Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Closer than ever
I guess it depends on what your definition of closer is. The WECRD has about 2 million "saved" for their pool project. The capital campaign asking for money for this project was recently said to be trying to raise another 900k. Oh that's after they commission yet another study for thousand of more dollars. The CLDC spent a year and a half and thousand of dollars and man hours to come to the conclusion that option three with a pool was what needed to be built. Had a big ol vote on it and everything. Now after doing nothing for the last four months the plan has changed. They are going to build option three without a pool and they figure they need 6-7 million to accomplish this. The only problem with that is that Option one was going to cost 6-7 million to build. So 1, how can they build a bigger option for the same price as the smaller option, and B, since when does 2 million plus 900k equal 6-7 million?
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Really?
After promising over and over again to abide by the CLDC recommendation the WECRD board has chosen to instead abide by the YMCA letter of late. This means that there will be no pool for at least ten years. This means that the WECRD can never be dissolved as promised in their campaign run because the Y asserts that any facility will always need funding from the WECRD. This means that all the time and money that the CLDC members put into the recommendation was a waste. It kind of makes one wonder why we don't just build something that we can afford and that can sustain itself.
The slick way that all involved with keeping this fallacy going is shameful. They take our tax dollars and provide nothing in return while burning through tens of thousands of dollars per year.
Remember how the Y was going to save the process? The Y was going to get down to the truth of what the community wanted. Thats why the WECRD board swore their sacred oath to abide by the CLDC recommendation. The YMCA led CLDC they came up with a recommendation to seek the funds and go for Option 3 with a pool. Phases were specifically talked about and discarded as an option because of how gimpy people are after our phased High School project. An option that could be built with the money we currently have was discarded because the YMCA rep said there was plenty of money that they could get out of this community. The WECRD gave the YMCA tens of thousands of dollars to guide us in the CLDC process. They told us that we needed community leaders to shape and mold our rec center so that it was truly what the community wanted.
There were only two recommendations voted on in the super duper recommendation meeting. Conduct a feasibility study and build option 3 or don't build anything and support and supplement local recreation. There was no phased recommendation.
I kind of feel like if we were just going to do what the Y said, if they had the expertise from the get go to counter what the CLDC found out, if the WECRD wasnt going to abide by the recommendation anyway, then why did we spend all the time and money on the CLDC process and surveys and such, AND aren't we due a refund from the Y? I mean really. They led us down this primrose path for a year and a half sucking money out of the WECRD the whole time and then at the end of the road they say, "Oh never mind all that hard work, time, and money over there, just do what we say"?
Anyway. Here's the letter for your reading enjoyment.
YMCA letter
The slick way that all involved with keeping this fallacy going is shameful. They take our tax dollars and provide nothing in return while burning through tens of thousands of dollars per year.
Remember how the Y was going to save the process? The Y was going to get down to the truth of what the community wanted. Thats why the WECRD board swore their sacred oath to abide by the CLDC recommendation. The YMCA led CLDC they came up with a recommendation to seek the funds and go for Option 3 with a pool. Phases were specifically talked about and discarded as an option because of how gimpy people are after our phased High School project. An option that could be built with the money we currently have was discarded because the YMCA rep said there was plenty of money that they could get out of this community. The WECRD gave the YMCA tens of thousands of dollars to guide us in the CLDC process. They told us that we needed community leaders to shape and mold our rec center so that it was truly what the community wanted.
There were only two recommendations voted on in the super duper recommendation meeting. Conduct a feasibility study and build option 3 or don't build anything and support and supplement local recreation. There was no phased recommendation.
I kind of feel like if we were just going to do what the Y said, if they had the expertise from the get go to counter what the CLDC found out, if the WECRD wasnt going to abide by the recommendation anyway, then why did we spend all the time and money on the CLDC process and surveys and such, AND aren't we due a refund from the Y? I mean really. They led us down this primrose path for a year and a half sucking money out of the WECRD the whole time and then at the end of the road they say, "Oh never mind all that hard work, time, and money over there, just do what we say"?
Anyway. Here's the letter for your reading enjoyment.
