this latest
second agreement with WIA's sweetheart? Waterwood has some troubling
situations. The messages are particularly bad for undeveloped lot
owners.  They must patiently wait for the timbering conglomerate to
offer them a developed lot as a trade. Unfortunately, the prenuptial
agreement doesn't detail exactly how or when trades will be done, nor
how many developed lots the timbering conglomerate plans to buy to
accomplish this massive project.  Even if the undeveloped lot owner
is successful in obtaining a trade to Whispering Pines II, inland
developed lots are slow to sell.  And a return on an investment in a
custom-built home at Waterwood is no guarantee under the present
leadership.  With the exception of waterfront homes and lots, inland
homes and lots have not appreciated in value at Waterwood during the
last ten years. We can also expect to pay increasing dues each year
to compensate for WIA's increasing personnel costs as well as the
costs associated with helping WIA's sweetheart continue its quest to
"deplat" (legal definition unknown), timber and then resell what was
once 18 undeveloped subdivisions. None of these activities increase
the community's amenities and services to improve quality of life.

Waterwood isn't the only HOA with problems that scare potential
homebuilders away. Some HOAs hunker down and blaze new trails and
succeed in overcoming tough problems.  One such HOA located in New
York faced problems similar to Waterwood. Their developer skipped town
and the Board lost sight of their mission.  The membership voted in a
new Board of Directors, determined to find a silver lining in the
cloud. They began strategic planning—it's financial planning, reserve
analysis, brainstorming, and dreaming, all rolled together.  To read
an article on how this Board overcame its problems and provided
residents with better and more appropriate services and amenities,
visit this article online at
http://www.caionline.org/feature/index.cfm

WIA's Board has historically underestimated the importance of its
mission, of voluntarily disclosing information such as the annual
report to the entire membership to encourage more informed voting, and
to improve quality of life by providing amenities and services, such
as free mail service, a playground, and more recreational and
landscaping projects. That tradition, however, may be slowly
changing.  This year, in response to requests, a Recreation Committee
was appointed to provide a playground in the community.  A
"Playground Survey" was disseminated to various homes this week. If
you didn't get a survey, you can stop in at the WIA office and get
one.

Another much needed amenity is free mail delivery closer to one's
home. At one time, Cape Royale had mail delivery similar to Waterwood
-- folks had to drive long distances to retrieve their mail at one
central place. But, with the cooperation of Coldspring's post office
which provided free mailbox clusters, Cape Royale provided the labor,
common area and the concrete pads to locate mailbox clusters in
various sections of the community.  Free box keys are obtained at the
Coldspring Post Office. At Waterwood, there is expensive paid private
mail service at a central location, despite the fact that rural free
delivery was established by Congress over one hundred years ago.
Residents who want free mail delivery should email Jan Stanley, Real
Estate Chairperson, at wia@...

Special Note: Waterwood Watchdog has new options.  The Home Page,
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waterwoodwatchdog/  now includes
photographs, a database, one file so far, bookmarks, and a calendar of
upcoming local events. The new options are accessible to members only.
For your information, members' identification and email addresses have
never been and will never be viewable to the public or to other
members -- your privacy is guaranteed.  For members' convenience, the
email delivery or email notification option can be turned "off" or
"on" (click on Edit My Membership). Members who turn off the email
delivery option will still be able to access all archived postings and
contents on the Home Page.

To see the new additions, click on
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waterwoodwatchdog/

[Special note to Waterwood homeowners and renters -- the County's 911
Coordinator, John Nunn, needs to enter your physical address in the
911 database so that your 911 call can be traced to an address. See
instructions at conclusion of this article.]

Waterwood's ambulance is occasionally driven to keep the battery
charged.  But, since the Harpers moved to Georgia a couple of years
ago (our former EMS personnel as well as good neighbors), the
ambulance hasn't been used for its intended purpose. Instead, Point
Blank's volunteer EMS has been responding to our emergencies.

Although WIA funds were spent in 1999 to train John Agee and Damon
Thomas, and in 2001 to train Lisa Williams as EMS responders, they're
not available 24 hours daily, seven days weekly. But, even with
training, residents worry if our volunteers and ambulance are up to
par. Supposedly, Waterwood's ambulance meets standards to provide
Advanced Life Support (A.L.S.); it has cardiac monitors,
defibrillators, I.V. / infusion pumps, I.V. solutions, Oxygen, Oxygen
supplies with all necessary regulators and gauges to deliver oxygen,
intubation equipment, respirator, FAA approved stretcher,
oropharyngeal airways, hand operated bag-valve mask resuscitators,
portable suction units, pulse oximeter, blood pressure cuffs and a
drug box (Warfarin, for example, for stroke victims). But, WIA has
never reassured the community that the medical equipment is checked
regularly to ensure it is working, nor has the community been
informed about the level of training for Agee, Thomas, and Williams.
As a result, residents feel uneasy about Waterwood's EMS.

This fall at the members meeting, directors acknowledged that our EMS
situation isn't good. Waterwood isn't alone. Our entire county has
been facing similar problems for several years. Because San Jacinto
County is a rural county (39 people per square mile), taxpayers in
San Jacinto county would have to pay more to receive the same level
of commercial services provided in another county with double the
population. The deciding factor in determining how many ambulances
and personnel a rural county needs is not its population, but rather
the condition of the roads, and the number of miles it will need to
travel from Point A to Point B (the victim), and from Point B to
Point C (a hospital in Walker, Montgomery, Liberty or Polk County,
since there are no hospitals in San Jacinto County).

At one time, San Jacinto County had as many as four volunteer
services - Shepherd in the southeast, Bear Creek in the southwest,
Coldspring in the center, and Point Blank in the northern end of the
county.  All but Point Blank, however, ran into financial
difficulties and problems keeping enough qualified volunteers.  One
by one, they  dropped out, leaving only Point Blank for most of this
year to cover the entire county.  Lengthy waits for transportation as
well as lengthy transport times to hospitals became the norm.

Last winter, Judge Joe Adams hand-picked 13 knowledgeable people in
the county and formed an EMS Advisory Committee to solve the county's
EMS problem.  They looked at several options and decided the best
solution was to ask the citizens of San Jacinto County to authorize
additional taxes for an Emergency Services District (ESD).  These new
funds, they concluded, would enable the county to contract with a
commercial ambulance service or to staff their own non-profit paid
ambulance service.

The ESD tax isn't a new tax in San Jacinto.  It already exists as
three cents per $100 property valuation to pay for volunteer fire
departments in the county. But, to pay for EMS, citizens needed to
vote to authorize the expansion of this tax to an additional seven
cents per $100 property valuation.  The first vote failed, perhaps
due to residents not realizing the severity of the county's EMS
problems. The second vote passed in July this year, primarily due to
Judge Joe Adams' widespread campaigning that included community
forums at several locations in the county.  Even the WIA Board
contributed funds toward this campaign to show their support for a
better EMS delivery system in the county. When voters in the county
finally endorsed the additional tax, the county found itself with an
additional $446,000 to pay for a one-year contract with a commercial
EMS.

But, this tax doesn't solve Waterwood's EMS problem.  Waterwood
doesn't pay the ESD tax. Why? The answer to that question goes back
to the 1980s.  Phil Palmer spearheaded a campaign back in the 1980s
and successfully got State representatives to amend the state's ESD
tax law so that certain county residents could vote themselves out of
the ESD tax. Waterwood folks voted and said, "No thanks" to the
county's ESD tax.  Back then, it was only three cents per $100
property valuation to fund volunteer fire departments.  The taxes
generated were given to the Commissioners based on populations in
their precincts.  According to Palmer, Waterwood's fire department
got back only a small portion of each ESD dollar paid-in by Waterwood
property owners.  That's why Waterwood folks were eager to vote
themselves out of the ESD tax. For the past 20 years or so, our
volunteer fire department was funded with approximately $25,000 of
our annual MUD taxes. Half of that budget went toward high rental
fees to the landlord and the other half went toward equipment and
utilities. October 1st of this year, however, that situation
changed.  The fire station building is now owned and remodeled by
WIA, and it's budget also falls under WIA's umbrella (our annual
dues).

Which commercial EMS is providing services to citizens of San
Jacinto County? A contract for $380,000 was recently awarded to
MedXpress; it has corporate offices in Kingwood. Beginning January 1,
2002, they'll have three ambulances -- one in Shepherd, one in
Coldspring and one shared unit in Point Blank and Waterwood.
Supposedly, Point Blank's rental contract to house EMS personnel
recently expired.  Whether it may be renewed at a later date is
unknown. Until then, the ambulance for the northern end of the county
will remain at Waterwood.

But, since Waterwood property owners don't pay the ESD tax, and since
there's no free volunteer service anymore, WIA's EMS Committee sat
down and made a deal with MedXpress. For $70,000 per year, MedXpress
will extend EMS to Waterwood residents.  And in the event Point Blank
obtains another lease to house EMS personnel someday, MedXpress will
keep one shift at Waterwood -- the 10 PM to 6 AM shift -- while the 6
AM to 10 PM shifts will be at Point Blank. The Country Club will
provide EMS personnel a room at the Lodge (near the Tree House
at Pools Creek Park).

Beginning in 2002, our WIA annual dues will pay for Waterwood's
volunteer fire department, security, and the new EMS contract with
MedXpress.  During 2000, WIA's annual report listed security costs at
$109,502 and EMS expenses were nill -- the addition of the $70,000
EMS contract and another $12,000 for fire equipment and utility
costs means that our fire, security and EMS will now cost roughly
$191,500 each year -- a hefty increase from the last full-year
figures reported in 1998 -- only $114,350 for EMS and security.

Will dues go up to cover the additional expenses? According
to our Audit/Financial Chairperson, David McElvain, maybe and maybe
not. As he explained in WIA's recent newsletter, if dues at the
current level ($142 per year) fall short of covering these basic
services, he says income from WIA's investments "should" be used to
cover the deficit. Some of us more astute readers have taken note
that McElvain used the word "should" six times in his explanation of
WIA's finances.  In other words, if dues are raised, the Board can
say they shoulda, coulda and woulda used investment proceeds to cover
the deficit in operations costs, but they decided against it,
preferring instead to raise our dues.

[Attention Waterwood residents, including renters -- John Nunn, the
911 Coordinator for our county would like you to call him and give
him your home phone number and physical address for their 911
database. This way, the dispatcher who receives your 911 call will be
able to immediately identify your physical address.  Because
Waterwood's house numbering system is not in conformity with the rest
of the USA (even-numbered houses on the right and odd-numbered houses
on the left of the road), it will be confusing and time-consuming for
the new EMS service to locate your house. To reduce this confusion,
please make sure your house numbers are visible from the street, and
call John Nunn, collect if you wish, at 936-653-3823, to give him
your physical address].

WATERWOOD IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION, INC.
ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP MEETING - OCTOBER 20, 2001

CALL TO ORDER - The 2001 Annual Membership Meeting was called to
order by David Carey at approximately 10:15 a.m. on October 20, 2001
in the National Room of Waterwood Country Club.  WIA President, David
Carey, welcomed all in attendance and introduced the WIA Board of
Directors and Staff.  WIA member Bob Lane made a motion nominating
Jack Zimmermann as chairman of the meeting.  This motion was seconded
by John Horn and passed.

At this time, WIA member John Agee presented outgoing WIA President
David Carey with a plaque and gavel for his tenure of service to
Waterwood.

QUORUM STATEMENT - Jack Zimmermann announced that the number of
eligible voters for 2001 were 1403 with 10 percent needed for a
quorum.  A quorum was declared present. Four hundred, twenty-seven
(427) voters were declared present in person and proxy.

APPOINT SECRETARY OF THE 2001 MEMBERSHIP MEETING -  Jack Zimmermann
appointed Lisa Hayman - Secretary of the 2001 Annual Membership
Meeting.

APPROVAL OF THE 2000 ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP MEETING MINUTES - Reading of
the minutes of the 2000 Annual Membership Meeting was waived as
members had received copies in the December 2000 newsletter. Jack
Zimmermann entertained a motion to approve the 2000 minutes as
written.  This motion was seconded by a show of hands and passed.

ELECTION COMMITTEE REPORT - Dick Beare, Election Committee Chairman,
gave a detailed summary of the election process and procedures for
Directors.   He then announced the votes received for each director
as follows:  John Agee (334), Donna Bridgeford (310), James Jemison
(251),  David McElvain (327),  Terri Reed (114), John Shideler (141),
Diana Spurling (155), Damon Thomas (252), and Carol Winters (122).
Write in votes were as follows:  Robert Beckles (1), Dick Beare (1),
David Carey (5), Jerry Healy (1), Bobbie Jean Kelley (1), Earl McVay
(1), Bill Richardson (1), and Barbie Ringler (2).  There was also
nine (9) invalid ballots, five (5) with no signature stub, two (2)
with no votes indicated and two (2) voting for more than five (5).

RECEIPT OF AUDITORS REPORT FOR 2000 - 402 For; 	  23 Against
RATIFICATION OF AUDITORS FOR 2001 -   405 For; 	  20 Against
BOARD'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT NO. 1 -403 For;   23 Against
BOARD'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT NO. 2 -393 For;   34 Against
BOARD'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT NO. 3 -379 For;   48 Against
PETITIONER'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT NO. 1 -82 For;      345 Against
PETITIONER'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT NO. 2 -81 For;      346 Against
PETITIONER'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT NO. 3 -63 For;      364 Against
PETITIONER'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT NO. 4 -57 For;      370 Against
PETITIONER'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT NO. 5 -52 For;   375 Against
PETITIONER'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT NO. 6 -85 For;      342 Against
PETITIONER'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT NO. 7 -79 For;      348 Against
PETITIONER'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT NO. 8 -60 For;      367 Against
There were four (4) invalid proxy ballots due to no signature or date.

NOMINATING COMMITTEE - Jack Zimmermann announced that Dick Hansen had
agreed to chair the Nominating Committee for 2002.

NEW BUSINESS -  Jack Zimmermann answered several questions from the
floor.  WIA member Gayl Ganskow requested that the board look into
the possibility of a play area for children.  WIA member Diana
Spurling inquired about EMS service in  Waterwood.  WIA member Louis
Ganskow inquired about the possibility of moving the mail boxes into
the WIA building.  WIA member Bob Lane suggested that WIA create a
WebPage.  WIA member Terri Reed ask the board to consider a
recreation committee.  Jack Zimmermann assured each individual and
the audience that all of these issues would be explored.  WIA member
Earl McVay asked that all of the outgoing WIA members be recognized.
Betts Horn addressed the audience about the plaque presented to the
Waterwood Volunteer Fire Department.  WIA member John Swartz
requested that the outside white lines on the parkway be repainted.
WIA member Mike Prine questioned how San Jacinto County's financial
situation would affect Waterwood.

Jack Zimmermann recognized the Waterwood Security officers and
Firemen that were present.

There being no further business, Damon Thomas made a motion to
adjourn, seconded by John Agee.  The meeting was adjourned at
approximately 11:40 a.m.

Have a complaint, suggestion, or idea?  Tell it to one of WIA's
Committee members.  Unlike previous years when a "committee" typically
consisted of one person, most of this year's committees look like
real committees.  They now include at least two persons, although
several committee members continue to wear more than one hat.
Zimmermann (selected president this year by directors) made committee
assignments shortly after the annual members meeting last month, but
anyone who wants to help would be welcomed. Just contact the WIA
office and express your interest.

     Members and residents can direct complaints, questions or concerns
through the main WIA email address (wia@...) or by letter or
telephone (locally 891-7710 or toll-free 1-866-891-7711).  Lisa, WIA's
secretary, will forward your communication to the respective
committees.

