Beginning in 2022, during the reign of Scott Auer (as General Manager) and Amy Tropfenbaum (as POA President), the Big Canoe POA launched on a path of Litigation never before seen in this community. They began suing everybody, property owners, local business, and most recently the Developer. Lawsuits for “Code Violations” have been perhaps the most egregious of the attacks on POA Property Owners (in addition to harassment notices doled out for claimed violations).
FOBC is documenting the history. Below is a list of litigation filings made between 2022 – May 30, 2026 (date as of this compilation). You have to go back to 2015 to start finding any previous litigation against property owners.
This Attached List (a 4 Page PDF) documents the Cases Numbers, Parties, and Filing Dates of lawsuits filed in Federal Court, Dawson County, Pickens County, and 10 other Georgia Counties.
What is Being Filed?
(1) Many of the lawsuits have been Collections for Past Due Assesments. BCMatters just released a really good article that addresses financial & governance aspects of these specific lawsuits – and the valid reasoning as to why these are necessary actions – but highlights the POA’s inconsistency and seeming lack of a plan. You can read that article here: https://bcmatters.org/both-sides-now/
FOBC asks, “Why are these types of actions becoming increasingly necessary in the first place?” Rising Monthly Assesments on low quality “Amenity Lots” appears to be the driver for most of these types of litigations – as people are just walking away from paying the fees, and have been unable to sell due to the collapsing market for these types of lots. Historically people in this position (a) gifted these properties to the Chapel; (b) walked away from County Taxes and had the lots sold for unpaid taxes; or (c) deeded them to the POA. The problem now with (a), (b) and (c) is that neither the Chapel, nor the Counties, nor POA wants these anymore. The POA already owns Twelve (12) “Take-Back Lots” in Dawson County; and Nine (9) “Take-Back Lots” in Pickens County. The Counties themselves own many “Take-Back-Lots”. Pickens County has three (3) lots that they have owned since 1999, and are NOT paying assesments on! None of these aforementioned lots are contributing to monthly assesments, and the POA is making zero effort to responsibly sell them on the open market.
Bottom line is that there is a consequence to the POA spending money it doesn’t have, and then making up for their financial irresponsibility by “Taxing” Property Owners. For anyone not clear about this – the POA has the authority to raise assesments without any approval by the property owners, and they are doing so regularly. While this may be fine for the $400K Home and above crowd – it is increasingly squeezing Vacant Lot, Treetopper, Villa, Condo, and small cabin property owners. Many property owners (especially of lots)… (1) feel trapped; (2) can’t sell; (3) can’t Give Away the properties (i.e. lots); (4) are watching property values start to drop; (5) are expecting increasing assesments, possibly special assesments; and (6) are increasingly desperate to get out of Big Canoe Ownership! And it is in this environment that the POA has started to sue property owners – which is exacerbating the cycle!
(2) Lawsuits for Architectural Controls Violations have increased. This has become a really big issue that has started to involve lawsuits AGAINST the POA for what is considered their harassing behavior and abusive tactics. The POA never talks about these, and so far every case has been quietly settled, with Non Disclosure Agreements (NDA’s) involved. It is unknown where these legal fees and settlements are financially accounted for in the POA Books.
(3) The 1st Trademark Lawsuit has been filed (Against EXP Realty Broker, Margot Weatherford). That was back in January. Ms Weatherford filed a Counterclaim in February, and Discovery deadlines have been set in the case. I can’t find that the POA has informed the property owners of this. In the coming weeks FOBC will be releasing the court filings, and providing additional information, and analysis of the case. There will be a surprising twist that the POA has certainly not seen coming. More trouble, and increasing litigation costs, are seemingly ahead for the community in regards to the Big Canoe Trademark Defense and Enforcement.
(4) The Developer Lawsuit
On May 18, 2026 the Big Canoe Property Owners Association filed litigation against the Big Canoe Developer. Here is a link to the 33 Page Lawsuit. This is the “known” lawsuit that has stirred up all the recent community buzz. FOBC will be devoting specific time to covering this issue. FOBC will be releasing information regarding the Anonymous authors of a new anti-Developer website that has launched – PreserveBigCanoe.com (“PBC”) – and some of the misinformation presented therein. The Developer has 2 more weeks to File an Answer and any Counter Claim. Below, FOBC releases some documents that so far neither the POA nor PBC has referenced.
May 2 2001 Waterford Tri-Party Agreement – 19 Page PDF
June 9 2001 Class E Amendment to Covenants – 3 Page PDF
Sept 19, 2001 Waterford Supplemental Agreement – 5 Page PDF
Sept 19, 2001 Waterford Supplemental Declaration – 10 Page PDF
June 17, 2003 Waterford Conservation Easement – 2 Page PDF
Aug 30, 2005 2nd Waterford Supplemental Declaration – 2 Page PDF
Feb 23, 2007 3rd Waterford Supplemental Declaration – 4 Page PDF
The next article in this series will be titled “Big Canoe POA Sues Developer – and Opens Huge Can Of Worms”, and we are going to discuss the consequences of some of those previously unpublished agreements – and the Tri-Party Agreement itself – and more plot twists!
I think the POA may have really screwed up this time, because my sources tell me that the Developer has finally had enough. In FOBC’s next article or two, the Big Canoe Property Owners are about to get a lesson in unknown facts – that they will definitely not like. And by unknown, I am talking about unknown to property owners. Not the Developer or the POA – they absolutely know about the issues, because I told them both years ago. In one way I guess you can say that i, david hopkins, property owner & editor of FOBC am sort of indirectly responsbile for much of the angst that Waterford, Wildcat and other property owners are currently going through. Unfortunately, things could get a whole lot worse (or better – depending on your perspective).
In closing, there is an old adage that jumps to mind in regards to the POA, specifically as it relates to suing the Developer, which goes like this:
“Don’t poke the bear.”
— david, FOBC Editor / June 3 2026
Be the first to comment