Lake Forest - Daphne, AL

When I read your statement "Whether it is a good thing or not, the question still remains "What is the association going to do about the accumulated silt?" Considering the substance of the other submissions today, the answer is probably nothing.", I have to ask myself just who has let the accumulated silt reach this level? Just what efforts did you do in the many years you were President of the association? How much accumulated silt was removed by your boards? We all know the answer is very little. We also know that your group had managed to alienate every political body capable of helping with removal. Let's see, you were at odds with the city council, the county, the state and many other agencies. We have just now restored relations with many of these groups and now have these groups actually working to find answers for us. Just last week, there was a major presentation about the Lake Forest Lake's problems made to many in a stormwater symposium. It must have been quite informative and impacting, because I heard from several who attended that they never knew it was so bad. Before you begin to denigrate the work regarding the lake, you may want to check your own record on it. Have you looked at the spoil site from the Tom's Cove dredging? How much of that material went right back into the lake? That is the most pathetic excuse for a spoil site I have ever seen. You can see the spoil being washed back into Tiawassee Creek. Not only that, but the LFPOA accepted all responsibility for that site and had to recently pay someone to fix it yet again. Quite simply, your record on the lake is far more dismal than any board I have seen. You will also notice that this board pushed to correct the spillway's condition and improve maintenance and safety at the spillway. That structure was allowed to deteriorate under your watch. And for what? So you could say "we are in the black". As a matter of fact, if you look at each of our properties, you will notice at least three years of little to no real maintenance. The clubhouse has holes in the kitchen floor. The Yacht Club kitchen floor needed new tiles. The pools needed new pumps and filters. The exterior shingles are falling off left and right. The roof is leaking at the 19th hole. The railing around the pro shop porch was falling down. Pieces of the Swim and Racquet building fell off. The tennis fences are leaning over. The docks at the Yacht Club are gone. There is no depth in the Yacht Club Basin. The cart paths on the lake had to be closed due to disrepair. I suppose all these deficiencies just happened in one year of you not being here? Get off your high horse and accept the fact that we have been underfunded for the last three years (at least) and have used every penny to maintain operations at a minimal level, while "giving" our members a poor product. Major changes are needed for this association to make it. They will soon begin.

The first question in the director's contribution was what did our boards do to help the lake. Well, for one thing, Bryce Cocke, who is on the Board of Directors today, was working hard on finding a solution to the lake problem for at least fifteen years. He was the leader of a group of members, who were then recognized as the Lake Committee. He spent quite a bit of time over the years taking pictures, surveying damage, and writing letters pleading for assistance. I was also doing the same kind of thing on behalf of the association, although I will admit that Bryce was at it much longer and worked much harder at it than I. The first significant financial measure that I can recall was taken by Bob Segalla during his last term as president. Bob dissolved a separate corporation that was the Architectural Committee and earmarked money that had accumulated in that entity to be spent on the lake. That was about $25,000. The next year the Board of Directors authorized management to spend Bob's money on the lake. At that point I was the president. The lake had filled in west of the Bayview Bridge. In fact, it looked very much like it does today. We dug it out to a depth of 18", so that there was no dirt above the waterline. We estimated that with the labor of association staff and the $25,000 in cash from Bob's action, that we spent in the neighborhood of $40,000. In hindsight, we found that the effort provided only a temporary solution. It was at that time that we realized just how much silt was coming from upstream and how quickly our lake was silting back up. The correct action would be to find a solution to the upstream problem first and then dig out the lake and maintain it in the future. That approach is more along the lines of what is taking place today with the current Lake Committee.

Tom's Cove was dug out twice, although the association did not pay for it. Both times the work was paid for by a third party, who had been found culpable by the one of our federal agencies. The last time was when the spoils site was created. That happened not long before I left the board and the director took over, so you might say that the neglect of the spoils site was his, not mine.

After that we concentrated on finding outside help from the various agencies, because it was our opinion that without an upstream solution, the problem was never to go away. In spite of what the director may think, his group was not the first to get together in a coordinated effort to work on this project. I do have hope, however, that his group will be the most successful.