     Questions or complaints about neighborhood eyesores, remodeling
rules, building codes, or neighborhood nuisances (human or canine
ones), can be directed to the Architectural Control Board.
Chairperson is Dick Hansen, members are Damon Thomas and Carol
Winters.

     Questions or complaints about the budget, the annual report or
WIA's expenses or purchases can be directed to the Audit/Financial
Committee.  Chairperson is David McElvain, and the "ex-officio member"
is Joe Moore, who is our WIA treasurer, administrator and employee.

     Questions about WIA's corporate and Board obligations and
responsibilities can be directed to our By Laws Committee.
Chairperson is Damon Thomas.

     Questions about the troubling area of rural EMS can be directed to
the EMS Committee.  Chairperson is John Agee, members are Donna
Bridgeford and Damon Thomas.  FYI, if Waterwood residents need an
ambulance, the Point Blank Volunteer EMS will respond.  The county's
new, professional EMS is Gold Star.  This company is not a volunteer
organization, and is being paid via the county's new tax for EMS (a
tax which Waterwood lot owners don't pay). Gold Star has reportedly
been assigned to the lower part of San Jacinto County for the time
being although this may change in January 2002. It is uncertain how
much WIA spent last year or intends to spend this year to operate its
own ambulance with EMS volunteers or to pay for Gold Star's services
-- this issue will be a future Waterwood Watchdog column.

     Questions and complaints about street lights, trash collection,
drainage problems, road repair, mowing, and general maintenance should
be directed to the Maintenance Committee.  Chairperson is Jim Jemison
and member is John Shideler.

     Municipal Utility District concerns such as leaks, sewage, water
problems, and MUD taxes can be directed to Liaison Donna Bridgeford.

     Questions about Waterwood's "curb appeal" including the issues of
the undeveloped subdivisions can be directed to the Real Estate
Committee.  Chairperson is Jan Stanley, members are John Agee, Dick
Hansen, Damon Thomas, and Joe Moore.  Deer Creek undeveloped lot
owners who are current in their assessments, by the way, will be
getting information from WIA regarding trade-up lots to developed
subdivisions. Details are sketchy right now, but information will be
posted here as soon as it is available.

     Questions, suggestions and ideas about Waterwood's future
playground and other future recreational facilities and activities can
be directed to the new ad-hoc Recreation Committee.  Ad-hoc
committees, unlike standing committees, are established by the Board
to address specific issues usually on a temporary basis.  Chairperson
is Diana Spurling, members are Terri Reed and Jan Stanley.  This
committee will be looking into recreational facilities and activities
outside of the country club's offerings.  The traditional Christmas
events organized by the Fifes, the Spring picnic for members, July
4th events, and semi-annual Nature Walks beginning next Spring, will
be assigned to this committee.

     Questions about Security can be directed to Chairperson Norm Snapp
or member Damon Thomas.  It was recently brought to the Board's
attention that speeders in Whispering Pines I and II are jeopardizing
the safety of children, wildlife and pets on the streets.  If you see
a speeder, someone shooting wildlife, or someone loitering on premises
who doesn't live here, please jot down their license plate number and
contact security at 661-2800.  If a local resident is continually
speeding on your street, you can also contact Waterwood Watchdog.
Waterwood Watchdog has already visited one speeding puppy at his home
and successfully reminded him of his priorities in life.

     It may interest some members to know that since its inception in
1973, WIA's corporate bylaws included a Recreation Committee as a
standing committee.  Several years ago, Board directors struck it out
of the bylaws.  One reason why directors never authorized
construction of recreational facilities such as hiking trails is
because directors were primarily golfers who "hiked" on golf cart
paths and relied on the Country Club for recreational activities.
They decided residents didn't need additional recreational facilities
and did away with the Recreation Committee as a standing committee.
The president and directors, however, can respond to complaints and
appoint an ad-hoc committee, as was done by Zimmermann when he
created an ad-hoc Recreation Committee last month in response to
complaints about a lack of a playground.

     Some members have asked if we members can elect a WIA president.
The answer is "no".  Each October, the nine directors themselves vote
amongst themselves and elect one of them to serve as a president. The
Board's selection of Zimmermann as president this year is a break
with tradition.  Traditionally, the oldest director who has served
the most years as director is selected president, such as last year's
selection of Carey as president.  That traditional selection process
resembled an archaic monarchy rather than an effective government
that hones in on talents, community skills and intelligence.  In
fact, Board traditions may very well be the reason why Waterwood
hasn't kept up with the times as much as other subdivisions have
done.

     This past weekend, neighboring folks stopped by to chew some bones
with Waterwood Watchdog.  Why, they asked, do directors seem to live
in the past by not recognizing the effectiveness of electronic
transmission of news and Board minutes?  This question was posed to
the WIA office and there's good news to report.  Waterwood Watchdog
has received permission under Jack Zimmermann's leadership, to post
the approved Board minutes (November 19th minutes, for example, will
be approved at December's meeting and will be posted here the third
week of December).  Minutes will posted separately, not accompanied
by editorials.

     A quick search of homeowner associations (HOA) on the Internet
reveals that several HOAs have websites.  They post bylaws, Board
meeting and recreational event notices, forms, committee reports,
budgets, Board meeting minutes, newcomer information, maps, and
photographs with links to the listing real estate brokers.
Waterwood's delivery system of information seems antiquated in
comparison. Websites can be created by independent designers,
knowledgeable volunteers, or by specialty companies for a fee.  If
anyone would like to volunteer to help WIA get a website up and
running inexpensively, please notify wia@... and the Board
directors may accept your help.

The new Board of Directors is off to a good start with Jack
Zimmermann at the helm.  Almost 24 hours after the annual membership
meeting concluded on October 20th, Zimmermann had divvied-out tasks
for more than a dozen Waterwood residents, including tasks for the
candidates who had lost the election.  Zimmermann's off to a good
start in what could be a pivotal year for a change of culture among
the Board of Directors.  Directors voted in: new folks Bridgeford and
Jemison, and former directors McElvain, Thomas, and Agee.

     The election results (numbers to be posted later) confirm what one
member observed all the way from Washington State.  Waterwood is
composed of three distinct groups -- a voting membership who is loyal
to an aging Board, a disenchanted and cynical membership that has
given up on voting due to little positive changes in the last 20
years, and a group of nonvoting undeveloped lot owners who live too
far away to care about Waterwood's governing style or their
directors.  The majority of the latter two groups didn't vote again
this year.

     The petitioners' proposed amendments got voted down, but not
because they were bad proposals.  Rather, the Board's unethical scare
tactics effectively convinced members that endorsing ethics would be
bad policy for Waterwood.  Scare tactics warned members the Open
Meetings and Open Records Acts contained criminal and civil
litigation provisions, effectively misleading the membership into
believing those provisions would put our directors under too much
pressure if they had to comply with ethics standards that weren't
meant for rural folks.

     Members also voted down the idea of an All-Neighborhood Advisory
Committee.  Although these type of committees are fairly common place
in urban homeowner associations, the concept is little understood
here at Waterwood.  One of the downfalls of asking members to vote on
amending a bylaw for the betterment of the community is that the
membership is not particularly interested or knowledgeable of
corporate government issues.  Thus, giving the membership an
opportunity to empower themselves was doomed to failure.

     One comment that Jack Zimmermann mentioned at the annual meeting
was his promise to look more closely at the undeveloped subdivision
situation.  This is good news because former Boards have never
prioritized this issue.  This month's column highlights key points of
this issue.

     Six years ago, when Waterwood's initial developer, Horizon,
wanted out of the real estate business, it sold its unsold lots.
Most of us know that Keystone Land bought Horizon's developed lots --
many of us live nearby Keystone's lots.  But, what most of us don't
know is that Horizon also sold its undeveloped lots, approximately
3,500 lots, to a timbering conglomerate (also known as CEM, Jacinto
Investments Company, Woodridge Land Company, JWBL Investments, and/or
Megachips, Inc.).  These lots resemble a patchwork quilt, in no
logical order, in 16 odd-shaped subdivisions along the seven-mile
Parkway.  In-between the timbering conglomerate's patchwork of lots
are another 1,000 or so patchwork of lots purchased by individuals
back in the 1970s and 1980s. Adding to the patchwork design are WIA's
recreational acres, roadways and greenbelts -- approximately 500
acres worth of WIA-owned forest.

     The forest may look serene, but the patchwork of lot ownership is
anything but serene.  And because details have rarely been explained
in the WIA newsletter or elaborated upon in Board minutes, few of us
understand the enormity of the change of ownership when the timbering
conglomerate became the majority owner of the lots.  From all
appearances, nothing has changed since the timbering conglomerate
took ownership of those 3,500 undeveloped lots six years ago.  Our
lifestyles and the forest haven't been disrupted.   But, don't let
this quiet picture lull you into complacency.  The timbering
conglomerate wants a return on its investment.

     Representatives of the timbering conglomerate approached WIA
directors Agee, Hansen and Thomas this past July.  They're trying to
resolve some pesky details that have eluded them for six years - what
to do with lot owners who won't sell their lots to the timbering
conglomerate.  If you blinked, you missed WIA's announcement in its
October 1995 newsletter.  In a tiny paragraph, we were told that a
timbering conglomerate would be trading developed lots with the
undeveloped lot owners.  The timbering conglomerate's goal is to
gradually acquire all the 1,000 undeveloped lots it doesn't already
own by offering either cash or a developed lot in Whispering Pines
II.  Sounds methodical enough, but is this plan accomplishing its
goals?  Hardly.

     Directors knew back then that the timbering conglomerate had
bought only 67 developed lots in Whispering Pines II, appraised at
$2,500 each, as trade-up lots.  An obvious question is, "What will
happen to the other 480 or so paid-up folks who want to trade-up to
Whispering Pines II but can't get a lot?"  With 600 developed lots
for sale in Waterwood, there certainly isn't a shortage of supply.
Seems fair enough that the timbering conglomerate would offer the
remaining 480 folks either $2,500 cash or one of Keystone Land's
developed lots. But, Machiavellian business tactics don't work that
way. Instead, the timbering conglomerate has been offering $100 to
$200 for those who lucked-out of the lottery for a developed lot.

     Undeveloped lot owners have a keen sense of justice.  Perhaps the
taxing district values their lot at $300, but they bought their lot
for around $5,700 from Horizon, and have contributed over $3,000 into
WIA's coffers over the last quarter century.  With a total investment
of almost $9,000, they feel entitled to something better than a
choice between $200 cash and a $2,500 developed lot.

     WIA directors, however, feel blameless and unsympathetic about
the plight of the undeveloped lot owners.  "Tough luck" is what many
directors have said when questioned about what to do with 480 or so
lot owners who didn't win the timbering conglomerate's lottery for a
developed lot.  Put yourself in these lot owners' paws . . . . would
you be wagging your tail if you had to fork over your $9,000
investment in trees for 25 years to a timbering conglomerate for
$200? Not without a good growl, you wouldn't.

     Forgotten, too, are another hundred or so lot owners in arrears
who haven't been invited to come back into WIA's folds, pay back
assessments, and qualify for a trade-up to a $2,500 developed lot.
There's certainly nothing wrong with allowing 100 or so folks to
write out a check to WIA for $1,000 in back assessments in order to
qualify for a developed lot.

     When or if this problem is resolved, directors will allow the
timbering conglomerate to submit an application to deplatt
undeveloped subdivisions,beginning with Deer Creek subdivisions
(located between Rt. 190 and the infamous "bad culvert repair").  The
next step is the County Commissioners' approval. Following their
approval, deplatting will bring a bonus to the timbering
conglomerate.  It will be able to acquire WIA's greenbelts and
recreational acreage (our environmental heritage) at a very cheap
price, and the land will revert back to agriculture tracts.

     Reverting back to agriculture tracts allows the land to be logged
and put in a different tax category, further increasing the timbering
conglomerate's profits.  If all goes as planned, in the next year or
two, we can expect our WIA directors to be invited to a ground-
breaking ceremony in honor of their valuable assistance to the
timbering conglomerate.  Logging trucks and heavy equipment operators
will then snip the ribbon, break ground, and begin to cut a wide
swath, "selectively harvesting" the coveted Loblolly pine trees, for
several more years to come. And after years of sharing our Parkway
with logging trucks, we'll be left with not only an immeasurable loss
of our magnificent environmental heritage, the loss of loyal WIA
members (and revenue), soil erosion due to loss of an understory
protected by pine trees, and less marketability, but also no doubt a
$1 million bill to repair the damaged Parkway.

     If there's any Board activity to be watched carefully, it's this
one.

It has been a sad week for Waterwood.  We all watched television with
horror, trying to make sense of the deaths of so many innocent people
caused by crazy persons.  Also this week, we all read with horror, a
letter to the membership from the president of the Waterwood
Improvement Association.  America and all the principles it stands
for, is being attacked from outside and inside our boundaries.

Dave Carey's letter (which cost us $700, paid by our dues) to the
membership reveals an authoritarian ruler who would have filed a
lawsuit against Thomas Jefferson for writing the Declaration of
Independence.  It is a sad day, indeed, when members must work under
the threat of a possible lawsuit to attempt to democraticize their
Association.  The membership will be asked to vote for Carey's
proposed amendment which increases the number of peitioners for
proposed amendments, from 15 to 70 persons. Under his proposal, this
would eliminate any hope for more improvements to our bylaws because
the task of finding 70 petitioners would have to be done by mail, and
few members have the same resources as Carey's $9 million to do that.

This coming week, members will be asked to vote on petitioners'
proposals to strengthen our bylaws so that we homeowner association
residents will have the same rights as Texans who live in
incorporated towns.  State lawmakers, who didn't work under threat of
a lawsuit, gave Texans the Open Records and Open Meetings laws in
order to protect the principles of democracy.  Petitioners are
offering the same principles to WIA members to vote on.  The Texas
Open Records Act says it best in its foreword:

"Under the fundamental philosophy of the American constitutional form
of representative government that adheres to the principle that
government is the servant and not the master of the people, it is the
policy of this state that each person is entitled, unless otherwise
expressly provided by law, at all times to complete information about
the affairs of government and the official acts of public officials
and employees. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their
public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to
know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on
remaining informed so that they may retain control over the
instruments they have created. "

Waterwood Watchdog couldn't have said it better.  Our "instruments"
are our bylaws, and our Covenants.  The membership, not the president
nor the Board of Directors, has control over those instruments.
When we vote on the proposals in the upcoming weeks, the
membership's  awareness of the need for democratic principles will be
put to a test more than ever before in the history of Waterwood.

In Waterwood Waterwood's continuing efforts to provide information in
order to help the membership make informed decisions about their
community, this month's column is devoted to Waterwood's  "Game
Refuge".

You may have noticed increased timbering in San Jacinto and Walker
Counties. According to the TX Forest Service, because of increased
demand for forest products and restricted supplies from regions such
as the Pacific Northwest, there has been more intensive timbering in
the southeastern states.  Although most of our county's forest is
protected and managed by the Sam Houston National Forest, privately
owned forests in the northern part of our county where Waterwood is
located are not immune from disappearing someday.  The US Government
is funding a survey to begin soon by employees of the Texas
Forest Service.  It's a follow-up survey to one done in 1992.  It will
reveal just how much forest San Jacinto County and other counties have
lost in the last 10 years.

As commodity prices for timber increase, and as the need for cash
arises, privately owned forests get the ax.  Certainly reforestation
programs would help to replenish forests, but many private landowners
do not replant forests.  Unlike commercial timber companies that
replenish some of their stock, private landowners profit from the
timber and then usually resell the treeless land.

