It’s always good news when the Association receives an unmodified or “clean” opinion of the year end audited financial statements. (1) In fact, given that a “clean” opinion is not only considered an industry norm but also a reasonable requisite of any accounting job description, anything less would have been unacceptable.
It might also be noteworthy to mention that Pickens County government has recently received a “clean” opinion of its year end financials as well. (2)
With that said, kudos to both.
Meanwhile in an unprecedented move, the POA Treasurer managed to completely upstage the Mauldin & Jenkins (M&J) accountant’s scheduled presentation of the audit results with his e-blast circulated to the community one hour before the open board meeting. (3)
Now, why did he do that?
Perhaps the Treasurer believed the property owners would be incapable of comprehending the accountant’s report.
Inconsistencies . . .
Regardless, despite the “clean” opinion, several inconsistencies have been observed between information referenced in this writer’s previous posts versus the Treasurer’s e-blast and the M&J accountant’s board meeting presentation.
Rather than opine too much, it might instead be useful to simply lay out the opposing narratives side by side for the reader to compare, judge and decide.
The Association’s collection policy . . .
In the Treasurer’s e-blast, he prominently quotes the M&J accountant and partner as saying, “. . . Overall, the Association’s Accounts Receivable collection policies and procedures remain effective. This process reflects an exceptional level of consistency and commitment, standing out as one of the strongest implementations in the Common Interest Realty Association (CIRA) industry. It sets a clear standard and sends a strong message regarding the importance of timely property owner payments.” (3)
This accolade was later echoed in the M&J accountant’s presentation of the audit findings. In fact, this same accolade was also included in the accountant’s audit presentation in 2025. (4) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmOr7cSd68k at 17:25
-
-
However, in stark contrast, one must only reread the June 1st post on this site, (5) https://bcmatters.org/both-sides-now/, to recognize that some owners have been past due for years as shown in two separate examples. For instance, one such delinquency dates back to 2019 without the initiation of any formal legal collection efforts until late 2025. Subsequently, a civil complaint was filed in May 2026 seeking a judgment totaling $28k.
- And even as past due balances continued to accumulate, owners of both properties were allowed to continue using Association amenities contrary to the 2006 bylaws (6) as well as the 1988 covenants (7).
-
All details cited in these examples are indisputable fact and a matter of public record.
And yet, for whatever reason, it appears that these delinquent receivables have somehow been repeatedly overlooked by the M&J accountants.
Note: It also appears that the accountants are unaware of the usurious interest calculations utilized in both examples.
The truthfulness of these two opposing narratives can be compared and judged by the reader.
The Reserve Study . . .
Secondly, in another example of inconsistency, after informing the community that an updated Reserve Study will be completed by year end, the M&J representative went on the record to advise the property owners that the Reserve Study “is not actually covered in our opinion.” (8a)
-
-
Once again in stark contrast, one must only reread a previous post on this site (9) (https://bcmatters.org/lines-in-the-sand/ ) to learn that during the June 2025 presentation of the annual audit report, the same M&J representative stated, “we do look at the Association’s policies and referencing, I believe it’s Article 6, Section 13, you are, in the policies and the covenants, required to have the study, the reserve study, done every five years. We’ve looked at the date, you are within compliance and just so the property owners know, I don’t want to steal management’s thunder, but they are in the process of getting it done right now.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdQMEC0UVzU at 17:45
-
Note: Needless to say that study was not in process as it has now been deferred until late 2026.
Further, these are two completely opposing narratives presented by the same M&J partner one year apart. In 2025, it is apparent that the governing documents were reviewed by the accountants to ensure that the timing of the Reserve Study was in compliance with the covenants. And yet, in 2026, no such assurance was given and M&J asserts that the study is “not covered” in their opinion.
What changed?
Was this a decision made by M&J or was it excluded at the direction of POA leadership?
For the record, the Association is no longer in compliance with Article VI, Section 13 requiring an updated study every three to five years.
The last date a reserve specialist was on site was August 2020 with a subsequent report filed in May 2021. This is particularly concerning given the $55 million plus in fixed assets subject to maintenance or replacement at some future date.
Note: This writer has been involved in ongoing correspondence with various individuals on this issue and will address the subject in more specific detail in an upcoming post.
Once again, it is up to the reader to judge and interpret the meaning of the two conflicting narratives.
And finally a motion to amend . . .
The POA President has moved quickly to explain the reasoning behind that executive session meeting that was held without a quorum on May 11th as noted in the previous post on this site. (10)
Remarkably, it seems her solution involves the amendment of the minutes to formally adjourn prior to the sixteen minutes of executive session that followed effectively eradicating any evidence of that unlawful meeting. (8b)
Characterized by the President as simply an attorney/client privileged “informational session” to discuss the Waterford complaint, it seems she will be soliciting the approval of the developer director as well to amend the posted minutes of the executive session.
It is unknown if the developer director who was not present during that “informational session” that was held by the three “elected directors only” will be agreeable to amending those minutes.
A final nod of appreciation . . .
In closing, this writer would like to sincerely thank leadership for following this site as demonstrated by the reactive stance they have taken to the documented information found on these pages.
Others are invited to follow as well.
. . . . .
Should you believe the information found in this post is important, please continue to share with your friends and neighbors wherever possible. As for those who wish to see additional articles posted in the future, please subscribe for an email notification or check back frequently. And as always, feel free to contact me directly at thepcrosses@gmail.com for questions or further discussion. Meanwhile, take care and thank you for your readership.
Patricia Cross
10438 Big Canoe
References:
1) 2025 Audited Financial Statement, dated June 25th, 2026, by Mauldin and Jenkins
(POAwebsite>login>POA>financials>AuditedFinancials>2025
2) “Pickens County advances code enforcement changes, reviews strong audit report”, Smoke Signals, July 2026. https://smokesignalsnews.com/eedition/news/page-20260701–4/page_4ec0d759-6ad5-546a-9d0c-057af6a74655.html
3) “POA Receives Unmodified “Clean Opinion” for the 2025 Annual Audit” message from the POA Board of Directors e-blast dated June 25th, 2026.
4) Excerpt from M&J accountant’s 2024 financial presentation, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmOr7cSd68k at 17:25
5) “Both sides now”, June 1st, 2026, bcmatters.org, https://bcmatters.org/both-sides-now/,
6) 2006 bylaws at Section 2.7, https://www.bigcanoepoa.org/property-owners/poa-community-governance/governing-documents/bylaws/, (No password required)
7) Article IV, Section 3 of the Declaration of Covenants, as posted to the POA website (No password required), https://drive.google.com/file/d/1t4T5uvufoqYpk9QEqVD5lKCLFp8DXV5t/view
8) Big Canoe POA Board Meeting, June 25th, 2026, video on Youtube at a) 54:50 ; b) 57:15 ; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPmvFKKwJIQ
9) “Lines in the sand”, August 19th, 2025, bcmatters.org, https://bcmatters.org/lines-in-the-sand/
10) “Internal affairs”, June 23rd, 2026, bcmatters.org, https://bcmatters.org/internal-affairs/