Regarding the director's remarks about the ill will that he says existed between myself, the City Council and others, I believe that there is sufficient documented evidence that such is not true. In fact, I used to read week after week in the Baldwin Yard Litter that somehow found its way onto my yard, that I and the former mayor were thick as thieves. So, how could we have been alienated? All kidding aside, I am not aware of ever having had a conflict with anyone in City, County or State government. To the contrary, I have the greatest respect for many of those who have served on the Daphne City Council over the years and, as far as I know, none have a beef with me. On one occasion, when a candidate for re-election to County Commission called and asked me for an endorsement, I refused, telling him that I did not think he had done anything for Lake Forest. That is the only instance where I might agree that there was a little alienation. As for the supposed animosity that existed between our board and other State and Federal agencies, the only people that I am aware of that ever dealt with those agencies are on the Board of Directors today.

The director's comments that "for three years there was little or no maintenance" are simply untrue and many of the items he mentioned in his barrage have, in fact, occurred since he took over. We should recognize, however, that in a 30+ year old facility, there will always be things breaking, falling off and needing repair. That is just the way it is. We all just put them back together in the best way we can. Yes, the docks were washed away by Katrina when we were in office. I believe that we were busy repairing the Yacht Club right after that and then the director's group took over. The docks were gone for less than two months while I was in office. How many months have they been gone while he has been in office? As for the cart paths on the Lake Nine, I believe I recall that the greens committee and the general manager recommended many years ago that we abandon those. So, the state of the cart paths probably should be considered deliberate. I am interested to hear his remark about the Yacht Club basin. Boy, it would be great if we could dredge that out! All it will take is money. If the director is really interested, let me refer him to Captain Hal Pierce. No one knows more about how that can be done than Hal.

The work that the current administration has performed on the spillway is very good and was much needed. I am not sure just how much of that they actually did and how much was done by other member volunteers. I do know both groups have been at work down there. The administration did put up that much needed fence around the spillway and for that they should be commended. That looks like it might have cost around $1,000 or less.

One last question, though, is once the upstream work is completed, what is the association going to do about the accumulated silt in the lake?

In response to this submission.."Many are just outright lies, such as clearing streambeds to lake, improving streambeds in co-operation with government. To my knowledge and at the last meeting, Peterson reported that "the Government" hasn't even started their political year study promise, nor has there been any activity on any streambeds!.." As I said at the stated meeting, I was not sure when the work was beginning on the streambeds. Well, I got a call yesterday from the Director of those projects and discussed it with him. As luck would have it, the streambeds will be getting cleaned just before the Lake Forest elections (how's that for a coincidence). It's a conspiracy! Seriously, the streambed restoration project is actually scheduled for later this week in the D'Olive Creek area east of the Bayview Bridge. I have asked that we inform interested owners in that are to be aware that this activity was going to begin. That is good news for many in that area. I am hopeful that it will make a difference in the beaver activity as well as the ponding in those areas. But also, it should be noted that there was restoration work done around February on the Tiawassee Creek streambed. That area was experiencing serious erosion and contributed to silting in the lake. That was worked on just after we began the watershed meetings with all the agencies. Now, even though I did not read or approve of any literature put out, the fact is that the statements about streambeds is true. Secondly, the spillway, or level control structure has been repaired at the dam. This structure was in disrepair and in an unsafe condition when I took over the lake chairmanship. This repair will lead to safer access to the valve and easier cleaning operations. It will also prevent people from throwing shopping carts in the structure. A project well done. Lastly, since it is October, the watershed study should be getting underway. I have contacted ADEM's coordinator of that project to verify this and offer any assistance that we can give. The facts show that there has been some progress in the area of the lake. Is it enough? No! but it is progress nonetheless. It might be a good idea to look at the pictoral history of the dam structure since we have been in office. This is one area where there is a marked difference in the approach of this new board.

While it is encouraging that the government is getting involved in the erosion problem, the work on the streambeds will have little affect on the main body of the lake. In fact, it might aggravate the problem by bringing more silt into that part. Hopefully, it will help some of our members, who have been dealing with the flooding upstream. On the other hand, one of the excuses that those government agencies have always made for not helping with the lake was that it was private property. If one looks at an early map of Lake Forest, one will find that the lake is not just that body of water west of the Bayview bridge. The lake is defined as that body of water that extends all the way to the boundary of the subdivision. So, if any work is actually done, then a serious case can be made that if, in fact, that work actually helps the watershed problem, then they should take it a step further by extending that effort into the main body of the lake. The excuse of "not working on private property" will be moot. In any case, the lake chairman should be commended for his work on this serious community problem. It would be a real stretch, though, for the new slate to claim his efforts as an example of their progress.