Unless we are watchful, the same thing will happen in Waterwood along
the seven-mile stretch of the Parkway.  Instead of a beautiful
forest, in another two decades we could be viewing weeds, mobile
homes, and soil erosion. There's no argument that the world needs a
steady, sustainable supply of timber, and that many rural economies
are dependent upon this commodity.  But, if Waterwood aspires to rank
as an upscale rural community, if we want forest and wildlife to
remain, if we want timbering to occur in someone else's backyard and
not in our backyard, we'll need to prioritize efforts to preserve our
"Game Refuge", as this area is known by its fading sign halfway down
the parkway.

The environmental buzzword today is "ecosystem management".
Basically, it's the application of economic theory and methods to
timbering decisions, by considering public sentiment and land-use.
Specifically, economists examine the trade-offs the public is willing
to make, the costs they're willing to absorb, in order to save a
forest. Tourism, wildlife, home values, and recreational opportunities
such as hunting, hiking, trail riding, and bicycling are but a few
options and choices, when considering the trade-offs against the
commodity prices of timber. If we lose our tall pine trees as well as
the plants and wildlife that depend upon those shady, tall pine trees,
what price will we have paid versus the commodity price received by
the timber sellers?  What cost savings will we have incurred by
allowing timber sales to take place?  Can we expect Waterwood's
ambiance to remain the same?  Will our home values decrease?  Is the
trade-off worth it?  Ecosystem management considers all those
questions.

Waterwood's "ecosystem management" is under the control of the WIA
Board of Directors.  In case you didn't realize it, Carey and our
directors already made an "ecosystem management trade-off decision"
back in 1995 with regards to selling our "Game Refuge".  Nine WIA
Board directors, half of whom no longer live here, put a stamp of
approval on timbering in our "Game Refuge" by allowing a timber
investment company to gradually acquire all the land, beginning 150
feet to the north and south sides of the Parkway.  The directors also
agreed to sell our greenbelts for $150 per acre, as stated in the
agreement.  Upon reading this agreement signed in 1995, one thing is
very clear.  Our former directors were anxious to get rid of the
"Game Refuge".  Why was the "Game Refuge" viewed as a liability to be
sold at below market value, when across the road, in the vacated
Whispering Pines III subdivision, the land is valued around $2,000
per acre? Did our directors make a too-hasty, misguided decision?

Waterwood's "Game Refuge" is actually 16 undeveloped subdivisions.  It
comprises of approximately 3,500 lots sold by Horizon to a timber
investment company in 1995, and approximately 1,000 lots sold by
Horizon to private owners who are WIA members just like us. Many of
these WIA lot owners live in Texas, including nearby in Coldspring and
Oakhurst, but a majority live out of state, including out of the
country in Mexico and Venezuela.  Most of these folks are current in
their property taxes, but only half of them are current in their WIA
annual dues.  Why are half of these undeveloped lot owners faithfully
paying their annual dues on a lot they've never seen?  Because they
believe our directors won't renege on a promise made almost 30 years
ago that their subdivisions will someday have roads and access to
electricity, sewage and telephone utilities.

Upon an undeveloped lot owner putting up the capital improvement
charge (anywhere from $3,000 to $10,000 depending on the size of their
house), WIA has promised, in a legal document filed at the courthouse,
that it will build roads and provide access to utilities. That is why
WIA has a $1.17 million Development Liability Fund (see annual
report to be mailed with the ballot).  It is reserved to develop
those subdivisions.  In reality, however, our WIA directors have
refused to do this. They claim it is not in Waterwood's best use of
funds to spend $1 million to provide roads and utility access to a
handful of lot owners in the far corners of Waterwood.  Few can argue
with that logic.  However, our directors' failure to make good on a
promise to undeveloped lot owners should be of major concern to WIA
members.  A breach of the directors' duty of loyality to the members
and an act not in good faith are grounds for a lawsuit by WIA members.

So, what prompted our directors to make a hasty "ecosystem management
trade-off decision" back in 1995?  Why did directors sign an agreement
that seems to benefit the timber investment company more than our own
membership?  The answer? To save money.  In exchange for giving up
ownership of our greenbelts and allowing a timber investment company
to someday control all the acreage (more than 4,000 acres), WIA won't
have to spend $1.17 million to build roads and provide access to
utilities in the far corners of our community.  What will happen when
550 or so lot owners who have diligently paid their annual dues for
almost 30 years figure out that it ain't going to happen?  Which real
estate agent will be foolish enough to market those now de-valued
lots?  Won't undeveloped lot owners be angry about the unmarketability
and devaluation of their lots as a result of this 1995 agreement? What
will happen to WIA's bank account when  undeveloped lot owners get
angry enough to file a class-action lawsuit against WIA?  What will
happen when the timber investment company claims they have rights to
timber, despite our Covenants protecting trees and our protests?  In
all honesty, I believe our WIA directors in 1995 never considered all
the possible unfortunate consequences when they signed this agreement
with Horizon and the timber investment company.  I believe their sole
motive in signing that agreement was to avoid dipping into our $9
million nest egg by spending $1.17 million on more lonely roads in the
forest.   Fiscal conservatism is not always a good thing. The cheap
easy way out of a problem can lead to an unfortunate chain of events
brought-on by shortsighted leaders.

If this 1995 agreement leaves a sour taste in your mouth, you're not
alone. Considering that WIA has almost $9 million and can afford to
improve our marketability by investing in recreational opportunities,
such as trails or pathways, a playground, or a park and pavilion for
family get-togethers, one has to ask, "Was this 'trade-off' decision
a good one or bad one for the future of Waterwood?"  This question is
one that all WIA members should have had an opportunity to answer
back in 1995.  Instead, nine shortsighted, fiscally conservative
directors made this decision for us, without our input, without
consulting us, and without regard for whether the majority of the WIA
membership was in favor of this decision or not.

Our forest is the reason many of us moved here.  Certainly the
Waterwood Resort and Golf Course had its appeal in the 1970s and
1980s, but since then, numerous golf courses have been built in the
suburbs of Houston and other cities.  Although many communities now
have golf courses and accessibility to a lake, few have forests and
abundant wildlife.  Without our forest and wildlife, there are few
incentives for anyone in the Houston area to drive the extra hour it
takes to get to Waterwood.  I believe that today's younger
generation, tomorrow's newly retired folks, will prioritize nature,
not golf, when they chose weekend, vacation or retirement homes.
Buying or building homes in proximity to forests and wildlife comes
at a premium nowadays, as more and more people escape to the
country.  As Keystone Land aptly advertises Waterwood, our community
is a perfect place to replenish the soul.  Our "Game Refuge" and the
recreational opportunities it can provide, if WIA spends the money,
are the impetuses for tomorrow's generation of urban and suburban
dwellers to buy or build a home in Waterwood.

If you plan to make Waterwood your home for the long haul, if you
believe East Texas forests are fast disappearing, and if you believe
Waterwood's reputation and property values as an upscale rural
community will be compromised someday because of timbering along the
parkway, then we'll need to tell our directors how we feel. With legal
assistance and professional advice, it is possible to rectify the
consequences of that agreement signed in 1995.  If the majority of
the membership so desires it, the Board of directors can act promptly
to correct this situation.

Don't be fooled by WIA directors who will have us believe there are no
alternatives, the ink is dry, and nothing in this agreement can be
undone. This is an easy answer for those who think inside the box.
For those of us who know better, we know that great ideas come from
thinking outside the box.  We know there are creative solutions to
difficult problems.  But without your involvement, WIA directors will
do nothing and no great ideas will be born.

Editor's Note:  Speeding tickets are being issued on the parkway.
Driving 61 to 70 MPH will cost $105, driving 71 to 75 MPH will cost
$150, driving 76 to 80 MPH will cost $180, and driving over 80 MPH
will cost $230.  Constable Lou Rodgers is requesting additional funds
for more deputy constables and a fully equipped vehicle, hoping that
revenue from speeders in San Jacinto County will fund his request.

Who are the hard-working volunteers who will be effective directors?
Those questions will be considered next month as 1,404 Waterwood
members vote for five directors.  Voter-turnout, however, is usually
one-third -- less than 500 members.

Here are a few tips from how-to books.  Don't vote for a homogenous
group of directors who all share the same opinions -- it can limit
effectiveness.  Diversity on a Board that reflects the community is
the key to an effective board.  A homogenous group is more likely to
unanimously pass resolutions and policies 99 percent of the time, with
no dissenters (such as this year's Board of Directors). You may ask,
"Isn't it best to have directors who all agree with each other?"  No,
say the experts.  More on that later . . .

How-to books also caution against choosing people solely for their
name or money.  Too much emphasis on voting for lawyers, bankers,
CEOs, and accountants can backfire by getting some "dead wood"
directors who have resources, but are too busy playing golf or working
full-time to go the extra mile required of directors.

Another caution is length of terms.  At Waterwood, our bylaws allow
two consecutive terms (four years total) with a break during the fifth
year.  This means anyone can be a director for 16 of 20 years.  Some
argue that no one should dominate a Board seat for 16 years, and that
our bylaws should be amended to increase the "time out" years. Others,
however, argue that the Board needs seasoned directors and we
shouldn't limit their terms.

This year, there are nine members vying for five seats on the Board.
Three are seasoned directors -- John Agee, David McElvain, and Damon
Thomas.  The newcomers are Donna Bridgeford, James Jemison, Terri
Reed, John Shideler, Diana Spurling, and Carol Winters.

If it's any consolation to voters who are reluctant to support
newcomers, our bylaws permit seasoned directors to chair and serve on
standing committees.  Agee, McElvain and Thomas, if not elected, could
advise and guide the five newcomers as non-voting committee members.
In fact, Agee already does this by serving on the EMS and Finance
Committees. Former directors' experience and knowledge don't get
tossed aside if they're not elected.  In fact, it would be a win-win
situation for Waterwood if members voted-in the newcomers and
appointed Agee, McElvain and Thomas as non-voting committee chairs.
This way, Waterwood would benefit by utilizing the talents and
experiences of at eight people rather than only five people.  For
that reason, Waterwood Watchdog recommends voting for five newcomers.

Hopefully Dave Carey's election committee will inform the membership
exactly how many ballots were mailed in and exactly how many of those
were counted as legitimate ballots.  Last year, the total numbers of
proxies and the total number of ballots were supposedly counted by an
independent auditor (these numbers weren't revealed in her report).
The auditor claims the counting was done in a professional manner, but
the total number of votes for candidates was 124 less than the total
number of proxy votes -- indicating the possibility that 31 ballots
were thrown out, uncounted.  As a result of no explanation for the
discrepancy in numbers, the election procedure loss credibility. Even
more unsettling, the Board refused a member's request for the second
consecutive year, to explain the discrepancy by recounting the
ballots.

Who are the right people to serve as directors? One important
criterion is people who will read, understand and make decisions in
compliance with our bylaws, state, federal and local laws, and CC&Rs.
According to the experts, the biggest mistake made by homeowner
association directors is overstepping their power, leading to
potential legal problems. Waterwood's Board of Directors this year
certainly had its fair share of directors who didn't read our bylaws,
CC&Rs, and state and federal laws.

1.  John Agee (this is his mandatory "off" fifth year) was unanimously
appointed as "ex-officio Board director" this year.  Our bylaws don't
provide for ex-presidents to be ex-officio directors.  The Texas
Nonprofit Corporation Act, which defines the legal parameters of our
association, states, "The articles of incorporation or the by-laws
may provide that any one or more persons may be ex-officio members of
the board of directors" (Art. 1396-2.14.(F) Board of Directors).
Waterwood's articles and bylaws make provisions for only two persons
to be ex-officio directors -- a secretary and a treasurer (WIA
employees, Lisa and Joe).  While not a catastrophic sin, it does
indicate an arrogance among our directors -- viewing "rules" and
"bylaws" as being meant for homeowners and members, but not for
themselves.

2.  Dick Beare and Jan Stanley, our ACB (architectural control board)
members, overstepped their power last year when they amended the 25th
restriction of our CC&Rs.  This restriction allows only cable TV in
homes and prohibits all TV and radio antennas.  Beare and Stanley
changed the restriction to allow DBS antennas under certain
circumstances.  There are two errors here.  First, the
Telecommunications Act of 1996, a federal law, essentially rendered
our 25th restriction null and void by prohibiting noncompetition
among TV broadcast providers.  Secondly, our Protective Covenants
state, "These covenants and restrictions as to any such unit may be
amended at any time by the vote of the owners of 80 percent of the
lots in such unit as well as the owners of 80 percent of the lots in
any unit of the same subdivision adjoining such unit."  In other
words, 80 percent of the entire WIA membership must vote on updating
our 25th restriction if we want to enforece antennas rules.  This
wasn't done. The ACB, therefore, has no authority to tell homeowners
where to put their DBS antenna.  Yet, Beare and WIA employees continue
to admonish homeowners about where to put DBS antennas. This and
other acts, unfortunately, have caused the ACB to lose credibility in
our community. Next year's ACB officials will have the monumental task
of winning the community's trust before it can effectively correct
architectural inconsistencies.

3.  The ACB (architectural control board) is suppose to approve
construction and remodeling plans within 45 days. Our CC&Rs state, "In
the event the Board fails to approve or disapprove any plans which
have been submitted to it within 45 days from receipt thereof,
approval shall not be required and the related covenants shall be
deemed to have been fully complied with."   There are several
instances where disapproval or approval was not granted within 45
days.  And when homeowners lost patience after hearing nothing from
the ACB within 45 days, they proceeded with their projects, only to be
told that they must stop their projects until approval is granted.
These homeowners have a legal right to proceed with their plans.

4.  The CC&Rs state that construction projects should be completed
within one year, but it also states the ACB can extend this timeframe
to longer than one year.  This "grace period" isn't equitably granted.
One family continues to be admonished for not building a garage next
to their new home within one year.  Meanwhile, another homeowner who
began preparing for construction last year has been allowed to extend
his completion time to longer than one year. What's the determining
factor when deciding who does and who doesn't get these grace periods?
You'll have to ask the Beare and Stanley that $64,000 question.

5.   Waterwood overheard an ACB member advising one homeowner that she
had to stop erecting her fence because it extended beyond her carport.
Is there a CC&R requirement that a fence must not extend beyond a
carport or garage?  No.  Common sense is missing here.  Why are there
phone calls to homeowners with well-kept yards and homes about matters
which the ACB has no legal right to enforce?  Do ACB members and WIA
employees have too much time on their hands?  There are plenty of
homeowners with unpainted houses, unglazed windows, weeds and rubbish,
and rotting wooden structures.  Our less immaculate homeowners could
certainly keep our WIA employees and ACB officials busy enough.

6.  State law establishes a prima facie safe speed of 60 mph day/ 55
mph night under Section 545 of the Transportation Code.  Both Section
545.355 and 251.154 of the Transportation code allow the speed limit
to be lowered after a hearing is held and evidence is heard on safety
issues, road conditions, etc.  Our directors recently tried to get our
commissioners to authorize a parkway speed limit of 55 mph day/ 50 mph
night, without a hearing.  Fortunately, our assistant county district
attorney stepped in and advised our commissioners, who in turn advised
our directors, of the state law.  This is another example of arrogance
among our directors -- viewing the Transportation Code of Texas as
being meant for other communities, not for Waterwood.

The election materials this year will once again include a list of
proposed amended bylaws and proxy instructions that are difficult to
understand.  Some say our directors intentionally make the proxy
instructions difficult to understand in order to encourage people to
just sign, date and return the proxy.  Default proxies (signed, but
with no checkmarks indicating "for" or "against" each proposal) are
automatically voted by incumbent and previous directors as "against"
all petitioners' proposals.