YMCA letter
Friday, October 22, 2010
Do-Over
Judy has no part in this post. This is my point of view and my point of view only. I was at the poorly attended CLDC meeting on 10/21/10 as a citizen. There were 10 people there including me and only 6 were CLDC members.
After much deliberation, a year and a half of studies and meetings, burning $50 thousand on the Y, and another $20 thousand on a survey; the CLDC wants a do-over. Around a month ago the CLDC with guidance from the Y made their recommendation to the WECRD to do a feasibility study and go for option 3 with a pool. Other than a town hall meeting to present those results the job of the CLDC was supposed to be done. The WECRD board voted to follow that recommendation. Now the CLDC says that they want a do-over. They were "rushed", they made a "mistake". They don't say why they were rushed but what else could it have been other than to try and bolster the sitting directors position going into the elections? After the CLDC made its recommendation the Y representative sends an email to the co-chairs of the CLDC. One of the co-chairs shares it with a few people. Not the whole committee, but a few people. The email erroneously states in part that the WECRD could be done away with at some point. I say erroneously because the proforma shows the WECRD raising taxes 3 percent until at least 2023 and when formally presented at the CLDC the numbers and statements that are in the email all still, "have to be checked". It's an after-the-fact, desperate, nonfactual interjection. Look at the email, (Part 1), (Part 2), and you can see where our opponents came up with their new platform and the sudden epiphany of having a plan to do away with the WECRD. Hey it's the CLDC; open, objective and transparent right? Whatever. The question is; how can our opponents have a "plan" to dissolve the WECRD when they've never discussed it in a public forum? Theres only one way, and that's the back door illegal meeting way.
It was also interesting to hear that the CLDC is giving up on the fantasy that $4 million dollars can be raised for option 3. The recommendation from the Y email is to stick with spending another $40 thousand dollars on a capital feasibility study for option 3 but tell the story to the public that they will build option 1 and go in phases to option 3. Good idea. Mtn Hm residents love phased projects. I'm sure that everyone will donate to a phased project. They would never go for any kind of radical idea like, building something that we can afford right now. I was on the programs and facilities sub committee and when the 3 options were first trotted out I asked where sub-option one was. The option that could be built with existing funds. I was told that there was all kinds of donation money to be had here and not to worry about it. My question is as valid now as it was then. Why this fixation with building more than we can afford? The numbers that the proforma are based on has a 3 percent tax increase per year for the next 13 years. It takes the districts collected taxes from the $440 thousand it is this year to $670 thousand in 2023 at least. Thats the kind of numbers they use to make their options work.
After a year and a half of work and spending, formally voting on a recommendation, presenting it to the WECRD and the directors voting to adhere to the recommendation, one email causes a train wreck. The CLDC wouldn't have voted for a recommendation that wasn't backed up by hardcore, surveyed, what-the-people-want data, right? They spent $20 thousand dollars on a survey that told them option 3 was the way to go, right? Jana was there through all the CLDC meetings, the WECRD wouldn't have voted to accept the recommendation unless "the city" had spoken and the "facts" backed it up, right? It's not like the recommendation barely passed the committee either, it was 9-4. Four voices of reason and nine pool zombies. If they were just going to change their minds whenever the email/wind blows why waste all the time and money?
A friend of mine was told that if we get elected we'll "ruin" everything that they have achieved. I don't see where they have achieved anything. The CLDC has gone the way of the WECRD and has officially entered the analysis paralysis zone. But back to the point. Judy and I didn't run for this thing to ruin anything. We ran because we want to see good things for this community come out of this project. The more we've got out and talked to people the more we know that good things can come out of this. But we need to get started. We need to stop with the studies and the meetings and all the haphazard spending that could go towards recreation. We may be able to have an indoor pool someday, but its never going to happen with the way things are going now. We are for breaking ground on a big enclosed space that can be used for hundreds of different activities and we're for starting on it as soon as we're seated. If you want to wish and hope and dream about recreation vote for our opponents. If you want results and lower taxes vote for us.
