Michael Bobbitt: Notes from the Peanut Gallery (January 5th, 2015)


Monday night’s meeting was the first I have attended since Mr. Taylor’s ascension to Chairmanship. What a difference he has made in Board procedures. Instead of relying on the county manager to report on topics the committees have discussed the Chairman asked the committee chairs’ for their respective reports. This procedural change makes each committee chair accountable for their committee’s decisions instead of hiding behind the county manager. A larger than normal number of people attended most of the meeting, hopefully this is a new trend.

Water District Board

The start of the Water District Board was humorous. After gaveling the water board to order Chairman Taylor turned to Commissioner Garrison, Committee Chair, for his committee’s report. The committee chair apparently not understanding the new procedure turned to Mr. Asycue, the County Manager, for the committees’ report. Mr. Asycue passed the request on to Mr. McMillan, Deputy County Manager. Mr. McMillan stood and handed out a sheet of paper to the Board only apologizing for not planning properly for the committee meeting. The water committee met six hours before the full Board’s meeting. The public part of the committee meeting was an hour forty-five minutes in duration and included a twenty-five minute taxpayer paid lunch for the members and staff. Another twenty minutes of the committee meeting was an intense discussion regarding the $30 tap fee. Mr. Lawrence Brame and Jessie Stem attended the committee meeting and were allowed to speak. Both gentlemen are still objecting to the $30 tap fee. Mr. Brame admitted he did not read the contract when he sign up for the taps because “I trusted you guys to do the right thing”. There is much disagreement on the cost for taps especially in the early years of the project. The committee concluded the discussion agreeing to formally review the tap fee and explore alternatives. Mr. McMillan skipped over or did not include the committees’ decision to review alternatives when summarizing the committee meeting. Commissioner Garrison made mention of the committee’s intent to review alternatives. That opened the door for Commissioner Brown to rail against what she had adamantly favored for the past six years. She said, “We need to do the right thing and need to honor our word and keep the base rate at what we originally stated.” It sounds like Commissioner Brown and Mr. Brame are singing from the same hymnal. The nub of the issue rests in the hands of five of the current Board members who choose to ignore Commissioner Brummitt’s warnings that the project was lacking property owner support even after manipulating how to count those who supported the system. The five have held fast in their denial of the facts he presented until the real cost for water was announced. A real cost 70% more than promised for 30% less water than promised and includes a monthly fee for a tap. The pipe is in the ground. The first interest payment is due in six months. The five are faced with the reality of their denial. A denial that includes ignoring there has never been sufficient number of customers to repay the loans. To repay the loan, without doubling the current water rate, the county will use $750,000 in property taxes from all property owners (city and county) for the next ten years. A loan to build a water system less than half the county’s property owners wanted and the city property owners don’t benefit. The water committee needs to find an alternative to the water rate and tap fee that encourages customers.

Committee Reports and Recommendations

Three committee reports were reviewed two of which are of note. During the discussion of the Joint Education Committee report Commissioner Garrison stated the obvious about problems within the school system, a lack of respect. Any way you arranged the list of the participants (administration, school board, parents, students, teachers, commissioners, and the public at large) all collectively show no respect to some or all of the others participants. That has to change or there will be no changes. Until we show some civil respect to each other there will be no change and no progress. I’m off the soap box. During the public safety committee’s report Commissioner Hester said “I don’t know of any house that was built without plans, cost estimates and source of funds.” I thought to myself you built a water system without detailed plans, detailed cost estimates and certainly without a source funds to pay back the loans.

County Manager’s Report

The Farmer’s Market ‘needs’ was the lead off topic in the County Manager’s Report. The ‘needs’ include a heating system for a building where produce is not sold in the winter months; and a paved parking lot to reduce the runoff of dirt and rock down the paved road passed a commissioner’s apartments. To fund those ‘needs’ Commissioner Hester worked hard to obtain federal and state tax dollars (government grants) to buy and install the heaters and pave the parking lot. On page 61 of the agenda someone told the County Manager that 10,000 customers (22% of the entire county’s population) visited the farmers market from June 11 through November 30, 2014. Visited is the operative word choice since those 10,000 customers attracted only 10 vendors “each sales day” throughout the entire season of operations. The last financial report from the Farmers Market is six months old and shows that 44% of income came from a donation and not operating income. The Board tabled approval of the high bid for installing the heating system because there was misleading or erroneous information used to select the winning bid. This action displeased Commissioner Hester the Farmers Market champion. Following Commissioner Hester’s advice some ten minutes earlier the Board should review the Farmers Market’s financial reports to confirm there is sufficient income to pay for the operation and maintenance of a heating system in a building whose peak period of usage is during non-cold weather days.