All meetings will be held in the County Manager’s Administrative Conference:
Planning & Environmental Committee
Tuesday, February 11 – 1:00 p.m.
Purpose: Neighborhood Stabilization Program
Water Planning Committee
Tuesday, February 11 – 2:00 p.m.
Purpose: Brochure for Community Meetings, other matters as necessary
Technology Committee
Wednesday, February 12 – 2:30 p.m.
Purpose: Data Center, Security Controls, Social Media, etc.
Public Safety Committee
Wednesday, February 12 – 4:00 p.m.
Purpose: VFD Audit Reports; Animal Shelter
Properties Committee
Wednesday, February 19 – 4:00 p.m.
Purpose: Vacant Buildings
Intergovernmental Committee
Wednesday, February 26 – 4:00 p.m.
Purpose: Recreation Matters
OK, the County Commissioners have answered the call for more transparency. Time HiH posters and those on the side line to step up and answer the Commissioners offer. Starting Tuesday afternoon and continuing on Wednesday afternoon subcommittees of the County Commissioners will be meeting for an hour to discuss topics ranging from the neighborhood stabilization program, to county wide water project, to the animal shelter. These are free public meetings and one of the best times to observe our elected commissioners at work. To observe you need to attend. Yes, the meeting times conflict with your job they also take the Commissioners away from their paying gigs. Attending the committee meetings is similar to attending the Board meeting except you feel more like child allowed to sit at the big peoples table during Thanksgiving. And sometimes you might be asked what you think. I encourage you to try to attend one of the meetings especially the one nearest and dearest to your interest.
Open letter to the members of the Water Planning Committee.
I think you need to assess the status of the county wide water project before you approve the newly revised brochure for community meetings
First of all a little history, from January to May of 2008 commissioners repeatedly said water would cost no less than $35 a month or no more than $45 month for 5,000 gallons. Commissioners also said the USDA would loan the county some 28 million dollars to build a county wide water system as long as 80% of property owners bought a tap. There were other promises, or assurances, or trust us we know what we are doing type statements bandied about before the May 2008 primary election.
The exact number of signups was not revealed publically for more than five years following the voter’s approval. For five years the commissioners did not asked how many have committed, signed up, and the county’s management never revealed the exact number of signups. Today we know that about one third of the property owners in Phase 1A have bought a tap. Three months ago those 590 – 600 customers learned they will pay more than originally promised for less than originally promised. And that 3% of their monthly payments goes into the bank account of an out of county for profit business. How this project got so far without the publics’ knowledge is topic for a graduate program on political machinations.
You, Commissioners Brummitt, Garrison, and Taylor, can not fix the history. You have the ability to affect the future. First step would be a clear acknowledgement of the state of county wide water project. This includes answering another commissioner’s question, why the Vance County water project’s customers must pay for an unbudgeted booster pump. Next step is a public airing of the closed door decisions for the purchase price for water and the need for an out of the county for profit business to operate and maintain the installed system. The final step is to take a fresh look at the cost to the property owners for their tap and water. None of these steps can be accomplished in a one hour committee meeting.
Approving tweaks to a brochure intended to convince a disapproving audience that signing up for county wide water is a good idea is a continuance of what has not worked for five years. Property owners are now concerned that with the failure to achieve the 80% committed level all of Vance County’s residence will pay for a system that only a third of the property owners want.
And, again, my question. The County residents, who live in the City, are not counted in these numbers, correct? or will pay, through taxes, any of these costs, correct? i really do not want to support a county ( outside city only) water system that I cannot utilize, nor need to. I assume no property tax dollars are entered into this venture, and all local costs associated will be user fees alone.
Mingo, I did attend the Water Planning Committee. Commissioner Brummitt pointed out several times during the meeting that even as a completed project there are an insufficient number of committed (signed up) property owners to make the water system self sustaining. Commissioner Brummitt has pointed out in other settings that water rates would need to increase to nearly $100 a month to make the system self sustaining based on the current committed property owners. In the interim reserves in the general fund will be need to cover system costs and eventually debt repayment.
I assume you are asking if the “…in these numbers …” means the property owners currently committed to the county water system. If that is correct, then “… County residents, who live in the City, are not counted in these numbers …”. It is the second part of your question that is troubling to answer. Unless the general fund is segregate into county taxpayers’ money and city taxpayers’ money then all Vance County property owners are paying for a water system that only one third of the property owners will utilize or need.
Hope this helps.
Thanks Michael. Thats a problem. It seems unethical to me to take tax dollars from a county resident and provide new services and not offer those services to them.( or in this case, no possibility of that service)
Mingo, your comment is so polite. Ethical is not one of the top three words I have heard other use to express their opinion on this matter.