I had an interesting conversation Friday with one of our elected officials regarding the efforts being made for a solution to the watershed issue.

"We are making some real progress with the new committee. The ADEM has agreed to study the D'Olive Watershed. That is a must before any federal money can be spent. All of our meetings have been productive. I have found that because of the pending lawsuit we have been limited on some topics which hurts our discussions and limits input.

All in all things are moving along and the LF board is doing a fine job.

He said that the erosion situation in Baldwin County on the Eastern Shore of Mobile Bay is a real mess. So, what else is new? I like this person and believe that he is really interested in working on a solution. He said that when the lake was originally built, the developer was told that it would take about fifty years to fill in. That piece of information came from NRCS, I think. He said that it actually took twenty-five years. Well, that's not quite true. There is still a lot of lake out there. One comment was particularly telling. He said that we won't be hearing much about Lake Forest and its lake in these meetings. "A country club complaining about their lake", my friend said, "doesn't create much of a concern with these agencies" or words to that affect. That has been a recurring theme throughout the years that we have been asking, pleading, and threatening for help with the lake problem. The one thing that I find particularly offensive about the statement is that this country club lake has been serving that same watershed area for three decades as a catch basin protecting the bay. Yet, none of those agencies have ever acknowledged that, in spite of plenty of evidence. The "country club's private lake" statement has been nothing but an excuse to avoid responsibility. Nevertheless, it is encouraging to hear so much discussion going on. We understand that the study will take a couple of years. What happens in the meantime?

We should accept the fact that eventually it will be the property owners association that will have to take action to deal with its own lake. The first question to be asked is "Do we want to restore it?" There are less than two hundred members who own homes on the lake. Those members desperately want the lake restored.

Unfortunately, there is not the same enthusiasm with the other twenty-five hundred plus members. I have deliberately tried to stimulate discussion on this site about the lake situation. Yet, very few people have shown an interest, basically, the lake committee chairman, myself and a couple of others. There have been numerous contributions about board micro-management, employee disenchantment, and even Sager's little stories, but very little on the lake. I remember when I was first running for the board. We were at a "meet the candidates" thing at the Yacht Club. One of our members came up to me and said, "I won't vote for you if you're going to throw away our money on that lake." That was in 1996 and that member, who is still here, probably hasn't changed his opinion. I told him at the time that the lake was an asset of the association and needed to be dealt with somehow. It still is and it still does.

Regarding the flooding problem along D'Olive Creek, liability, if there is any, belongs upstream. The legal action taken against the LFPOA is just a matter of grasping at straws. In order for liability to exist, one must take an action that causes damage to the offended party. The association has made no changes that would even remotely be considered as having caused the upstream flooding. In fact, the opposite is true. The association has removed dirt from the lake to increase its capacity to take excess water. The association has provided access to the dam by the city, so that they can open the spillway in anticipation of heavy weather. Association staff have opened the spillway themselves. The association has worked with the D'Olive Bay Restoration Committee to force those responsible for the damage to the Tom's Cove portion of the lake to clean it out. In fact, the association is a victim here. Although, one can never tell what might happen in court, if the association loses this one, then the insurance company would have had to have hired the worst attorneys possible and deserve to pay the claim.

Nowhere does it say that the property owners association is responsible for flood control. That responsibility must lie with governmental entities. Now, so much for the blame game.

After a decade of struggling with the lake problem, this writer is convinced that the solution, if there is one, lies with the association itself. We can stall. We can eagerly wait for the completion of more studies. We can do anything to avoid taking an action. But, eventually I believe that we will have to act. Lake Forest has two general courses of action.

One, we can decide that the forces of nature are too overwhelming for us and plan to let the lake gradually disappear. That could take a century. If that is the decision, then the association simply has to periodically lower the lake, put equipment out there, and move dirt around to make it more aesthetically pleasing. We could landscape it all and change its name from the Lake Forest Lake to the Lake Forest Lake & Gardens.