The proposals this year are similar to last year's proposals -- they
call for more democratic activities. Two proposals endorse the Texas
Open Records and Open Meetings Laws as ethics standards for members'
access to records and for closed meetings.  One proposal creates an
advisory committee of homeowners to advise our directors, and vice
versa, in an attempt to promote better communication between
homeowners and directors.

And finally, one proposal takes politics out of the ACB committee by
requiring two non-directors to serve as ACB officials.  There is
strong evidence supporting the need to appoint non-directors as ACB
officials.  A case in point is an "Un-aesthetic Front Door" in
Waterwood.  For years, this door was owned by a WIA member who could
cast eight ballots (the member owned eight lots).  Now if you were an
ACB/board candidate looking for re-election, would you risk losing
eight votes from this member by sending a nasty citation letter about
an "Un-aesthetic Front Door"?  It should come as no surprise that when
the ownership of the un-aesthetic front door recently changed hands,
the new owner was promptly cited for having an un-aesthetic front
door.

While many members will see merit in these proposals, the petitioners
have not endeared themselves to loyalists of the Board of directors.
Like the Loyalists of the eighteenth century, they see the petitioners
as a disgruntled minority upsetting the satisfied majority.
Waterwood's style of politics resembles colonial America --  it's not
nice and it's not polite to disagree with or challenge the monarchy.

Whether Waterwood is ready for a change in its governing style and its
leadership remains to be seen.  The election results, if all the
ballots and proxies are properly counted, will be a good indication of
what the membership wants for our community.

For previous postings, visit:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waterwoodwatchdog

It's official, our county sheriff's and constable's officers are now
authorized to give tickets to speeders on the Waterwood Parkway.  Who
should we thank for this?  The W.I.A. Board, after years of watching
folks give a thumbs down to the 55 MPH signs, decided it was time to
penalize speeders.  They approached Will Copeland, our commissioner,
and got the Commissioners' Court to authorize speeding tickets for the
Parkway.  The speed limit is 60 MPH daytime, 55 MPH nighttime.  New
signs will be posted.

Also in the news, the people of San Jacinto County voted to expand the
fire district (funded by property taxes) to include EMS.  This means
folks, with the exception of Waterwood residents, will pay increased
property taxes in order to pay for both fire protection and EMS
county-wide services to begin this fall.  Years ago, Phil Palmer
spearheaded a special election, where Waterwood residents voted
themselves out of the county's fire district taxes. Because Waterwood
residents paid annual dues to fund their own volunteer fire services
as well as EMS and an ambulance, residents could avoid the
"double-taxation" dilemma and opt-out of the county's fire district
taxes through a special election.

For many years, EMS in the county has been entirely dependent upon
volunteers and was not funded by the county.  Here in Waterwood, for
example, our annual dues pay for EMS.  That was fine when we had two
EMS qualified volunteers and an ambulance, but for most of the past
year, we've been calling upon Point Blank's volunteer EMS to help us
out.  In truth, less than a dozen folks in Waterwood can name our EMS
volunteers, and probably less than ten folks know what kind of medical
equipment is onboard the ambulance.  Our ambulance has been
conspicuously missing from the road, our EMS news has been
conspicuously missing from W.I.A.'s quarterly newsletter, and our EMS
committee chairperson has been conspicuously missing from quite a few
Board meetings all year.

However, in the upcoming months, when the county's fire protection
district begins to include EMS, residents of Waterwood should pay
special attention.  The Board may decide to use a portion of our
annual dues to contract with the county's new EMS provider.  The other
alternative is to hold another special election for Waterwood
residents and vote ourselves back into the county's new, expanded
fire/EMS district.  The former would result in everyone paying an
equal amount.  The latter would result in the richest folks of
Waterwood paying more for fire/EMS than the poorer folks, since the
fire/EMS taxes are based on property values.

Obviously, if the W.I.A. Board is dominated by the richest folks of
Waterwood, the Board may not support a special election to vote
ourselves back into the county's EMS district. Residents should
request a special meeting to hear all three options - hiring our own
EMS crew with our annual dues, contracting with the county's EMS with
our annual dues, or holding a special election and getting back in the
county's fire/EMS district and paying with increased property taxes.
More news about this important development will come at a later date.

Another important development in the county, but not publicized very
well, is the county's new public nuisance abatement program.  Last
year, the county commissioners passed a county ordinance aimed at
getting rid of "nuisances".  Junk in the yard, tall weeds, rusty
abandoned vehicles, shacks that are ready to fall over, unoccupied
unkempt properties that are a health hazard -- anything listed in
Chapter 343 of the Texas Health and Safety Code is considered a
"nuisance" and can be cited as a violation by the constable's office.
When a complaint is submitted, owners are contacted by the constable
and are required to get rid of the nuisance.  Failure to do so
results in fines.  The county can get rid of the nuisance themselves
and then bill the stubborn owner for the county's costs.

The most persistent nuisance at Waterwood is tall weeds.  The public
nuisance ordinance requires mowing if weeds are taller than three feet
and within 100 yards of another residence.  Waterwood Watchdog is
pleased to announce the county's new ordinance works.  Last fall,
Waterwood Watchdog filed a complaint against an absentee lot owner's
five lots where weeds were over three feet high and within 100 yards
of a residence.  Eventually, the grass was mowed.  Each year, another
complaint can be filed to get tall weeds mowed.  If you want to file a
complaint about an absentee lot owner's tall grass, and you're not
sure who owns the lot(s), contact Waterwood Watchdog at 936-891-5089.

Unlike W.I.A., which engages in sweetheart deals with absentee lot
owners and companies who own Waterwood lots, the county doesn't.  No
one is exempt from compliance. To receive an email attachment of the
county ordinance, or for a copy of a complaint form, you can call
Waterwood Watchdog.  The justice of peace at Point Blank also has
complaint forms.

Speaking of enacting laws in order to get things done.  Across the
country, state lawmakers are increasingly addressing complaints about
homeowner associations' arbitrary and unfair activities. For example,
here at Waterwood, our CC&Rs (deed restrictions) require a quorum of
80% of the membership to change (amend) a restriction, yet Dick Beare,
W.I.A./ACB chairperson, has amended the 25th restriction all by
himself, seemingly unaware that the membership should have voted for
or against his recommendations.  Even more disturbing, no one on the
Board, including several lawyers by trade, were aware that Dick
Beare's action was out of line.  Perhaps no one has read the first
paragraph of the CC&Rs?  A copy of the CC&Rs is available free from
Waterwood Watchdog, or for $3.25 from W.I.A.

Arbitrary decisions by Board members and administrators in powerful
positions have generated House Bills in Austin, as well as negative
publicity for all homeowner associations.  Some folks refuse to buy a
house in a community controlled by a homeowners association because of
arbitrary rules by officials intoxicated by power.

In this most recent legislative session in Austin, two House Bills
addressed dispute resolution practices between homeowners and
homeowner associations. The governor signed one of them (HB 507, the
Texas Residential Property Owners Protection Act, available as an
email attachment from Waterwood Watchdog), and the other one (HB 1423)
is "dead" in a committee, unlikely to be revived in 2003 during the
next legislative session.

Because lawmakers are increasingly addressing problem areas of
"quasi-governments" of homeowner associations, some Board directors
are looking to the corporate world for ideas to alleviate problems.
One is the "win-win" strategy.  This strategy calls for each side to
explain their positions, and to explain what circumstances led to
those positions.  By revealing the circumstances, the problems can
usually be solved.

A few exemplary homeowner associations are replacing the old
adversarial model, "them (homeowners) versus us (directors)", with the
21st century buzzword "win-win strategy".  This strategy brings
directors and homeowners together as teammates instead of masters
lording and fighting with the common people.  The first step is to
re-do everything -- the activities, the meetings, the policies, the
committees -- from a homeowners' standpoint.  The key is to value and
respect the homeowners' contributions and suggestions for how best to
get things done.  This strategy is the focus of neighborhood advisory
committees. Directors tell advisory committee members what's needed,
and vice versa, and committee members, with input from neighbors,
decide how best to achieve it or solve the problem.  This process
gives homeowners a sense of "ownership" in their community.  Such an
advisory committee can make a big difference between living in a
private corporation or living in a real community.

Utilizing ideas from homeowners is a good thing.  This year, a
proposed amendment will be presented to the membership in October for
a vote.  The proposal is the creation of an All-Neighborhood Advisory
Committee.  It's not an original idea -- many homeowner associations
have a similar committee.  Hopefully, members will support and vote
for this amended bylaw so that Waterwood won't get left behind in the
changing politics of homeowner associations.

Next month, a look at who's running for the Board.

For previous postings, visit:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waterwoodwatchdog

How does Waterwood rate among its peers?

There's still two weeks left for Waterwood residents to enter a
national awards program for homeowner associations.  Past winners of
the contest, sponsored by the Community Association Institute,  got
more than just good national publicity, they also benefited in
increased prestige, property values, and number of new homeowners.

What's the criteria for judging a good homeowner association?  Here's
a sampling of questions on the application.  How many members are on
each committee?  How many bids are required for purchasing products
and services?  Does the office administrator or manager have a
certificate as a property management specialist, and does she or he
regularly participate in property management courses or seminars?  Do
board members participate in homeowner education programs?  What is
the orientation process for new board members?  What are the methods
which your board resolves disputes with residents?  List the ways
board members disseminate information throughout the community.
Describe the ways your association has amended CC&Rs or architectural
guidelines to reflect community evolution and change.

If Waterwood Improvement Association entered this contest, sorry to
say, it wouldn't win a prize.  Our committees traditionally consist of
only one Board director and no members who weren't previous directors.
Although the Nominations Committee requires a second person, no second
person was appointed until Waterwood Watchdog recently notified WIA
that the bylaws required a second person.  They hastily appointed
someone.  Last year's president, John Agee, has appointed himself as
a second member on many of the committees, which means our previous
top dog still exerts a tremendous amount of influence over
Waterwood's continuing activities. Next year, when Dave Carey steps
down as president, he'll appoint himself as a second member on many
committees, assuring that the tradition of the top dog exerting
tremendous influence will continue (as it has for almost 28 years).
It shouldn't be hard to understand why the community seems beaten
down into frustrated submission and apathy, and is unwilling to
volunteer on committees.

If Joe Moore attended any property management seminars, we members
weren't informed about it.  Bids? Only one bid from Jerry Nemec is
required to fix culverts and roads (former bidders got continually
snubbed and say they won't submit bids anymore). Complaints and
disputes from residents concerning CC&Rs and inequitable treatment
often receive a deaf ear from directors.  The "list of ways"
residents receive information is pretty slim. Waterwood residents
have a bulletinboard controlled by a real estate agent that prohibits
controversial and political postings (it might dissuade prospective
buyers of Waterwood property), and we have a quarterly newsletter
that reads more like PR fluff than "useful information".

Nor have the CC&Rs been amended in its 28-year history to reflect
community evolution and change.  For example, many residents are cited
for parking their boat trailers in driveways.  Since Waterwood is
located along a lake, is a "weekend retreat" for urbanites seeking
relaxation and recreation on the lake, and is a "sportsperson's
paradise" for retirees, it makes sense to allow trailers in
driveways.  Today's more casual living styles mean residents here
don't want to live under the same scrutiny as urban homeowners who
don't have the luxury of a nearby lake.  Dick Beare, ACB Chairperson,
doesn't seem to understand this cultural evolution however, and it's
doubtful if he would initiate changes in our CC&Rs.  So how does
Waterwood rate against its peers?  It'd be an understatement to say
there's room for improvement.

One area needing improvement is our EMS.  Rural EMS is a problem
because of low population and resources, particularly here in San
Jacinto County with a population of only 22,000.  Waterwood no longer
has Reece and Marie Harper as EMS providers to drive Waterwood's
ambulance, the community of Shepard no longer has its volunteer
ambulance service, and the county no longer has a contractual
relationship with an EMS provider.  The entire county has become
reliant upon Point Blank's EMS staff and volunteer ambulance service
that has been spreading itself pretty thin, trying to help everyone
in the county.  That's why it took a little over an hour to get one
resident, who was in a comatose state, to a hospital in Huntsville,
29 miles away.  In a true emergency situation of life and death
hinging on seconds, Waterwood Watchdog would prefer a neighbor to
drive her to the hospital than to dial 911.  Unfortunately, many
Waterwood residents aren't informed about the troublesome EMS
situation here, nor has the Board of Directors been too eager to
explain the EMS budget funded by your dues.

The EMS problem might be rectified this year if county residents vote
for a proposal to create an Emergency Service District (ESD) by
increasing the tax from three to ten cents per $100 valuation.
Waterwood is exempt from the three cents tax for fire prevention
services because we fund our own fire department.  That's why we can't
vote in the special election on July 21st that would expand the
district to provide both fire and emergency services.

Waterwood residents have a lot to gain if folks of San Jacinto County
vote for this ESD.  If approved, the county will need to determine
whether to provide EMS and ambulance services themselves (by creating
a nonprofit corporation, for example) or to contract with an EMS
provider, such as Gold Star or Excel. Once they decide, our directors
can then consider ways to financially contribute or piggyback with a
subcontract so that the county's EMS will be extended to Waterwood
residents.  Many nearby rural counties already have ESD, and quite a
few of them contract with Gold Star.   Waterwood Watchdog encourages
you to contact county neighbors outside of Waterwood to vote "for"
this proposal on July 21st.   Last year's similar election failed by
only 79 votes.

Speaking of votes, the County Commissioners were going to "vote" to
approve a speed limit of 55 MPH for the Waterwood Parkway at their
meeting a few weeks ago.  Our directors recently discovered
that the sheriff's office and the constable can't legally give
speeding citations to folks driving faster than 55 MPH, because the
county commissioners never adopted the 55 MPH speed limit.  Director
Hansen, therefore, urged Will Copeland, our commissioner, to vote to
approve 55 MPH so that speeders could be given tickets.

Waterwood Watchdog, however, contacted Robert DuBoise, Assistant
Criminal District Attorney for San Jacinto County, and asked, "Can
they arbitrarily do this?"  He responded, "There is a prima facie safe
speed of 60 mph day/ 55 mph night under Section 545 of the
Transportation Code.  Both Section 545.355 and 251.154 of the
Transportation code allow the speed limit to be lowered after a
hearing is held and evidence is heard on safety issues, road
conditions, etc."  As a result of DuBoise's information, the
commissioners postponed the vote.  Therefore, the speed limit remains
at 60 MPH daytime/55 MPH nighttime, despite what the unofficial signs
say.  If a hearing is held to consider lowering the speed limit,
Waterwood Watchdog will notify you.

For previous postings, visit:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waterwoodwatchdog

Our directors met behind closed doors and secretly ended a
28-year tradition of free records to members.  Other homeowner
associations (HOAs) across the USA consider it goodwill to give out
free copies of minutes, bylaws, budgets, and monthly expenditure
reports.  They want members to be well informed about their
community.  Our directors don't share that view.

Goodwill isn't completely gone.  Our directors still generously spend
your dues to give hams to our volunteer firefighters, to buy $1,200
worth of Christmas lights each year, and to throw a BBQ each spring
for members.  But, when it concerns goodwill expenses for members who
want to look into WIA's monthly expenditures, board decisions,
written policies and budgets -- that goodwill is terminated.
Waterwood is now probably the only HOA in the USA that charges fees
for those records.  Supporters of the Open Meetings Act and the Open
Records Act say our directors are acting improperly and abusing their
authority.