Art Nelson
After much deliberation, a year and a half of studies and meetings, burning $50 thousand on the Y, and another $20 thousand on a survey; the CLDC wants a do-over. Around a month ago the CLDC with guidance from the Y made their recommendation to the WECRD to do a feasibility study and go for option 3 with a pool. Other than a town hall meeting to present those results the job of the CLDC was supposed to be done. The WECRD board voted to follow that recommendation. Now the CLDC says that they want a do-over. They were "rushed", they made a "mistake". They don't say why they were rushed but what else could it have been other than to try and bolster the sitting directors position going into the elections? After the CLDC made its recommendation the Y representative sends an email to the co-chairs of the CLDC. One of the co-chairs shares it with a few people. Not the whole committee, but a few people. The email erroneously states in part that the WECRD could be done away with at some point. I say erroneously because the proforma shows the WECRD raising taxes 3 percent until at least 2023 and when formally presented at the CLDC the numbers and statements that are in the email all still, "have to be checked". It's an after-the-fact, desperate, nonfactual interjection. Look at the email, (Part 1), (Part 2), and you can see where our opponents came up with their new platform and the sudden epiphany of having a plan to do away with the WECRD. Hey it's the CLDC; open, objective and transparent right? Whatever. The question is; how can our opponents have a "plan" to dissolve the WECRD when they've never discussed it in a public forum? Theres only one way, and that's the back door illegal meeting way.
It was also interesting to hear that the CLDC is giving up on the fantasy that $4 million dollars can be raised for option 3. The recommendation from the Y email is to stick with spending another $40 thousand dollars on a capital feasibility study for option 3 but tell the story to the public that they will build option 1 and go in phases to option 3. Good idea. Mtn Hm residents love phased projects. I'm sure that everyone will donate to a phased project. They would never go for any kind of radical idea like, building something that we can afford right now. I was on the programs and facilities sub committee and when the 3 options were first trotted out I asked where sub-option one was. The option that could be built with existing funds. I was told that there was all kinds of donation money to be had here and not to worry about it. My question is as valid now as it was then. Why this fixation with building more than we can afford? The numbers that the proforma are based on has a 3 percent tax increase per year for the next 13 years. It takes the districts collected taxes from the $440 thousand it is this year to $670 thousand in 2023 at least. Thats the kind of numbers they use to make their options work.
After a year and a half of work and spending, formally voting on a recommendation, presenting it to the WECRD and the directors voting to adhere to the recommendation, one email causes a train wreck. The CLDC wouldn't have voted for a recommendation that wasn't backed up by hardcore, surveyed, what-the-people-want data, right? They spent $20 thousand dollars on a survey that told them option 3 was the way to go, right? Jana was there through all the CLDC meetings, the WECRD wouldn't have voted to accept the recommendation unless "the city" had spoken and the "facts" backed it up, right? It's not like the recommendation barely passed the committee either, it was 9-4. Four voices of reason and nine pool zombies. If they were just going to change their minds whenever the email/wind blows why waste all the time and money?
A friend of mine was told that if we get elected we'll "ruin" everything that they have achieved. I don't see where they have achieved anything. The CLDC has gone the way of the WECRD and has officially entered the analysis paralysis zone. But back to the point. Judy and I didn't run for this thing to ruin anything. We ran because we want to see good things for this community come out of this project. The more we've got out and talked to people the more we know that good things can come out of this. But we need to get started. We need to stop with the studies and the meetings and all the haphazard spending that could go towards recreation. We may be able to have an indoor pool someday, but its never going to happen with the way things are going now. We are for breaking ground on a big enclosed space that can be used for hundreds of different activities and we're for starting on it as soon as we're seated. If you want to wish and hope and dream about recreation vote for our opponents. If you want results and lower taxes vote for us.
Art Nelson
Monday, October 18, 2010
Meet the candidates
The Senior center "Meet the Candidates" night, which we are attending, is the October 25th. The next night, Tuesday the 26th, we are having a more in depth informational and Q&A meeting at 7PM. We were able to reserve the conference room at Farm Bureau at 1010 Sunset Strip . We would like to present the facts of where the WECRD is now, and where the public has told us it needs to go. We will have some of our pamphlets as well as information that has been produced by the WECRD. Please call 590-2727 or send us an email at either Judy@RecreationNow.net or Art@RecreationNow.net if there's anything in specific you would like to see there. The appointed board members that are attempting to be elected to those seats have been invited to attend. We hope that if you have any questions or input for us that you will attend. Light refreshments will be served.
