Big Canoe Property Owner Puts the POA and Its Attorney on Notice

Questions the Community Can’t Un-See, or Ignore

Earlier this week, a Big Canoe property owner formally challenged the Property Owners Association — and its attorney — over what appears to be a clear violation of the community’s governing rules, along with a growing list of election irregularities that have already left this year’s Board race in disarray.

The formal demand letter, which you can read in full here ~ 6 Page PDF, was sent directly to every member of the Board, POA management, the Association’s attorney, and the Election Committee.

It is not a casual complaint. It is a formal demand for answers, documents, and corrective action.

And once you understand what it raises, it becomes hard to un-see. (Photos in PDF)

Part One: The Commercial Use Violation

Let’s start with the straightforward part.

A residential unit in Petit Crest Villas (Lot 636, 29 Wolfscratch Drive) is being used full-time as a business office — guest check-in, operations, staff workspace, maintenance coordination, signage, and dedicated parking.

Big Canoe’s Rules & Regulations, Section A.13 (Rules for Business / Commercial Endeavors) could not be clearer. Here is the exact language:

“No family dwelling unit may be used solely for business/commercial purposes.”

The Rules then define what qualifies as a business or commercial endeavor.

Under Rule A.13.2.1, a prohibited business use includes:

“Any occupation, work, or activity undertaken on an ongoing basis involving the provision of goods or services to persons other than the provider’s family, whether or not the provider receives compensation.”

Under Rule A.13.3.1, business use is not permitted if it is:

“Apparent or detectable by sight, sound, or smell from outside the dwelling,” and
“Characterized by customer, client, or visitor traffic,”

A staffed guest check-in and operations office operating daily, with signage and parking, satisfies every prohibited condition. It is an open violation, and well known to the POA and Management – who have silently allowed it to continue for years.

There is no published exception in the Declaration or By-Laws. If an exception exists, it must be written, formally adopted, and disclosed to the membership.

So far, no one has produced one.

Why This Matters — Even If You Live Nowhere Near Petit Crest

This stops being “their issue” very quickly.

If a residential unit can be converted into a permanent commercial operation here, then the precedent is set everywhere, and no neighborhood in Big Canoe is immune. Once restrictions are selectively enforced, they are no longer enforceable restrictions.

Courts — including Georgia courts — have been clear for decades that selective or inconsistent enforcement of restrictive covenants can undermine or defeat enforceability. See Davis v. Miller, 212 Ga. 836 (1957); Kirkland v. Morris, 259 Ga. 482 (1989); Southland Owners Assn., Inc. v. Myles, 252 Ga. App. 522 (2001); King v. Chism, 632 S.E.2d 463 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006).

What stops your neighbor’s property from becoming:

• a property management office?
• a vacation-rental check-in hub?
• a real estate office?
• a contractor’s staging location?

Which leads to the unavoidable question:

Why was this allowed?

Part Two: Why This Is Also an Election Issue

Petit Crest Villas is not just another neighborhood.

It represents the largest single voting bloc in Big Canoe — approximately 64 Class A Improved Lot votes, effectively cast as a bloc through management.

At the same time:

• This year’s Board election failed to meet quorum
• Ballots have now been re-mailed
• The process used to decide how this “redo” would occur has been, at best, opaque

Anyone following recent reporting at BCMatters already knows this election cycle has been troubled — marked by irregular procedures, unclear authority, and governance decisions made without transparent explanation
(see: https://bcmatters.org/rogue/).

Here is the part that should concern every voter:

This commercial-use exception is not new.
It appears to have existed quietly for years, outside the view of most property owners.

And that matters — because long-standing exceptions create dependency.

A residential business operation that exists only at the continued tolerance of the Association is not independent. Shutting it down would impose significant operational and financial costs. That reality creates leverage — whether anyone acknowledges it or not.

When the same entity benefiting from that tolerance controls the largest voting bloc in Big Canoe, the system becomes vulnerable to influence by design. No explicit instructions are required. The pressure is structural. The incentive is obvious, and the absence of documentation only deepens the concern.

The Point Where Process Breaks Down

This is where governance stops looking incompetent and starts looking compromised.

After the election failed to reach quorum, there are no publicly available minutes explaining:

• Who decided how the failed election would be handled
• What authority was relied upon
• Or why the Election Committee — the body specifically chartered to oversee election procedures — appears to have been sidelined while the Board moved forward on its own

That is not a technical oversight.
That is a process failure.

The Election Committee exists for a reason. Its charter (available here:
https://www.bigcanoepoa.org/property-owners/poa-community-governance/committees/election-committee/ ) defines its role in administering elections and procedures.

So why wasn’t the Committee clearly in charge of determining how a failed election would be resolved?

Why was that authority seemingly absorbed by the Board itself — without documented deliberation or transparency?

These questions echo concerns raised in earlier primary reporting, including:

• https://bigcanoe.news/how-big-canoes-election-committee-is-tilting-the-2025-board-race-and-why-every-property-owner-should-care/
• https://bigcanoe.news/big-canoe-developers-ties-to-election-chair-littleton-exposed/

Individually, each issue is troubling.
Taken together, they form a pattern that is hard to ignore.

Why the Demand Letter Matters

The formal demand letter does not accuse anyone of criminal conduct.
It does not allege a quid pro quo.

What it does is more serious than that.

It demands that the Association:

• Produce the written authority allowing a residential business operation
• Identify who approved it and when
• Clarify whether votes from that bloc are being relied upon in this election
• Preserve records
• And pause an already-troubled election until these issues are resolved

If everything has been done properly, responding should be straightforward.

If it hasn’t, silence will say far more than any press release ever could.

A Community Already on Edge

Big Canoe property owners are not upset over one isolated issue. They are upset over a pattern — financial excess, assessments, transparency, governance, and process.

This is another crack in the foundation.

A residential community only functions when rules apply equally, and when elections are conducted in a way that inspires confidence instead of suspicion.

Right now, both are in serious doubt.

And that should concern every property owner — regardless of how they plan to vote.

– fobc editor
1/18/2026