At the members' meeting last October, our newly re-elected directors
were both weary and glad to see the culmination of a harrowing six-
month election campaign. They were dismayed when a member at the
meeting distributed a damning report on WIA's minuscule efforts to
file liens against nonpaying lot owners, totaling $1.66 million in
arrears.  With evidence of possible mismanagement, members'
perception of our newly re-elected directors began to slip.
Directors Beare, Carey, McElvain, and Swindler, along with "Ex-
Officio Director" Agee (an appointment not permitted by our bylaws)
all agreed something had to be done to get rid of troublemakers who
were putting WIA's directors on the defensive. Directors asked their
attorney (at members' expense) to come up with an idea to fight back.

According to the following month's board minutes, our directors met in
a closed door meeting with their attorney, Travis Kitchen, to discuss
a lawsuit against one of their political opponents, as well as the
new fees and request form for records.  When they came back to the
open meeting, they adopted Kitchen's preparation of a request form
and fees for records.  Under the Texas Open Meetings Act, it's
unlawful to deliberate with legal counsel in closed-door sessions
about matters that don't pertain to litigation.  It's also unlawful
to deliberate accessibility to records in a clandestine meeting with
the very same attorney who was simultaneously litigating a lawsuit
against one of the directors' political opponents.  This opponent, by
the way, had requested numerous WIA records to support his belief
that directors should be decreasing, not increasing annual dues each
year.  State lawmakers and district attorneys don't take too kindly
to these kind of maneuverings.

Governing officials who meet in a clandestine session with their
attorney to discuss citizens' access to records, and then cover-up
the details of that new procedure, both in board minutes and in their
publications, face charges that come with penalties, fines and/or
county jail.  If the motive of officials in elected offices was to
create hardships for political opponents to get records that were
formerly easy to get, those officials could be charged with
misdemeanors.  Sound like a potential Waterwoodgate fiasco?

Ironically, two hours earlier during the open meeting, our directors
discussed the punitive nature of the $100 fee for new construction and
the $25 fee for remodeling projects. Dick Beare (in WIA's December
newsletter), explained that these fees were dropped because directors
felt the fees were punitive and WIA didn't need the income.  Their
newsletter didn't mention the new fees and request form in their
newsletter. They're no dummies.  It wouldn't look too good to tell
1,440 voters about the new fees for records, while also making
themselves look benevolent by eliminating other fees.  The fact that
both the newsletter and November's board minutes were censored to omit
details of the new fees and request form, means that only 20 of 1,440
WIA members know about WIA's new records request procedure.

Nearby Westwood Shores, Cape Royale and almost 200,000 other home
associations (HOAs) in the USA don't charge fees for records, with the
exception of lengthy deed restrictions.  Nor do they require members
to submit a form, explaining why they want records.  Waterwood's new
request form for records asks, "What is your purpose for wanting
records?"  Although it's a legitimate question, it invites abuse of
power and intimidation.  At February's board meeting, directors
Swindler, Hansen and Beare verbally punished Waterwood Watchdog when
they read her purpose for wanting expenditure reports (audiotape of
their unprofessional conduct is available from WIA for $50, and
witnesses are available). The new request form appears to be an
invitation to directors to engage in unethical activity - to
intimidate and verbally punish members requesting records.

So, if Waterwood's officials are keen on quizzing, punishing and
intimidating members who want records, and doing unethical things in
noncompliance with the Texas Open Meetings Act and the Public
Information Act, why can't they be charged with criminal misdemeanors?
Robert DuBoise, Assistant Criminal District Attorney of San Jacinto
County, says our county doesn't border Harris County, and therefore,
he has no authority to investigate complaints based on the Texas
Public Information Act or the Open Meetings Act.  These laws, Chapters
551 and 552 of the Government Code, Ethics, exempt HOAs in rural
counties due to possible lack of resources available.

If Waterwood was located in Cleveland or in The Woodlands, and based
annual dues on appraised assessments, the county district attorney
could investigate our directors' activities.  State lawmakers,
however, didn't intend for an $8 million rural HOA to sidestep the
intentions of worthy laws when they exempted rural HOAs.  In fact,
some HOAs located in rural counties voluntarily comply because it's
the right thing to do.  San Jacinto County Judge Joe Adams says he
can ask state lawmakers to amend and include rural HOAs in these
Acts, but since the next session won't be until 2003, he suggested
looking at our bylaws and making necessary changes.

Is Waterwood the only HOA in the USA with directors who have a
penchant to abuse their authority?   There are 200,000 associations in
the USA that, like Waterwood, provide roads, patrol services,
streetlights, and architectural consistency.  Rules are set through
deed restrictions, and overseen by directors who are neighbors.  As a
result, a handful of neighbors have powerful influences over community
life for an estimated 42 million homeowners in the USA.  All too
often, say critics and lawmakers, power in the wrong hands can destroy
community spirit.  Unchecked power results in rules that aren't
equally applied to everyone, services that aren't equally provided,
directors who subtly bully targeted homeowners, arbitrary rules with
no member input, and no due process procedures.

Evan McKenzie, a researcher, says homeowner associations "can really
create little neighborhood Hitlers."  He's author of Community First!
: Emerging Visions Reshaping America's Condominium & Homeowner
Associations and Privatopia:Homeowner Associations and the Rise of
Residential Private Government. McKenzie says, "only lawyers tend to
come out ahead when the dust settles."  But, he explains because
lawmakers have demanded reforms, HOAs across the USA are
relaxing rules, and ending bickering and harshness. The good news, he
says, is that many HOAs are becoming kinder.

Our association, however, is getting meaner -- and because of
loopholes in laws, directors are getting away with it. Their problems
started last Spring, when Healy, Reed and Smith mailed letters to
1,400 members and put the directors on the defensive. They questioned
the directors' wisdom when they purchased Horizon's seven-mile
parkway for $250,000, paid $5,000 for road engineering advice, paved
roads for $89,000 (with a stone-mix dangerous for bicyclists,
motorcyclists, and skateboarders), badly installed new culverts for
$60,000, and gave a raise ($60,000 annual salary including benefits)
to an HOA administrator whose job description is unknown.  In a wild-
eyed flirtation with democratic ideals, these upstarts began
peppering the WIA office with questions and requests for documents,
soliciting proxies, and promising to return overpaid dues.  Our
directors fought back with clever explanations, confusing proxies, a
lawsuit, and a new request form and stiff fees for records. They'll
cleverly blame last year's legal fees ($7,500) on the opponents.  The
year before, however, when there was no political challenge, they
spent more - $9,096 in legal fees.

Our directors' governing style isn't just about a handful of men who
want to ensure a smooth re-election this year by getting rid of
opponents and gadflies.  It reveals a deeper problem.  There's a
schism of two generations living in Waterwood.  One generation is
from an era when only the top echelon in society was allowed access
to documents and thus, gained power and profits by keeping negative
information out of the public eye.  Another generation remembers when
the Vietnam War and Watergate gave birth to demands for access to
secret records.  This generation stopped trusting "dumbed-down"
information censored by officials who were abusing their authority.
Their sentiment gave rise to laws such as the Texas Open Meetings Act
and the Public Information Act; laws designed to prevent abuse of
power.

This October, members will be able to elect five directors.  There are
two considerations.  One is the necessity to elect ethical
directors.  The other concern is the future lost of revenue from 500
or so members who own undeveloped lots along the seven-mile parkway.
Pandora's  Box will fly open when these lot owners realize that our
directors refuse to build roads and provide utility services to their
subdivisions.  Eventually, those lot owners will give-up and will
stop paying their dues along with 530 others who have already given-
up hope. These lot owners contribute about $70,000 to our operations
budget.  If they give-up on Waterwood and stop paying their dues, our
directors will need to reduce operations by $70,000 or else raise
dues over the next few years.

There's no indication directors will reduce operations expenditures.
In fact, directors plan to increase the operations budget.  If
history repeats itself, present directors will use eloquent words and
a confusing annual report to prove their case for increasing dues.
Although bond proceeds could pay for some operations, it's unlikely
they'll cut back on road projects, which are funded from bond
proceeds.

Waterwood needs directors who will put their energies toward building
quality of life here, and improving communications between members and
directors.  We don't need more years of censored board minutes,
clever explanations of deficits, abuse of authority, punitive rule-
makings, and selective enforcement of deed restrictions.  We need
directors who will be public servants, not masters of the community.
In September, Waterwood Watchdog will interview the candidates and
endorse those most likely to bring Waterwood up to par with other
HOAs.

(Full-text versions of these well-written and easily understood laws,
which list prohibited activities, can be viewed at the Texas'
government web-site:
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/gvtoc.html
Scroll down to click on Chapter 551: Open Meetings and Chapter 552:
Public Information)

Correction: San Jacinto County's dump site WILL accept TVs,
appliances and refrigerators (but not tires). You'll need to get a
$25 permit however, good for a year.

Highlights of January 2001 Board Meeting

*  The Board received information about the new animal control
ordinance for San Jacinto County.  (Editor's Note: Supposedly, a part-
time animal control officer will cite owners with warnings/fines for
unleashed dogs off the owner's property, and check for current rabies
shots.  Although stray dogs aren't a focus, they might be taken to
Conroe as a last resort.  There are no facilities for strays in this
county.  Continuing to take Waterwood's stray dogs to Rita B. Huff's
Animal Shelter in Huntsville will be the best solution).

* The Board received information about the county's new dump
procedures.  (Editor's Note:  Gone are the days when you could
dispose of a TV, stove, furniture or refrigerator at the county dump
free of charge.  Large items such as furniture and appliances must
now be taken elsewhere; logical choice is Polk County's Landfill,
which will cost money.  San Jacinto County's dump site will accept
only household trash -- $25 for an annual permit or $5 coupon books
good for ten bags of trash.  Waterwood residents already have
dumpsters for household trash, so there's no need to drive to the
county dump.)

*  The Architectural Control Board, composed of Directors Beare &
Stanley who are missing a third partner as required by the Covenants,
conducted a tour of Waterwood on January 15, 2001 and mailed 32
letters to residents, citing deed restriction violations. (Editor's
note: Two of four residents not in compliance with Beare and Stanley's new rules
for satellite antennas were cited -- the FCC in Washington D.C. will soon be
coming to rescue those residents.  Beare refuses to comply with FCC
guidelines on antennas, although he was provided a copy of the FCC guidelines. 
Apparently, directors want a show-down with the federal government).

*  The Board unanimously approved reducing legal expenses, citing
last year's legal expenses as high because of opponents running for
Board seats (Editor's Note: Legal expenses in 1999, a year of no
opponents, was higher).   The Board granted Dave Carey the authority
to obtain emergency legal services (Editor's Note: When Waterwood
Watchdog wrote a letter to committee chairpersons Hansen & Beare,
complaining about the unfair manner in which the WIA maintenance crew
was selectively cutting down trees for free, Carey abused his newly
granted "emergency powers" and asked the Board's attorney to respond
to Waterwood Watchdog.  This complaint should have been resolved by
Directors Hansen and Beare, not their attorney).

*  In response to Waterwood Watchdog's criticism about unfair
cuttings of dead trees, Beare distributed a proposed, new & improved
dead tree policy for comment by the directors.  (Editor's Note: A
notice on the bulletinboard invites residents to "comment" on this
proposed policy, but when a resident asked to see the proposed policy in order
to comment on it, she was told that no one but the directors can see
the proposed policy.  Carey, Beare and their colleagues just don't get it).

*  McElvain, chairman of the Audit/Finance Committee, reported on his
committee's activities (no published list of members on this committee exists). 
He reported that they would research the feasibility of changing a portion of
the WIA investment portfolio from bonds to equities, and evaluate tax
consequences.  McElvain also stated the ad-hoc committee (believed to be the
same people) is still looking into the liability issue in the undeveloped
subdivisions and still exploring options.

*  The MUD lease agreement for the fire station was reviewed again,
but not approved again, going into the sixth month of unsuccessful
negotiations.  With regards to MUD, the Hogan Corporation was hired
to develop an application proposal to the TX Natural Resource Control
Commission (TNRCC) to obtain the required discharge permit (to
discharge effluent from the MUD's treatment plant to Lake
Livingston).  The application has been submitted to the TNRCC and
awaits approval.

*  The EMS committee is still exploring options in EMS delivery at
Waterwood.

*  The new security car was purchased for $17,000 and the old one was
sold to a Waterwood Country Club employee for $500.

*  Jerry Nemec, an engineer who is paid by WIA to assess roadways,
reported on costs and materials involved to re-pave the 8-mile
Waterwood Parkway.  Jack Zimmermann  asked if another major road
expenditure this year would be prudent.  Although re-paving the
Parkway is due this year (financed from bond proceeds, designated
several years ago), the Board agreed with Zimmermann to discuss this
issue at a later date.  (Editor's Note:  The money is there to be
spent.  The Board is fearful if they repave the Parkway this year,
which is in relatively good shape, members will question this
expenditure).

*  WIA member Terri Reed distributed a document with several
suggestions for improving the annual report to make it more
explanatory regarding operational expenditures.  She also suggested
improving WIA committee participation by more actively recruiting
members and residents to join committees.  (Note: McElvain did not
take kindly to my constructive criticism of the annual report;
conveying a no-can-do attitude.  Although the American public has the
SEC to pressure public companies to improve their annual reports, WIA
members have no one except themselves.  More members will have to
complain about this issue if any progress is to be made).



Highlights of February 2001 Board Meeting

*  Beare denounced Waterwood Watchdog for a full five minutes,
calling her a "gadfly".  Directors Hansen, Swindler and Zimmermann
jumped in, too, for a five-minute attempt to intimidate her for
seeking WIA records and information.  (Editor's Note:  Although
community activism is normal and encouraged at other HOAs in the USA,
it is obviously a new phenomenon here at Waterwood, requiring
punitive and legal measures by directors who just don't get it).

*  WIA approved another $3,425 expense for signs and trenching of
electrical lines to the signs.  They also approved the cost of a new
copy machine for the WIA office, and other office furniture.

*  The Country Club officially was sold on February 10, 2001 to the
new partners (several corporations run by families).  They contracted
with WIA's security to obtain security services.  In a leap of faith,
WIA has contracted with the sign builders to erect similar granite
signs at the marina, club house and Pools Creek area (WIA will
collect payment from the club owners who have verbally agreed to do
this).

*  McElvain discussed the pros and cons of investing a portion of
WIA's money in stocks.  No action will be taken.

*  WIA successfully got the San Jacinto County Justice of Peace to
warn a resident to come into compliance with deed restrictions known
as CC&R's  (Editor's Note:  There are two other houses in worse shape
than this resident's house, but no similar action was taken on these
residents).

*  Westerdahl, a resident, asked for "Caution, Children Playing"
signs, and they will soon be erected.  He also asked about the dirty
fence which lines the entrance to Waterwood at Rt. 190.  Why can't
someone paint it?  The Board didn't go into detail, merely saying the
white fence doesn't belong to Waterwood.

Here's the story behind the fence.  It belongs to an attorney who
lives in Navasota; Alfred Lehtonen's company, Lehtonen Investments.
His company owns all the land at the WIA entrance on Rt. 190,
including the pastures which he rents to local cattlemen, as well as
a great deal of acreage in this county.  Rumor has it he received
this land from Horizon Corporation, the initial developer, in
exchange for his legal services back in 1973 when Waterwood was
built.  Our directors have already asked Mr. Lethonen  to paint his
fence, but he has been stalling for unknown reasons.