Saturday, October 16, 2010
The petition
Just to clarify, I have never signed a petition to dissolve the Western Elmore County Recreation District. I fully understand the frustration and anger that led to that movement and I know plenty of people who would still like to see the WECRD go away.
(ID Statute 31-4320 “Dissolution of District – Procedure” provides the guidelines.) Here is the bottom line. If the district is dissolved, the County Commissioners pay any debts and get title to the district property. The funds are then dispersed within the county for recreation purposes. I know none of them want that hassle!
I believe the available recreation funds should immediately be used for the benefit of this community but that the goal should be to reduce taxes and ultimately return to the household fee of $34.50. The Blue Ribbon Committee advocated the household fee as the most equitable way to go when they asked the voters to say “yes” to establishing the recreation district 10 years ago. The WECRD also believed that was the fair and equitable way to acquire their funds. Then without warning, they changed to a mil levy and began collecting .006% from all homeowners and businesses. They increased the taxes they collected by over 60% in one year. That was a pivotal point in rampant community mistrust and credibility issues for the WECRD. It’s time to change that image with a new board and a fresh, honest approach.
Judy Mayne
Monday, October 11, 2010
Not dissolving the WECRD
I can't speak for Judy but this is my viewpoint.
I signed the petition to dissolve the WECRD. After attending countless WECRD meetings and asking the directors to spend money on recreation and the directors refusing to spend money on recreation I was, and still am, fed up. Lets not forget that the district was all set to start building and the ONLY reason that they got the Y involved with the formation of the CLDC is that the petition was out there. Thats the process that we have and in my mind it worked. It worked because it got people like Judy and myself involved in the CLDC process and made me decide to wait and see what happened. The result of the CLDC and the recommendation to spend 40 thousand dollars to redo a study thats already been done to try and build a building that another study they paid 20 thousand dollars for says cant be sustained, is ludicrous, but the process however skewed was carried to it conclusion. I want to see this thing succeed. But not in the typical big government way of mortgaging our future with all kinds of debt and waiting however many more decades to start benefiting the people of Mountain Home.
I will not make a motion, or vote to dissolve the district when elected, and although I can't speak for Judy, I'm sure she wouldn't either. If this campaign has taught me anything its that people are fed up with being taxed and receiving nothing in return but the promise of increased taxes and a bond for a building that only 15% will have the privilege of paying to use.
The directors brag about having 1.7 million dollars in the bank. How many kids over the past ten years haven't been able to participate in sports or programs due to lack of money? Would it have killed the pool dream to write a check to parks and rec and/or the schools to get those kids in those sports or programs? 1.7 in the bank is a shame is what it is.
I signed the petition to dissolve the WECRD. After attending countless WECRD meetings and asking the directors to spend money on recreation and the directors refusing to spend money on recreation I was, and still am, fed up. Lets not forget that the district was all set to start building and the ONLY reason that they got the Y involved with the formation of the CLDC is that the petition was out there. Thats the process that we have and in my mind it worked. It worked because it got people like Judy and myself involved in the CLDC process and made me decide to wait and see what happened. The result of the CLDC and the recommendation to spend 40 thousand dollars to redo a study thats already been done to try and build a building that another study they paid 20 thousand dollars for says cant be sustained, is ludicrous, but the process however skewed was carried to it conclusion. I want to see this thing succeed. But not in the typical big government way of mortgaging our future with all kinds of debt and waiting however many more decades to start benefiting the people of Mountain Home.
I will not make a motion, or vote to dissolve the district when elected, and although I can't speak for Judy, I'm sure she wouldn't either. If this campaign has taught me anything its that people are fed up with being taxed and receiving nothing in return but the promise of increased taxes and a bond for a building that only 15% will have the privilege of paying to use.
The directors brag about having 1.7 million dollars in the bank. How many kids over the past ten years haven't been able to participate in sports or programs due to lack of money? Would it have killed the pool dream to write a check to parks and rec and/or the schools to get those kids in those sports or programs? 1.7 in the bank is a shame is what it is.
Sunday, October 10, 2010
Hits
We are averaging close to 100 hits a day. Thanks to everyone that is passing the site around and for all the encouraging words.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)