The other course of action is to decide that the lake is worth saving and start taking steps to do it. That would involve the three steps mentioned in an earlier submission. First, build a catch basin with obstructions on the upstream side to cause the water to start tumbling and drop the sediment to the bottom of that catch basin. There would have to be two such catch basins. One, east of the Bayview Bridge to handle D'Olive Creek and the other probably east of the bridge on the 1st hole of the lake nine to deal with Taiwasee Creek. Then, the association would have to monitor the accumulation in the two catch basins to determine the interval of maintenance needed to get the captured dirt out. We must accept the fact that the maintenance would be required periodically forever. And finally, once we have gotten the incoming flow of erosion under control, we can then begin restoring the lake to some previous condition. Granted that this is a layman's perception of the problem and solution. We would expect the association to bring in an engineer to make sure the job is done right. What this means is that there would need to be an annual budget item with money allocated for lake maintenance, just as there is for each of our amenities. A deeper lake would offer better recreation opportunities and greater capacity to accept water from those heavy future storms, which might help with flood control.

Of course, there is a third course of action. We can do nothing. We can wait for some governmental knight in shining armor to step in and save the day. I tried that one. It doesn't work.

At the recent Improvement Committee meeting, Jim Moss is reported to have said that they have now gotten the association out from under the control of the earlier boards. Well, those earlier boards handed ole' Jim and his friends an association that is financially solid and physically in good shape. The association has the money and/or the credit to take any action we choose to make Lake Forest better for everyone, including those who live on the lake. That is, assuming that we have the will.

The webmaster does seem to have a good understanding of the lake problem. But, he does seem to want to ignore our own subdivision's contribution to the silt in the lake. Our roadways, lots, golf course, and medians have contributed a fair amount of sediment to the lake. Do we intend to ignore our own problems? Lake Forest needs to clean up its own act before pointing fingers elsewhere. Ride around our developement and look at the bare areas, constantly eroding and placing silt in our drainage system. We are appreciative of the median program, it can help stabilize badly eroding areas. Our membership can help too. If they have yard areas that have high slopes, they can keep it planted and stable. You would be surprised what a couple thousand lots can contribute in a hard rain. Our golf course users can assist by staying on the paths and using a "90 Degree Rule". They can also be helpful by allowing bare areas of the course to revegetate. We can lead by our actions as well as our words. The City of Daphne has taken a lead role in erosion prevention. They have a Sediment Officer to enforce land disturbance laws and has already shut down sites where protections are unacceptable. Through efforts in education, stabilization and enforcement, we will see a reduction in the silt coming into the lake. At some point, hopefully not too far down the road, we can take remedial action and set up a long-term maintenance plan. It will take a very long time to get the lake to its pre-development condition. There are no quick fixes out there. I would like the webmaster to expand his discussion about flooding. The homes that have flooded, from what I understand, do not sit adjacent to the lake. These places are on the tributaries coming into the lake. Did the lake actually cause the flooding? The current consensus is that the lake did not. Using terms like these to raise fear among owners along the lake are pointless and without basis. The LFPOA is currently defending itself in an action brought about by flooding. When that case is completed, we should have a better understanding of the flooding cause. Certainly, we want everyone who lives on the lake to be able to enjoy it and be free from fear of trash, silt and grasses overtaking their property. This will happen in the years to come, as these efforts come to fruition. There is currently a great developemnt pressure on the watershed. The Watershed Assessment beginning will allow the state and federal government to get a handle on the problem. There is a tremendou s amount of support out there for us, right now. Let's let them do their job while we monitor the progress. So far, we have seen nothing but diligence from all of those involved. When that changes, we will lead the charge to get them back on track.

That was depressing. In the first place, if one will read the previous posting on the lake, one will find that I said "here is the hard part. Lake Forest must do it."