Since our new granite sign on Rt. 190 is on Mr. Lethonen's land, WIA
pays him a land rental fee of $1,200 every three months.  But because
the country club and Keystone Land also have interests in promoting
Waterwood, they each reimburse WIA $200 every month, negating WIA's
expenditure.  However, if the country club and Keystone Land skip a
payment or two, or decide to bow out, WIA is stuck with the payments
and the terms of the lease, which is renewed every seven or ten years

(Editor's Note: Our annual report doesn't adequately explain this
expenditure, nor does it adequately explain many other expenditures.
Little things, such as the cost of new office furniture in our new
WIA building, will probably not be itemized for us members in this
year's annual report.  After listening to five Board meetings, I've
concluded that lack of money to buy things isn't a problem facing our
directors.  Itemizing all the directors' purchases in an annual
report might reveal their carefree spending.  This might explain
McElvain's unwillingness to improve the annual report for the benefit
of us members who may be asked to pay more next year).

Back issues of Waterwood Watchdog are available at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waterwoodwatchdog


END

What is Waterwood doing about its Dead Trees?

     That question is frequently heard among residents lately.  At
February's Board meeting, one Whispering Pines II resident asked the
Board directors, "We've got a lot of dead trees in our neighborhood,
is anything being done about them?"   There was a long pregnant pause
among the Board members.  They slowly glanced toward President Dave
Carey, waiting for his answer.  "Well," he finally said in a barely
audible voice, "there's been some selective cutting."

     Why the pregnant pause and Carey's reluctant answer?  Almost 24
hours earlier, Waterwood Watchdog had asked a similar question in the
form of a complaint to two WIA committee chairmen.  Our bylaws
require complaints to be directed to the appropriate committee, which
is a little-known fact.  This is also a little-known fact among our
Board directors.

     Waterwood Watchdog's complaint, presented in a formal manner in
compliance with our bylaws, resulted in a WIA office brouhaha.  Her
complaint resulted in the WIA president making an emergency phone
call to the Board's attorney.  In a faxed letter that morning,
Waterwood Watchdog had asked, "Why has the WIA maintenance crew
felled almost 20 dead trees on Dave Carey's street (the WIA president
and only resident on that little dead-end street), while other dead
trees remain standing?"  Waterwood Watchdog felt this was unfair and
unethical, and maybe illegal, to fell trees not owned by WIA,
particularly those on the president's street, while leaving other
dead trees standing.

     In angry retribution, Dave Carey used his emergency powers newly
granted to him by a unanimous decision of the Board the month before.
He called the Board's attorney, and the attorney, at your expense,
sent Waterwood Watchdog a nasty letter.  It's unknown what this
letter says (the wrong letter was in the envelope), but no doubt,
Waterwood Watchdog was told in fancy legal language, to put a muzzle
on her schnozzle.  In addition to Carey's "emergency situation" to
use WIA funds to strike a legalese blow to Waterwood Watchdog for
making a complaint, for good measure, four Board directors ganged-up
against Waterwood Watchdog and gave her a ten-minute verbal flogging
at February's Board meeting.

     But, there is a good news to report. Waterwood will supposedly
have a new and improved dead tree policy. Written by Dick Beare, this
policy will hopefully eliminate the unfair manner in which dead trees
are felled and/or removed by WIA's maintenance crew.  A victory for
Waterwood Watchdog?  Perhaps, but a hollow one for sure.  Board
members would like nothing better than to see Waterwood Watchdog
confined to a kennel to serve a life term.  Her crime?  Too many good
ideas.

     So, what's the big deal about a couple hundred dead trees?  If you
ask WIA this question, they might charge you a $25 research fee to
answer your question.  WIA's new policy under Dave Carey's presidency
is to discourage curiosity and complicated questions by charging $25
for research -- if you're in disbelief, just call WIA (295-8970) and
ask for a copy of their "Records Request Form"  And, be prepared to
fill-out another page, detailing your reason for wanting information.
Waterwood Watchdog, however, will answer free of charge.

     In a forest, the land owner, town or state government, or
homeowners association which oversees part of that forest will need
"risk management" of its dead trees (primarily because several
varieties of pine beetles bore in the trunk and kill the tree).
Obviously, something must be done about dead trees that will fall on
nearby structures and electrical lines.  Also of concern is the
aesthetics of dead trees; some consider them unsightly and in need of
removal, while others want dead trees to remain in the forest in
order to attract bugs for birds to eat.

     For the first 20 or so years at Waterwood, "risk management" of
its dead trees fell under Horizon's responsibility.  As the developer,
Horizon Corporation paid for a tree removal crew once or twice a year,
to remove nuisance trees.  Anyone could call Dave Burford*, Horizon's
contact person, and ask, "Dave, will you please have a problem tree
removed" and it would be done.  Life was simpler back then.  Waterwood
didn't have too many dead tree problems.

(*Footnote: WIA currently pays Dave Burford a monthly fee of $100
for his "knowledge of the history of Waterwood" and for other
consulting work, such as last March when he was paid an additional
$2,000 which probably won't be itemized nor explained in the annual
report.)

     The dead tree situation changed when Horizon sold its developed
lots to Keystone Land several years ago, and when the WIA Board was
given ACB (Architectural Control Board) responsibilities shortly
thereafter.  Keystone Land, the new "developer" who merely re-sells
lots once owned by Horizon, doesn't have a risk management policy
regarding dead trees on their lots.  Keystone Land began cutting a
few dead trees in 1999 until the costs starting mounting over $250.
Now, Keystone won't remove any dead trees.  Even when one resident's
lawyer sent a nasty letter to Keystone about four of their large dead
pine trees looming over the resident's house, Keystone refused to cut
the trees down.

     But, WIA never developed a "risk management" program for
Waterwood's dead tree problems.  John Agee, president of WIA during
those years, said this wasn't WIA's responsibility.  He and the Board
stuck their heads in the sand for several years and said, "What dead
trees? We are unaware of any dead trees causing problems."

     Waterwood Watchdog has been trying to find out who's responsible
for Waterwood's dead trees.  When Waterwood Watchdog visited Agee,
WIA president at the time, at his home in the fall of 1999, she was
told there was nothing WIA could do about dead trees.  He explained
that WIA was not in the tree cutting business, our maintenance staff
was already over-worked, it was illegal to cut other people's trees
without their permission, and to do so, would invite a lawsuit.

     But, while Agee was proclaiming that WIA wasn't getting involved
with dead trees, WIA's maintenance crew was supervising the selective
removal of dead trees despite Agee's proclamation.   Additionally,
Keystone Land, owner of several hundred lots in the developed
subdivisions (who doesn't pay annual dues) was getting some of their
dead trees removed for free during a weekend project supervised by
WIA's maintenance crew.   Meanwhile, the homeowner was paying up to
$150 to get a dead tree removed, and up to $150 to hire a lawyer to
write a nasty letter to any stubborn neighbor who wouldn't cut down
their dead trees.

     Last year, Waterwood Watchdog asked the WIA office about this
"selective cutting" since Agee had proclaimed that it was illegal to
cut trees that didn't belong to WIA.  She was told the trees removed
for free were "nuisance trees".  OK, so why weren't ALL nuisance
trees included in this free tree removal project?  Why did it appear
the free dead tree removal project was occurring at the County Club
Estates more frequently than the Greentree and Whispering Pines
subdivisions?  Despite what Agee was telling Waterwood Watchdog, the
untold and unwritten dead tree policy was "WIA will selectively cut
SOME dead trees in CERTAIN subdivisions, depending upon one's social
accessibility with CERTAIN Board directors."

     A few months after one "selective cutting" last Spring of SOME
dead trees in CERTAIN subdivisions, three dead trees fell on a house
despite the owners' continual pleas to WIA to please do something
about their neighbors' dead trees.  The reason those three trees
didn't get cut in the previous selective cutting, quite simply, was
because CERTAIN Board directors weren't socially accessible to the
homeowner whose house was in danger.  Had they known which Board
director to pal-around with, those trees probably would have been cut
down for free long before they fell, causing over $6,000 in damage.

     In desperation, Waterwood Watchdog asked the San Jacinto County
District Attorney's Office, "Who has the authority get nuisance trees
removed?"  They responded there were no county or state laws to help
me out, but that the simplest solution to this problem was for WIA to
enact a policy.  When Waterwood Watchdog passed on that bit of good
advice to WIA last year, Board members (particularly Dick Beare, ACB
chairperson) became annoyed about a resident telling them how to do
their job.  Unfortunately, Waterwood Watchdog doesn't have the
diplomacy of an amiable, cute poodle with a ribbon in her hair.


     Finally, last November 2000, Dick Beare wrote a dead tree policy,
to address dead trees that pose a danger to houses and garages.  If a
dead tree will fall on your structure, you can get WIA involved.  WIA
will contact the owner, and if the lot owner refuses to have the tree
cut down, WIA will hire someone to cut the tree down, and then bill
the stubborn lot owner.  Good policy, but it doesn't address the many
dead trees which aren't posing a threat to structures -- the ones
being "selectively" cut down by WIA's maintenance crew.

     Recently, the maintenance crew cut down almost 20 dead trees on
Dave Carey's street; he's the only resident on that little cul-de-sac
street, and he's the president of WIA.  Those 20 or so dead trees
were not a threat to any structures.  They were merely an eyesore to
only the Carey's eyes (the street is not a through-way).  Nor did WIA
write to the owners of the dead trees on these three lots to ask
permission to cut them down.  Unlike last year, when Agee was
proclaiming it was illegal and too much work for our WIA maintenance
crew to cut down other people's dead trees willy-nilly, it appears
this year, the new president, Carey, has abolished Agee's
proclamation.

     WIA will find a clever way to dispute the unfairness of this
selective cutting by claiming that other dead trees were cut down in
addition to those on Carey's street.  However, what they'll refuse to
tell us, is how many of those dead trees cut down, besides those on
Carey's street, were located on cul-de-sac, dead-end streets with
only one resident.

     Another generation of pine beetles living inside dead trees this
winter will emerge and hop to nearby live trees this Spring.  The
dead tree problem just won't go away.  This Spring, there will be
more dead trees, adding to the already burdensome problem of last
fall's dead trees that are threatening to fall any day now.  Because
of increasing pressure from residents and Waterwood Watchdog about
dead trees, the Board is beginning to see the wisdom of a "written
policy" addressing the entire dead tree issue, not just those posing
a threat to structures.

     Hopefully, it will be a good policy which addresses ALL dead trees
on ALL lots, and will be posted in a place where ALL residents can see
it.  Hopefully, this policy will be good enough to weather the change
of power on the Board of Directors.  Unfortunately, the community
won't be invited to comment on the proposed policy before it becomes
final.  Since the Board operates more like a colonial style of
government rather than a democratic one, we residents will just have
to wait and see what they decide for us.  The tree policy will be
discussed and possibly passed at the Board meeting on March 17th.

     Watchdog organizations value community input in any policy-making
organization, be it local, state or national groups.  Although Board
members claim they are in touch with community residents and receive
numerous positive responses from the community to support their
policies, the Board has never conducted a poll, held a town meeting,
or mailed a questionnaire to any resident in the last ten years at
least.  When the Board claims they have community support, they
merely get back-slapping responses from their neighbors and
friends, not from the entire community.

      It is apparent to Waterwood Watchdog that the Board practices
isolationism and rarely contacts other homeowner associations to see
how they do things.  One homeowner association contacted by Waterwood
Watchdog has an exemplary strategy for its dead tree problem; there
is a written "A" list identifying critical trees to be removed first,
and a written "B" list identifying other dead trees to be removed at
a convenient time. This urban community of 2,250 homeowners near
Washington DC spent $14,000 last year removing dead trees and another
serveral thousand dollars reforesting.  It is fully explained in
their annual report.

     Waterwood's upcoming new dead tree policy won't be the only
policy developed with no community input or research to see how other
homeowner associations are doing things.  WIA's ill-fated satellite
antenna policy had no community input.  Created by Dick Beare and Jan
Stanley (Board directors and ACB officials), they want antennas
mounted on the roof or within four feet of the house or garage.
Waterwood Watchdog did an informal email poll of other homeowner
associations.  Of those who responded, none had restrictions,
informing me the FCC frowns on most restrictions.  But, Beare,
Stanley and their supporters seem undaunted with FCC rules.  Jan
Stanley told Waterwood Watchdog, in a tone of voice reminiscent of a
scolding elementary schoolteacher, that if nearby trees were blocking
the satellite signal to a roofline, the trees could be cut down.

     Uh-oh, looks like our trees' worst enemy won't be the pine beetle
anymore.

                            -END-

Highlights of the November 2000 Board Meeting

* The country club will undergo extensive renovations, hopefully to be completed
by Labor Day this year.


* The Board unanimously passed a motion to accept a bid of $21,897
from the builder of the new WIA building to also remove and replace
the siding on the Fire Station to match the new WIA
building siding.


*  The culvert and erosion problem on the parkway is still ongoing
with no due date in sight.  The non-operable street lights are still
an ongoing concern with SHECO, the electric company, however, some have been
replaced and are now working.


* The 2000/2001 operations budget for MUD (water & sewage) forecasts
a $37,283 shortfall due to a $21,429 increase in bulk lake water for
our water treatment plant and an estimated $13,500 for obtaining
permits to discharge the sewage plant effluent directly into the lake
(TNRCC requirements make it infeasible to continue to discharge into
the golf course pond).  Additional Federal and state mandated testing
requirements for bulk and treated water and increased purity for
sewage plant effluent are expected in the near future. This could
increase chemical costs and may require upgrades of our water and
sewage treatment plants. Therefore, we can expect MUD tax rates to
stay at maximums and the possibility of increased water/sewer rates
in the future (presently $23.50 per month).


* WIA, new owner of the Fire Station, is negotiating a lease
agreement with MUD for the Fire Station.


* The Board unanimously passed a motion to grant $1,400
toward Christmas light replacement costs and the reception.  During 1999,
approximately $2,481 was spent on Christmas lights and the reception.


* The Board unanimously passed a motion to spend $2,456.70 to bore
underground electrical conduits for the new WIA building.  George
Russell, new owner of the parkway at that area, had asked the Board
to avoid overhanging wires, and therefore, there will be underground
utilities to the new WIA building.


* The Board agreed that instead of a web page, a 1-800 toll free
number would be more appropriate for members.  This will probably
occur soon.


* The Board unanimously passed, at the Board attorney's
recommendation, a new policy regarding members who want to review WIA
records and information.  Any member who wants information, even a copy of the
bylaws, must now fill-out a form explaining the purpose the information is being
requested; fees are 25 cents per page (no free email allowed), Board audio tape
at $50.00, and mailing labels at $75.00 (no email attachments or email requests
will be honored, despite many documents which are originated and stored in
computer applications).  Watchdog's note: The reason for this new policy is due
to Dave Carey's suggestion to make it very difficult and costly for members and
this watchdog to obtain information and to contact other members.



Highlights of December 2000 Board Meeting

* The EMS Committee will explore EMS strategies.


* The eroding roadway above the new culvert (installed last July for
approximately $60,000) won't be repaired for awhile due to weather conditions.


* The Board unanimously passed a motion to authorize $2,500 for
upgrading the AC/Heating unit in the new WIA building.


* The Board unanimously passed a motion to accept Andy's Electric
Service bid for lighting at each granite sign (11 signs) at $575 per
sign.  Two signs which have no underground conduits will need to be
bored before lighting can be done for these signs.


* The Board unanimously passed a motion to spend up to $17,000 for a
security car, known as a "program car" from a dealer that specializes
in outfitting police cars.


* The Board unanimously passed a motion to spend $5,021 for the new
granite WIA sign, and $1,290 for replacing the Bay Hill sign; Goehrs
Builder will do this, the same company which did the other granite
signs.  The contract will also include signs for the Country Club,
with the Country Club re-imbursing WIA for the cost of their signs.


