Sorry I haven't posted anything in a while, I've been busy actually working to pay the bills.
Last weeks meeting was a step in the right direction. But I also think it is clear that we still have a vast rift that probably cannot be mended.
Let me address this Phase II water project again. Aside from the previous issues I've raised about why Mr. Cordier and his court (Mr. Graffis) are so fired up to push this water project through, the more I learn about this project, the less I am in favor of it.
Do I think it is important to have an upgraded water system? Absolutely.
Do I think we need to push it forward at the expense of all else? Definitely not.
In the last meeting, George had asked Rick to come up with a number for the roads. In order to chip seal everything in the community, twice, it would cost $155,000.00. However, to do Plats I and II would cost $33,000.00 and it could be done this year.
George felt that the public should have a voice in whether or not the roads went forward, but I felt that this was made clear at the previous public meeting. The community wants to have the roads addressed!
I posited that we should do a portion of the roads each year until it was all completed.
George next turned to the water system stating that it would cost $76,000.00. However, this isn't accurate as the original bid of almost a year ago did not include labor. George indicated that there was a $8,000.00 contingency fund, thus the real cost was less than $76,000.00. Again, this is flawed logic. I don't know about you, but whenever I budget for a job, there is always an unforseen expense. The $8,000.00 contingency is there for a reason and we shouldn't discount it.
Now, George had to concede that the cost did not include labor. So the cost would definitely be more than $76,000.00 in order to complete Phase II. There is only $23,000.00 in the budget alloted for Phase II. George's plan was to do the following:
(1) Liquidate our $50,000.00 reserve.
(2) Use the $23,000.00 in the budget allocated to Phase II.
(3) Sell our remaining parcel of land at the airport,
(3) Raid the labor budget, and
(4) Raid the healthcare budget.
I can't support this reasoning for a couple of different reasons. The first one is fiscal responsibility. We simply cannot afford to put all of our eggs in one basket. Phase II has an unknown top end to its cost. We don't know what labor will be. We don't know what equipmenet rental is going to cost. These costs are not known. Raiding every dollar we have in our budget is a terrible idea. Selling assets to fund projects is an even worse idea. Would it be prudent in your own household to liquidate your savings and checking accounts as well as sell your home to fund the purchase of a pool or hot tub? Would it not be smarter to make sure that you kept money in reserve? I don't see the current board doing that in this case.
Now, let me address the other reason I think this is a bad idea. At the end of the day, this is about improving our water system to increase our level of fire protection. We are going to go from a 250 gpm capacity to a 500 gpm capacity. However, in order to do that we need to have a 500 gpm pumper truck. We don't have one and the County apparently does not have any present plans to purchase one despite Mr. Cordier's assertions to the contrary at the September 14th meeting.
So, in the end, we push this project through and what benefit have we received? I don't see one. I certainly don't see one for the expense.
250 gpm or 500 gpm isn't going to save our homes when all we have is a garden hose from our neighbors house.
What I proposed at the last Friday meeting was breaking Phase II into multiple projects. I also proposed the same thing for the roads. I felt this was a fair and reasonable compromise. Creating a solid multi year plan that addressed the concerns of everyone and accomplished all of our goals. I don't think this offer of compromise was well received by our chairman and I'm going to tell you why.
During the course of the meeting, George made me the following offer. He was so sure that he was right and I was wrong that he stated "If I'm wrong, I'll resign. If you're wrong, you resign." It was at this moment I realized there was no compromise to be had. It was also clear to me that personal feelings have clearly obscured that which is in the greater interest of Seven Bays.
As I stated at the meeting, I receive no benefit from either project. I live too far away for the roads to affect me and I live too far away from the nearest fire hydrant. My goals are to serve the greater good of Seven Bays. To ensure that we are fiscally solvent. Putting all our money into the one project and stripping other sections of the budget to do it is too close to the edge. If we have one thing go wrong, we're out of money.
The board has already addressed one issue that is going to cost us some money and we don't know how much it is going to cost in the end. But we're going to have to deal with it and it will probably put both the water project and road completion off for the forseeable future.
Now, let me turn to the previous posts which have served only to malign my good name. Linda, you simply have to get your facts straight. You've stated that you took time to review the attendance sheets from last year. You stated that I attended less than half of the meetings. One of our wonderful community members actually went back and reviewed the minutes for the previous year and determined that you were wrong. A statistical analysis was provided showing attendance at board meetings, community meetings, and a combined total of board meetings and community meetings. Overall, I believe I had a 75% attendance rate.
Now, your argument is going to be that it should have been 100%, but consider this. I deliberately set up a communication network so all of the board members could talk on a regular basis throughout the year. I made that same system available to the current board members.
I didn't need to attend every meeting because our previous board spoke on a regular basis via email and telephone. We also shared a common vision and had respect and trust for one another. Our local email network allowed us to meet day in and day out if necessary and there were days when we would send multiple emails across the network. The same network, that you now refuse to use.
The next time you choose to go on the attack, check your facts.
As to your statements that I am trying to play the community. Shame on you. Certainly aren't you trying to do the same thing? And even if you are correct, is it not correct to make the public aware of the actions of the board. Should I have allowed all of these transgressions to take place without public scrutiny? Was it not the new members of the board's platform that the old board hadn't communicated with the community until after the fact? Is this not what you and George wanted to change? Further, is it not the exact same behavior that Roy Graffis and George Codier exhibited in their 'letter's' to the community? I'll thank you for not calling the kettle black.
Many members of the community have approached me asking me to work with the board. I am most certainly willing to do that and have indeed endeavoured to do so. I have argued with reason and logic over the past few weeks, letting the emotions go. I don't think the balance of the board has accomplished the same, but your actions will speak louder than your words.
As was stated at the previous meeting, the time is now. Spending every waking moment talking about what the previous board did or did not do does not alleviate your responsibility for dealing with the issues of today. You cannot use the past as a scapegoat as it only reveals an inability to address the real problems facing you.
I look forward to seeing everyone at the PUBLIC community meeting this coming Friday.
Jay S. Jump
Seven Bays