If the only erosion coming into the lake was from the subdivision, the work we did a few years ago would still have the lake looking pretty good. Unfortunately it doesn't. When highway 13 was started and other subdivisions on that stretch of road, like Tiawasee Trace, were developed, they cleared much of the undergrowth that held back the water. We have pictures. Runoff control was not enforced by either the county or city so that when the heavy rains came, water ripped down that newly cleared path surrounding Tiawasee Creek and blew the Greenwood bridge right into the lake. The Greenwood bridge is in Lake Forest, so I guess that makes it our problem. It was a city-owned bridge on a city-owned street. When the city did a poor job of rebuilding that bridge and the new one blew into the lake a short time later, I suppose that was Lake Forest's fault as well. We have pictures. When the county extended highway 13 to highway 90 and, along with ADEM, did a poor job of enforcing runoff control, the lake received tons of new dirt. WE HAVE PICTURES! Our fault again? Tom's Cove has been filled twice by a dirt pit in Spanish Fort and is being filled again by the Bass Pro Shop development. Yep. We are taking pictures. That's Lake Forest's problem.

He says, "Lake Forest needs to clean up its own act." For years, Lake Forest's Architectural Committee has been a watchdog over erosion within the subdivision. We have required a $1,000 deposit from builders before allowing them to build a house and we have kept some of it because of runoff abuse. I can still remember Bob Segalla prowling the neighborhood taking pictures of collapsed silt screens and projects with no silt screens at all. Later, Ed French did the same thing. B.T. Cocke and I have taken tons of pictures. When Friday Construction wanted us to exempt them from Architectural rules, we refused, even though we really wanted them to build those houses. A couple of years ago the board hired our own fulltime architectural support person dedicated to enforcing the covenants and inspecting those projects for erosion. That was a board that actually did more than talk. But, one thing we cannot do. We cannot enforce anything outside of Lake Forest. That is and has been a major source of our problem and trying to redirect the issue away from that will not change the fact. Apparently the director is not aware that the people along the lake already know all of this and what is really "raising fear" is reading statements from the Lake Chairman that suggest nothing is going to be done for years.

I have to sympathize with the director. I used up all his excuses over the last decade, myself. Like him, I had hopes that all the efforts of our board and management, and the optimistic words from those outside entities would lead to a solution. They did not. Maybe these new efforts and optimistic words will have more success. I will be happy to "expand on the flooding" issue tomorrow.

I would hope that most members and people who live on the lake would have a real understanding of what problems we are facing. I believe most do. The Watershed Assessment is DOING something. There are many other activities that are being considered with the ultimate goal of reducing impacts to the lake and in the end, restoring it. Some are already taking place. There was a recent streambed stabilization project completed within Lake Forest. That project helped stabilize a badly eroding streambank. I suppose that these occurences should be reported in the press rather than just getting them done. We should be thankful that the city, state and federal people are doing things to help. To continuously play the blame game and lash out at the very people who control progress is not helping Lake Forest or our lake. The LFPOA President and Lake Chairman are encouraging and uplifting those that lend a hand, no matter how small. It has paid off with funds directed toward our watershed for the first time in years. This study is the very thing that will drive funding for improvement. Consider this, would a prudent politician or government agent spend money in an area where they have not studied and planned the best way to do it? It is logical to most that this assessment, when completed, and even while ongoing, will create fundable projects to help the lake. How many and to what degree will be the key. This is a vital time for us and cooperation and coordination are the keys to success. Local involvement of politicians is the key to getting assistance. We are fortunate that our Mayor and Council, legislative delegation, and county commission have stepped up to provide it. We should not demean their efforts or question their motives. We have to continue to support their efforts and encourage its continuation.

Oh, how nice it would be if we could say, "Whoopee, they are doing something now!" Unfortunately the above writer has apparently not been paying too much attention to what has been taking place for more than a decade. If we had been paid a little for every letter we've written, every presentation we have made, and every legal report we have sent to some agency, we would probably have enough to dig out some of that dirt. I really sympathize with the above director because I have been on the "writing the positive news" side of this issue more times than I would like to remember. Nothing has ever come of it. Maybe these new directors have the golden tongue and can accomplish something that no one before has been able to do. You will understand if I don't hold my breath. Whining that all of you contributors and myself are just being negative won't help.