* Capital improvement charges for developed subdivisions of $1,500
will remain unchanged in 2001.  However, fees will increase for those
wanting to build in the undeveloped subdivisions as follows: $3,435
for multi-family unit, $6,870 single family less than 8,000 sq. feet,
$8,588 single family for 8,000 to 20,000 sq. feet, and $10,306 single
family for more than 20,000 sq. ft.


-End of message-

Waterwood Watchdog has a lot to growl about this month.

December's issue of the WIA newsletter was received by all members a
few weeks ago.  It reported that 474 members were present in person
and proxy at the annual meeting held in October.  In the same breath,
the article reported that the total number of "Proxy Ballots" was
488.  Waterwood Watchdog asked WIA about this discrepancy, and was
informed that "you are correct, the number should have been 488
rather than 474."  OK, if 488 members voted for four candidates each
(one ballot per assessed lot), then the total number of votes for
directors should equal 1,952 for all the candidates and write-in
candidates.  However, according to the numbers reported in the
article in the WIA newsletter, that number totaled only 1,828 votes.
That's a discrepancy of 124 votes for candidates, which means 31
ballots weren't counted.  When Waterwood Watchdog asked about this
discrepancy, WIA's response was "If all 31 ballots in your scenario
were cast for the unsuccessful candidate with the most votes, the
election results would not change."  Waterwood Watchdog wasn't
questioning the outcome of the election, rather it was questioning
the integrity of the election procedures.  Not being able to explain
why there were 31 fewer ballots than proxies reveals a problematic
election procedure.  This year's Election Committee should ensure
that whatever problems existed last October to cause such a wide
discrepancy in the numbers, will hopefully be corrected in order to
restore integrity to the election process.

The WIA Board recently passed a new ACB policy concerning satellite
antennas, which was initiated by Dick Beare, chairman of the ACB
(Architectural Control Board).  Despite FCC guidelines mandating that
homeowner associations cannot restrict homeowners from receiving a
satellite signal, the WIA Board did exactly that by requiring
antennas to be placed on the roof or within four feet of the house or
garage.   It was no doubt, another unanimous decision with no one
swimming against the tide by offering a voice of reason.

Unfortunately, the ACB didn't look for guidance.  Had they done so,
they would have discovered the FCC has a few things to say about the
rights of renters and homeowners with regards to installing satellite
antennas.  The WIA Board will now have to change its policy to come
into compliance with FCC guidelines, thanks to Waterwood Watchdog
which has kindly emailed the WIA Board a copy of the FCC guidelines
enacted several years ago.

Since homeowners in Waterwood live in a forest of 60-foot plus
Loblolly and Sweetgum trees, we face some unique problems in deciding
where to place a satellite antenna.  With a signal coming from the
sky at 54 degrees elevation and 184 azimuth, this means if trees
around a house in Waterwood are 60-feet tall, the satellite antenna
must have 50.3 feet of clearance (no trees in front of it).  Not
every homeowner will be able to find that 50-foot clearance from the
roof.  Some of us will find the unobstructed signal elsewhere on our
property and place a pole in the ground at a spot wherever the signal
can be obtained, even if it is 100 feet from the house or garage.
The ACB, in requiring that the pole be moved within four feet of a
house/garage would prevent many homeowners or renters from obtaining
a signal in a forest.  If Waterwood was situated in a desert with no
trees (and therefore, no obstructions anywhere), such a requirement
would have been reasonable.

Waterwood Watchdog routinely asks WIA for a copy of the Board's
minutes approved at the following month's meeting.  When a copy of
December's Board meeting minutes (approved at the January Board
meeting), was recently requested, this was denied.  According to the
WIA secretary who answered the phone, Dave Carey must grant
permission for the approved minutes of December's meeting to be
released to its members, despite the fact that our bylaws state that
this information "shall at all times" be available to any member in
good standing.  This is another example of disregard for our bylaws
and members' rights.

Unfortunately, members who aren't familiar with our bylaws can easily
be hoodwinked by our Board members.  Waterwood Watchdog asked
Zimmermann (the bylaws committee chairperson) about the legality of
appointing John Agee as an ex-officio Board member (non-voting) who
is now sitting at the Board table with his colleagues.  When asked
which bylaw gave the Board the right to appoint John Agee as an ex-
officio board member, he responded . . . "I believe it is well within
the authority of the Board to do so under Article IX, Section 1(c)."
This section of our bylaws, however, gives the Board powers to
appoint "officers" (presidents, vice-presidents, treasurers, etc.),
not ex-officio Board members.  In fact, the Texas Nonprofit
Corporation Act, which supersedes a corporation's bylaws, states that
ex-officio Board members can be appointed if the bylaws or articles
provide for it.  Quite simply, our bylaws and articles only provide
for the secretary of WIA (Lisa) to be an ex-officio Board member for
the purpose of recording the Board's and membership's activities.
Our bylaws contain no other provisions for appointing ex-officio
Board members.  The Board members know that 1,450 WIA members will
not read our bylaws, and therefore, feel quite confident that they
can do whatever they please by merely stating that our bylaws give
them this right.  A copy of the bylaws can be obtained by calling the
WIA office, if Dave Carey will grant permission.

While these issues may seem like petty issues to the casual observer,
it is disheartening to know that the Board passes motions and acts
without regard for its perimeters, such as our bylaws, the Texas
Nonprofit Corporation Act, and the FCC guidelines.  These perimeters
are designed to grant certain rights and equal access to the little
guy (you and me) who might be unnecessarily burdened and restricted
by oppressive and overly powerful leaders in society.  Being able to
declare and defend our rights is the stuff by which we Americans are
made of, hence the necessity for watchdogs which need to growl and
bark at every little thing that disturbs them.

In other matters, there was a recent attempt to illicit some
sophistication from our WIA Board.  Waterwood Watchdog recently asked
the WIA Board members at their January meeting to reconsider the
value of its annual report to members.  More specifically, Waterwood
Watchdog asked the Board to produce a "plain English" annual report
so that members can know exactly what is being spent and why.
Following in the wisdom of Warren Buffett himself, with his preface
in a handbook printed by the SEC, titled "A Plain English Handbook:
How to Create Clear SEC Disclosure Documents", Waterwood Watchdog
asked the Board to re-organize the line items in the list of
expenditures so that we members could make sense out of them.  How
much, for example, does it cost to "maintain" Waterwood.  Presently,
the groundskeeping employees' salaries (which are paid from interest-
bearing bonds, not our dues) are totaled with the office employee's
salaries (which are paid from our annual dues).  As a result of
lumping the sums together, it's easier to disguise the true cost of
our office employees, and easier to point to fuzzy math as the reason
our dues may increase next year.   McElvain, Board member and
chairperson of the Finance/Audit Committee, however, immediately
responded that this was illogical and un-doable, and the rest of the
Board silently agreed, of course.

Why should members demand a "plain English" annual report?  For the
same reason Warren Buffet wants to read a plain English annual report
from a public company.  "I suspect that a less-than-scrupulous issuer
doesn't want us to understand a subject it feels legally obligated to
touch upon," is what Buffett has to say about annual reports he can't
understand.  Waterwood Watchdog feels the same way when reading WIA's
annual report.

Until next month, please note:  the new web site address for
Waterwood Watchdog is http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waterwoodwatchdog

2000 is behind us.  It was a memorable year for Waterwood.  Thanks
to an "opposing party" which almost won three seats on the Board of
Directors, the Board is feeling pressured to behave more sensibly.
     Three sensible things have happened since the election last
year.  First, annual assessments (also known as annual dues) won't go
up this year. Why? Because 350 members told the Board they wanted
previous years' assessments refunded back to them.  And, almost 200
members voted for the "opposing party" (Jerry Healy, Martin Smith,
and Terri Reed) in order to get those refunds.  Although the
"opposing party" didn't win seats on the Board, the Board took heed
of all this.  They decided this year wasn't a good time to upset
everyone and raise dues again.  Five seats, the majority, are at
stakes here, in the upcoming election.
     Second good thing to surface . . . . Dick Beare, the Architectural
Control Board's chairperson, recently concluded (and the Board
concurred) that the long tradition of requiring $100 and $25 fees
from members who are building and repairing their homes was
unnecessary.  Why?  Maybe because 70 members voted to radically
change the Architectural Control Board (ACB) to make it less
dictatorial (petitioners' proposed bylaw amendment #9).  Although the
proposed amendment was voted down by Agee's proxies, perhaps Beare
felt pressured to re-evaluate the sensibility of some ACB policies.
     The Board quickly and unanimously agreed that these fees were
nonsensical and should be eliminated.  So, why did these fees exist
for the past 20-odd years?  W.I.A. receives plenty of revenue
elsewhere, such as $435,028 from interest on its millions of dollars
of investments, and another $367,058 in annual assessments from its
members in 1999. Slapping $100 and $25 fees on a dozen homeowners in
Waterwood each year hardly seemed necessary in order to raise another
$1,000 in Waterwood's bank accounts.  The only reason these fees
existed was because Waterwood's ACB policies were modeled after
homeowner associations in urban areas.  However, unlike urban areas,
Waterwood's population isn't growing and Waterwood doesn't need
additional sources of revenue.  It took 70 brave and gutsy members to
vote against "Tradition" and awaken Rip Van Winkle out of his sleepy
ACB Policies.
     The third good thing to happen is two policy changes, initially
suggested by the petitioners' proposed amendments.  First, members
who work Monday to Friday can now attend Board meetings and watch
their officials in action on a Saturday morning.  Prior to October,
these meetings were held on a Monday morning when few members could
attend.  The Board also agreed with the petitioners that ballots
should be secret. This way, you can vote without worrying about
certain Board members looking for your ballot next year, to see how
you voted.

     So, what is going on inside Waterwood?  There are three concerns
noted by Waterwood Watchdog who has observed the last two Board
meetings. First, there is a tendency among Board members to vote
unanimously on all motions.   All motions are passed with a "yea".
There are no "nays", no disagreements, no opposing opinions, no
advocates of a different philosophy.   For example, Jack Zimmermann,
who is also the chairperson of the Bylaw Committee, made a motion to
appoint John Agee as an ex-officio non-voting Board member.  John
Agee was present at this meeting, however, he wasn't sitting at the
Board table where he used to sit when he was president.  He was
sitting with Waterwood Watchdog and other ordinary members in chairs
next to the Board table.  The Board quickly and unanimously passed
that motion.  No one questioned whether the Bylaws allowed such an
appointment, probably because no one was brave enough to swim against
the tide.  As a result, John Agee now sits at the Board table.
Apparently, it may have been too humiliating for John Agee to sit
with ordinary members who are not encouraged to speak.  This way,
John Agee can freely speak to Board members, while ordinary
members must remain silent during discussions.
     What is this all about, you may ask yourself?  If all past-
presidents were appointed ex-officio Board members, we'd need a few
more chairs at the Board table in order to allow past and present
directors to freely speak at meetings, while ordinary members must
keep their mouths shut.  No one on the Board questioned whether our
bylaws allow the appointment of ex-officio non-voting Board members.
Presently, our bylaws establish that the secretary and treasurer
(W.I.A.'s office employees and non-members, Lisa Hayman and Joe
Moore) are ex-officio Board members.  In order to appoint any past
president or any member as an ex-officio non-voting Board member,
W.I.A. members must pass an amended bylaw in order to allow the Board
to do this.  Waterwood Watchdog has brought this issue to the Board's
attention.  Stay tuned, because if the Board proposes such an
amendment in October 2001, you will know the real story behind that
proposal.
     The second concern is EMS (emergency medical services).  San
Jacinto County had a three-month contract with Excel, an EMS
company.  Excel, a for-profit company, declined to renew its
contract, due to losing money.  There were not enough emergency calls
in San Jacinto County, and therefore not enough reimbursements from
insurance companies, to keep Excel afloat.  This rural, forested
county, with a population of less than 50,000, is 30 miles from a
hospital in Huntsville, the county seat of Walker County. EMS is
available only as a volunteer service in San Jacinto County.
     At November's Board meeting, the security chief explained how one
resident at Waterwood lay comatose in bed and in immediate need of
EMS. Because John Agee, Waterwood's only qualified EMS volunteer,
wasn't available, security called for the nearest EMS which was Point
Blank's volunteer EMS, approximately 10 miles south of Waterwood.  No
one wanted to risk a lawsuit by using Waterwood's new ambulance to
merely transport the victim to a hospital at Huntsville, one-half
hour's drive away.  As a result, because of the delay from Point
Blank's EMS, it took a little more than 60 minutes from the time the
security chief found the victim until the time she arrived at
Huntsville's hospital. If Waterwood wants to tout itself as a
"retirement community", EMS at Waterwood will have to improve its
response time in order to get heart attack and stroke victims to the
hospital in less than one hour.
     The problem isn't lack of resources, it's lack of getting
qualified people to work on very sporadic occasions.  Weeks can go by
without needing EMS.   W.I.A. has a new ambulance.  It also has an EMS
committee which supposedly should be addressing solutions to the EMS
problem.  However, the chairperson of that committee, Norman Snapp,
wasn't at November's meeting when John Agee addressed some EMS
solutions.  The following month, at December's Board meeting, Norman
Snapp was there.  Snapp addressed the same EMS concerns Agee had
expressed the previous month.  The other Board members politely
informed Snapp that John Agee had already addressed those concerns and
was looking into some solutions and that perhaps they should get
together.  It appears that John Agee, our EMS volunteer, never
telephoned his Board colleague of many years, the chairperson of the
EMS committee (Snapp), to keep him informed.  As a result of this
lack of coordination within the EMS committee, EMS continues to be
problematic.
     The third concern is the 650 or so lots in the heavily forested
and undeveloped subdivisions which are owned by dues-paying members.
David McElvain is the chairperson of the Audit/Financial Committee and
he has been looking into ways to reduce W.I.A.'s $5 million liability
to provide roads and utilities to the 650 lot owners in the
undeveloped Deer Creek, Whispering Pines and Greentree subdivisions.
The Board appears to be perplexed about why 650 lot owners have
refused to sell their lots to Jacinto Investment, the owner of
approximately 4,000 acres, including platted lots, in those
subdivisions.  This company intends to de-plat those subdivisions and
sell-off or timber that area following permission from the county to
zone it as agricultural property.  No one on the Board suggested that
perhaps 650 members don't want to sell their lot for pennies to a
company which intends to someday drastically reduce the abundant
wildlife population and forests, the very reason members bought a lot
in the "Piney Woods of East Texas."  It appears, from Board
discussions, that either few Board members care what happens to these
subdivisions, or else no one wants to swim against the tide that
favors returning these subdivisions to agricultural land for
timbering.
     Fortunately, George Russell, a tree-loving member who attended
November's Board meeting, suggested that the Natural Areas
Preservation Association, a non-profit land trust, could advise
W.I.A. on how to establish a tax-exempt organization. This way, lot
owners could donate their lots, take a tax deduction, our wildlife
and forests would remain intact, the land would be exempt from
property taxes, and the desirability of living in Waterwood would
increase.
     However, the Board's un-named "committee" which considered
Russell's suggestion and explored solutions to reducing W.I.A.'s $5
million liability was composed of members by invitation only (David
McElvain, Earl McVay, a previous Board member, and Joe Moore, our
office employee who is not a W.I.A. member). This informal and un-
named committee, which was not announced in the recent W.I.A.
newsletter and has since been disbanded, included no members who
wanted to save our wildlife and forests.  This is another example of
the one-sided nature of the Board which has a history of unanimously
passing motions (and quickly disbanding ad-hoc committees) with
little or no considerations of input from members.
      The private nature of these committees, along with the seemingly
lack of structure or coordination, is a community malady that needs
to be nurtured back to health.  Waterwood Watchdog brought this issue
to the Board's attention at the January 20th meeting.  There is no
justifiable reason why the Board doesn't willingly and whole-
heartedly invite members to join its committees, including its  un-
named committees.  With only 398 homeowners in Waterwood, half of
whom live here full-time, probably only 15 or so members would be
willing to do this.  But, even if only 15 members express an interest
in being involved in Waterwood's committees, that's a 100% increase
in committee membership, a step in the right direction for
Waterwood.  The EMS committee, for example, is an acute area that
needs all the ideas and volunteerism it can get.  Presently, the
Board hand-picks it committee members within a closed circle of
friends and previous Board members who want to run again for Board
seats this year, folks with a political agenda.
     One sorely lacking ad-hoc committee is a Recreation Committee, to
look into recreational opportunities at Waterwood, such as a
playground for children and adequate boat launching facilities.  A
similar concern was raised at the annual meeting.  George Russell
mentioned at November's meeting that dredging is needed at the
Marina, in cooperation with the Trinity River Authority, in order to
launch boats when the lake level is low.  This problem has existed
for many years, and will probably continue for several more years.
How many potential buyers of lots/homes will continue to look
elsewhere if boat access to Lake Livingston is important to them?
Obviously, Waterwood needs a committee to address these concerns, yet
no one on the Board appears to be interested in these issues.
     May this coming year bring more positive changes at Waterwood.
     PS:  Sometime prior to April, the Egroup.Com website will be
changed to a Yahoo website due to a merger.  At a later date,
you may be asked to change settings if you want to click on the main
page of Waterwood Watchdog website in order to read old postings.

WATERWOOD IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION, INC.

CALL TO ORDER - The 2000 Annual Membership Meeting was called to
order by John Agee at approximately 10:15 a.m. on October 14, 2000 in
the National Room of Waterwood Country Club.


QUORUM STATEMENT - John Agee announced that the number of eligible
voters for 2000 were 1404 with 10 percent needed for a quorum. A
quorum was declared present. Four hundred, seventy-four (474) voters
were declared present in person and proxy.


APPOINT SECRETARY OF THE 2000 MEMBERSHIP MEETING - John Agee
appointed Lisa Hayman - Secretary of the 2000 Annual Membership
Meeting.


APPROVAL OF THE 1999 ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP MEETING MINUTES - Reading of
the minutes of the 1999 Annual Membership Meeting was waived as
members had received copies in the December 1999 newsletter. Damon
Thomas made a motion to approve the 1999 minutes as written. This
motion was seconded by a show of hands and passed.


ELECTION COMMITTEE REPORT - Earl McVay, Election Committee
Representative, gave a brief summary of the election process for
Directors. He then announced the votes received for each director as
follows: Richard T. "Dick" Hansen (304); Jerry Healy (163); Terri
Reed (196); Martin M. Smith (179); Norman Snapp (272), Jan Stanley
(302) and Jack Zimmermann (409). Write in votes were as follows:
Robert Beckles (1), Don Thornton (1) and Bill Richardson (1).


Director Jack Zimmermann gave a brief explanation of the legality of
the election of director ballots and proxy ballots.


NOMINATING COMMITTEE - John Agee announced that Jan Stanley had
agreed to chair the Nominating Committee for 2001.


NEW BUSINESS - President John Agee answered several questions from
the floor and several citizens voiced their concerns relating to
filing liens in undeveloped areas and also the need for recreational
facilities.


WIA member Terri Reed, made several motions as follows: inviting
members to a coffee hour prior to each monthly board meeting;
directors to hold their monthly meeting in larger room; monthly board
meeting agendas and minutes be emailed; place liens against 774 lots
with $1.6 million in unpaid assessments; security and office
personnel organize a dead-tree removal project; design and distribute
a brochure instructing Waterwood residents which emergency service to
call when needed; All motions were defeated.


At this time David Carey recognized outgoing President John Agee and
his
wife, Betty for his outstanding leadership and a very productive year.


WIA member, Martin Smith delivered a piece of paper to the podium
stating a purpose of a special meeting.


There being no further business, Damon Thomas made a motion to
adjourn, seconded by John Horn. The meeting was adjourned at
approximately 11:55.

Results of "proxy ballots":

RECEIPT OF AUDITORS REPORT FOR 1999 -     462 For; 17 Against.

RATIFICATION OF AUDITORS FOR 2000 -         459 For; 20 Against.

BOARD'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT #1 -  441 For; 47 Against.

BOARD'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT #2 -  449 For; 38 Against.

PETITIONERS' PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT#1- 110 For; 376 Against.

PETITIONER'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT #2 - 113 For; 375 Against.

PETITIONER'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT #3 - 148 For; 336 Against.

PETITIONER'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT #4 - 102 For; 384 Against.

PETITIONER'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT #5 - 86 For; 399 Against

PETITIONER'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT #6 - 95 For; 389 Against; 1
Abstain; 1
Invalid

PETITIONER'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT #7 - 105 For; 382 Against;
1
Abstain

PETITIONER'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT #8 - 119 For; 367 Against;
1
Abstain.

PETITIONER'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT #9 - 70 For; 416 Against.

PETITIONER'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT #10 - 86 For; 401 Against.

PETITIONER'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT #11 - 87 For; 398 Against;
1
Invalid.

PETITIONER'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT #12 - 81 For; 405 Against

PETITIONER'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT #13 - 70 For; 416 Against

PETITIONER'S PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT #14 - 114 For; 374 Against

The last time a group of Waterwood residents tried to
democratize the Board was back in 1991.  Led by Dick Beare, a group
of disgruntled residents submitted five proposed amendments for
members' approval at the annual meeting in 1991.  Their goal was
to
"democratize the operation of the Board".  All five of their
proposals were voted down, but not by members who endorsed their
worthy goals.  Quite simply, the president back then acquired the
majority of the mailed-in proxies, and he voted all the proposals
down.
	 If history repeats itself, last month's members' meeting was
no exception.  This time led by Martin Smith, a group of disgruntled
residents submitted 14 proposed amendments, proposing sweeping
changes in the way things are done at Waterwood.  Unfortunately, the
worthiness of the proposals got buried beneath a mud-slinging contest
of letters to members about potential refunds and a confusing
"proxy
ballot".  And, when members were asked to read 16 pages of
legalese
mumbo-jumbo in tiny print, along with a "proxy ballot"
designed to
exploit readers' confusion, many members copped-out.  They
abstained from voting "for" or "against" and merely
signed on the
dotted line.  When that happens, as it did back in 1991, the proxy
holder, usually the president, gets all those votes regardless whose
name was written as assignee.   Thus, it was no surprise when John
Agee, listed as the Board's proxy holder, acquired the majority
of
the "proxy ballots" and voted down all the petitioners'
proposals at
the members' annual meeting held October 14, 2000, at the Country
Club.
	 Of the 16 proposed amendments which were put before the
membership, two were proposed by the Board.  Both proposals were
voted in by John Agee.  As a result, Board meetings will now be held
on a Saturday morning (instead of a Monday morning), and ballots will
be secret from now on, which was initially proposed by the
petitioners.
	 None of the petitioners' proposals got support from John
Agee, who acquired the majority of the "proxy ballots".  The
petitioners had proposed term limits for directors -- four years
maximum during any ten-year period.  This bylaw would
have increased the minimum number of directors going through the
Board's revolving door of directors from 18 people to 27 people
per decade.  The Board had argued that finding additional qualified
people would have been "a difficult task".   Agee voted that
down,
assuring that 18 people can continue to control the Board
indefinitely, if no seats are vacated.
	 Petitioners wanted to require the Board's Nominating
Committee to include more input from residents, particularly members
who live on the west side of F.M. 980.   Such an amendment would have
helped solve the Nominating Committee's "difficult task"
of finding
qualified people to serve on the Board, but this, too, was voted down
by Agee.   This proposal was a result of complaints from residents on
the west side of F.M. 980 about being Waterwood's
"stepchildren",
feeling left-out and not a part of the community.
	 Petitioners wanted to decrease the number of directors to
eight from the current nine.  It was voted down by Agee.  Also voted
down was the innovative idea of requiring the president to refrain
from voting on issues, a special condition which would have
superseded Robert's Rules of Order.  This special condition was
an
attempt to do away with perceived absolutism on the Board and to
distribute power more evenly among the other Board members.
	 The most controversial proposal was allowing only 20
petitioners to request a special meeting, which was voted down by
Agee.  Currently, special meetings must be requested by 25% or
approximately 350 members, a task considered by petitioners as
unrealistic considering that many members do not live in Waterwood
and are unaware of what's going on in Waterwood.  The Texas Non-
Profit Corporation Act requires a minimum of 10% of members
to request a special meeting, which is less burdensome and less
restrictive than Waterwood's current bylaw.  Petitioners say they
will propose a bylaw modeled after the Texas Act next year.
	 Petitioners wanted to introduce due process procedures and
community participation from residents who live on both sides of F.M.
980 in the Architectural Control Board's activities, but this was
voted down by Agee.  This proposal was a reflection of malcontent
across the country, including in Waterwood, with inflexible and
unreasonable rules imposed on residents.  A case in point is the now
defunct dog registration mandate issued last summer under the
pretense that unregistered dogs would be picked up.  However, there
are no county or local authorities who pick up stray dogs.
	 Petitioners wanted Association information to be available
via electronic mail, but this was voted down by Agee.   Currently,
Board issues and news are posted at the mailbox area and the Country
Club.  Approximately 80 percent of W.I.A. members, however,
aren't
members of the Country Club and don't receive mail at Waterwood.

         Petitioners wanted to require eight signatures instead of 15
signatures, when submitting proposed amendments for members'
consideration at the annual meeting in October.  They also wanted to
change the submission due date to August instead of July 1st.  This
was voted down by Agee.  Petitioners wanted to give members the right
to challenge business practices, and to make motions at the annual
meeting concerning annual assessments and business decisions of the
Board.  This, too, was voted down by Agee.
	 Few changes will be made this year.  The petitioners were
disappointed, but admit that deciphering 16 pages of legalese mumbo-
jumbo may have been a daunting task for members.  However, they plan
to re-submit some of the same proposals next year.
	 Also at the meeting, ballot results were announced.  Elected
to the Board was Dick Hansen and three incumbents, Zimmermann,
Stanley and Snapp.  The results were as follows: Jack Zimmermann, 409
votes; Dick Hansen, 304 votes, Jan Stanley, 302 votes; Norman Snapp,
273 votes; Terri Reed, 196 votes; Martin Smith, 179 votes; and Jerry
Healy, 163 votes.  Next year, five seats will be available, a
critical year because five directors will consist of a majority up
for election or re-election.***

In many communities, the property association's ability to
collect annual dues (known as assessments) is the life blood of these
communities.  This is the reason is it important to file liens
against properties with unpaid assessments.  In Waterwood, however,
very few liens have been filed with the county.
	 In this year's election, approximately 1,413 ballots were
mailed to property owners who were current in their paid
assessments.  Approximately 774 property owners were not eligible to
vote because of  delinquent assessments, ranging from $10,072 to $10
each, for a grand total of $1,660,262.90 in delinquent assessments.
The break-down by area is as follows:


54 Lots #814  $232,693.02
30 Lots #821   	   56,150.58  (Greentree Village)
12 Lots #823    	   44,624.69
341 Lots #824 	   866,705.23
71 Lots #830-831     45,944.18  (Whispering Pines)
123 Lots #834 	   319,432.86
1 Lot #869 	    1,226.94       (The Villas)
48 Lots #871        40,103.88 (Country Club Estates III)
19 Lots #876      13,010.20 (Bay Hill)
76 Lots #885 to 887 7,903.62 (Beach, Bass Boat & Fairway I)
45 Lots #890  24,960.68 (Park Forest)
11 Lots #891  7,507.00 (Lakeview)
	 Grand Total $1,660,262.90


	 Records indicate that in November 1998,  W.I.A. placed liens
against only 50 lots,  6% of the lots with delinquent assessments.
Since W.I.A.'s ability to collect on delinquent assessments is
crucial to W.I.A.'s operating budget, as well as crucial to its
integrity and commitment to its paying members, it is imperative that
more liens be placed against the improved lots first, and the
unimproved lots second.
      W.I.A. directors during the last ten years have considered
the unimproved lots to be "worthless" (lots in Deer Creek, and
undeveloped lots in certain Whispering Pines and Greentree
subdivisions), because there is no access to water, electricity and
sewage facilities.  It has been the custom to "cancel" delinquent
assessments on unimproved lots which are sold at tax sales, because
these lots are valued less than the delinquent assessment due.  As a
result, buyers of these unimproved lots owe nothing to W.I.A.
However, due to the increasing deforestation of the Piney Woods as a
result of private land being timbered, our unimproved subdivisions
have become valuable to timbering companies.  The Texas Forest
Service claims that although trees are abundant in the region, 2.8
million acres of Pineywoods timberlands are under stocked.   Also, on
non-industrial private forest land, for every seven acres of pine
harvested, only one acre is replanted.  Often, according to the
Forest Service, these lands were harvested needlessly or improperly.
One only need drive from Waterwood to New Waverly via the old Phelps
road, to see the increasing timbering and deforestation.  It is
apparent that forests are becoming more "valuable" for its timber.
	 Five years ago, Jacinto Investments, L.P. bought Horizon
Properties' interest in the undeveloped subdivisions (unsold lots
only).  For the past five years, Jacinto Investments has been buying
or exchanging lots owned by individuals, with the objective to
someday own all the land in these undeveloped subdivisions.
According to the chief assessment officer in San Jacinto County, if
all the undeveloped lots of Deer Creek, Whispering Pines and
Greentree eventually become the property of Jacinto Investments,
these subdivisions become more valuable, simply because all the
acreage will belong to one owner rather than an assortment of lots
belonging to several people.  Jacinto Investments will then be able
to profit from its investment by selling this acreage in whole or
partials to timber companies.   W.I.A. will have no authority over
the sale of this land by Jacinto Land Investment to timbering
companies or to other "developers".
	 Historically, the Country Club has been touted as a benefit
to residents.  But, perhaps more important is the benefit of living
in a forest with an abundance of wildlife.  Many people purchase
homes here, not solely because of the Country Club, but because the
Country Club and our homes are situated in a genuine forest.  Houston
suburbanites, for example residents of The Woodlands, may have trees
in their backyards, but they lack a genuine forest, "home" to an
abundance of wildlife.  However, due to the increasing timbering in
our area, as well as a previous Board decision to permit Jacinto
Investments to timber, and W.I.A.'s reluctance to file liens against
these undeveloped lots with delinquent assessments, we may be
unknowingly giving up our best asset when these lots are purchased
each year by Jacinto Investments at tax sales.  If losing our forest
disturbs you, we residents must notify W.I.A. directors.  Do we want
W.I.A. to allow Jacinto Investments to continue to acquire the
remaining unimproved lots, thereby making that acreage very
attractive to timbering companies?  Or, do we want W.I.A. to acquire
these "worthless" lots at tax sales to help prevent the sale of this
acreage to timbering companies?
	 Members can contact W.I.A. by phone at 936-295-8970, or write
to the
Board Directors at wia@l..., or, W.I.A., P.O. Box 1655, Huntsville,
TX 77342-1655.
	 The above information was compiled by Terri Reed, a
resident of Waterwood for nine years, who enjoys living in the forest
with wildlife.