There may be some money coming from government some day. In the meantime, there will be more homes flooded and more ugly erosion piling up at the entry points of D'Olive and Tiawasee creeks to the lake. There is no mystery here. To ease the problem we must:

And, here is the hard part. Lake Forest must do it. That costs money. Yours truly is on record as saying that as far as I am concerned we should not take another shovelful of dirt out of the lake until the first two bullets above have been done. That opinion doesn't win many friends along the lake. But, removing dirt without the other measures only makes more room for more dirt to come in. And, come in it will and very soon.

Yes, we have evidence to show that much of the problem has been the result of negligence on the part of local, county and State governments. And, yes we have pictures to show that individuals and businesses have contributed to the problem. And, Bryce may be right that we should go after them. But in the meantime, more homes will flood and more dirt will pile up in the lake. And, we will be waiting for another study.

Don't you just love it. The new board has an agreement with local, state, and NATIONAL, political hacks to "study" the lake problem! Not only will they "study" it, the "study" will not start until October - 8 months from now. Next, the best part, the "study" will take 2 years. Not only will the facetious five be out of office; the political hacks will probably be also. Net result NOTHING HAPPENS FOR THREE YEARS!!! This is the way politicians work - "study" it until public interest goes away. Then do nothing

Several years ago a similar study was to be undertaken to find a solution to the problem and that solution might take ten years. When I checked on the status of the study about a year later, I was told that no one had followed through on it. Sometime later the former mayor and I were blamed for somehow undermining the project for political reasons, which was nonsense.

I am grateful for any efforts on the part of anyone to solve the erosion problem that is damaging the Lake Forest lake. I was recently told by State Representative Randy Davis that the Conservation Department was, indeed, going to do a watershed study. However, in the next year we are probably going to see much more severe weather like we had last year. The weather people in the know say the next several years will be ugly. The people who live on the lake have reason to be worried.

Submission received from a director. Starts discussion with statement about the appointment of new director.

I sent a letter to all the board members and Steve that I could not attend and I requested that on an issue of such importance, that ALL board members must be present. They obviously had already counted 5 for the slate of 5 and one for Henry. The rest of the board is not important. I am going to call a special meeting, if I can get another board member to support it. The D'Olive Committee filed a complaint with ADEM for the damage to Toms Cove, THE 4th such complaint. Henry refused to file a complaint for the association to protect the association's property, specifically the lake or to protect the property of the members that live on the lake. The last rain was worse and The D'Olive Committee is filing the 5th complaint and that is going to be the subject of the special meeting, to let Henry and John explain why they do not wish to protect the Lake by filing a complaint with ADEM to protect the Lake, which is LFPOA Property

The Lake Chairman received great news the other day. In a meeting with ADEM officials, it was relayed that the D'Olive Creek Watershed Assessment will begin in October of this year. This is a positive step in documenting problems and determining methods needed in the watershed to limit existing problems and prevent future impacts to the lake. This assessment will be used to develop a Watershed Management Plan that can be adopted by ADEM and other authorities to manage outside development, future land uses, and existing problem sites in a way that leads to better water quality in the long term. The Assessment t akes two years to complete. This was accomplished by working together with local government officials, federal and state agencies, and other elected officials in a coordinated effort. This is only the beginning of that work and many more things are being discussed and will be brought forward as this effort continues. This is evidence of a firm commitment from many people in government to help us with our lake problem. They will be commended for their efforts in the upcoming Spectrum.

The LAKE- Just finished reading the Baldwin section of the Mobile Register. Front page top right article concerning Spanish Fort cliffs that are sliding. It seems from the article that the $2 million grant for repairs will not be used to help dredge the LAKE, as it has been determined that the soil isn't conducive to drain as needed? We can continue to talk or we can take action. We should have all the evidence we need from the soil samples taken from the LAKE showing where the soil came from-upstream Timber Creek, Eastern Shore Centre, County Rd 13 Extension to Hwy 90, etc., etc. The politicians will continue to politic without action. By the way, they're supposed to be working for us, but politics haven't gotten any results for years. It's time to act in the form of a suit against ALL responsible parties upstream. This is a $6 million dollar problem that others are responsible for and the Alabama Law is clear as to downstream issues. 6 million is the estimated cost to put the LAKE back to the condition it was in before the irresponsible responsible parties filled it up with their upstream runoff. The Lake Forest members who live on the LAKE deserve better.

I think there needs to be a new LFPOA, Lake Front Property Owners Ass. Seriously, we are so taken for granted, yet our lives are the most affected in potentially devastating ways & in other "lifestyle" ways & even more so in ways that directly affect our property values. If I wanted to sell my house now & any intelligent buyer were to realize that the lake was filling in in front of my eyes every day with no clear solution, it probably would not sell, certainly not for what it is worth as "lakefront property."

The new LFPOA deserves a plan of action & a timetable & regular updates on the progress by the new lake chairman or they should find someone else to do the job that needs to be done. We should be informed ahead of time if possible of any lowering of the lake. Just because we have no more hurricanes or major storms now, is no reason not to be actively seeking solutions to the lake's problems.

The first matter to be done is the new valve & actuator installation. It should be done asap. If the lake needs to be lowered to do this, do it now while the weather is cooler & not next summer when we want to use the lake more for recreational purposes. If there is any reason that this is not being pursued now, we want to know why not?

Regarding your statement of a "new" LFPOA, the current association on the whole has done a good job for more than a decade. However, Lake Forest is vast and complex and there are several problems at any given time. So, which problem gets addressed first by the board? You've heard the term "It's the squeaky wheel that gets the grease?" Well, that saying applies here. Every other amenity has its own political action committee. Golf has the MGA and others. Boating has LFYC, Inc, the Eastern Shore Sportsmen and others. Tennis has the Lake Forest Tennis Association. Where's the PAC for the lake? Some years ago there was a Lake Committee and I don't mean that board committee. It was an independent committee made up of property owners who lived on the lake. They convinced a board member to take an interest in their problem. He was B.T. Cocke. That group came to board meetings. The key word there was "group". They stated their case. Sometimes they got ugly. But, that wheel squeaked. Former president, Bob Segalla, arranged to shut down a pointless corporation, Architectural Committee, Inc. and arranged for around $25,000 that was in the defunct corporation to be set aside for the lake. In 1999 the association spent that money and more on the lake. Maybe that's what you need. A PAC that squeaks, screams and maybe just gets downright ugly.

Regarding the lake issue the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. There is a lawyer willing to take this on a contingency basis and file against all upstream parties. He should be given the go ahead asap since nothing else has worked. Probably would strengthen the case to dismiss LFPOA from the current suit.

During Lake committee report, seems Chairman Peterson has shelved the $22K idea of an electrically controlled actuator in favor of getting the manual controls safe to access by Kenneth. As well as getting some type of catch at the outlet to keep debris from entering the outlet and fouling the controls. Peterson mentioned holding a public Lake meeting some time in January.

Concerning the Lake: It is prudent that a thorough review of the history of the Lake Forest lake take place. There are years of data and communications to review. Also, it must be considered that Lake Forest is in litigation at the present time concerning the lake. These things would indicate that the less officially said about the lake, the better. It is easy to see the problems the LFPOA has with the lake. To continually dwell on that without participating or contributing to a viable solution is a true waste of energy. All members of Lake Forest have an interest in the lake. As to the City Council taking act ion on a request to take the lake. I can say that the new Lake Chairman has not requested the city to take the lake or take any specific action in its regard. The board might be interested in knowing just who is pushing for action without authority to do so.It could be, coincidentally, that the City Council is finally deciding to act on something done years or months ago. Could this be an attempt to "help" the new board?

Unfortunately, the comments above demonstrate a lack of knowledge of what has transpired in the past regarding the Lake Forest lake. The Board of Directors almost two years ago, offered the lake to the City in a face to face meeting with the then mayor, Harry Brown and the Public Works Director, Ken Eslava. These gentlemen have not been the stumbling block on the issue. That distinction may by laid at the feet of the Daphne City Council. If anyone would like a thorough review of the history of the Lake Forest lake, there is no one better to talk to the board member, B.T. Cocke. No one anywhere knows more about it than that gentleman. The Board of Directors needs to put personalities aside and work with each other to solve this problem. The former general manager, Jake Bodiford, had an extensive file on the history of the lake including numerous letters written to the Corp of Engineers, ADEM and others. Either Jake has it or it is with the interim gm, Steve Jernudd. In either case, it is certainly available to the board.