A reader wrote in:
If you don’t already know it, the
Eastman Board approved (10/17) the Council’s recommendation of spending up to
$4.5 million to build a new Golf/Restaurant Center by a vote of 5 (Goldman,
Rand, Webber, Karash, Sodano) to 4 (Austin, Kershaw, Shulman, McInnes). One of
the reasons asserted by those in favor of the proposal was that the Council had
approved the proposal. So in a sense, the Board was not taking responsibility
for the vote, just confirming the Council’s position. But, it’s not quite as
simple as it appears.
As the Board President said, this
proposal started about four years ago with a request to add a bar to the dining
area of the restaurant. He appointed a committee to review the request, which
came back with a broader recommendation, that would have cost about $150K. Two
or three incarnations later, the Board-appointed committee’s recommendation has
blossomed to 30 times as much. Obviously, the Board supported that
recommendation, which was referred to the Council for consideration.
How often does the Council not
support a recommendation from the Board? So, in spite of the 60-40 referendum
vote against the proposal, the Council rubber-stamped the Board’s
recommendation. So, the origin was with the Board. It recommended the project
to the Council, which rubber-stamped the proposal, sent it back to the Board,
which rubber-stamped the Council’s rubber stamp!! Got that?– the Board doesn’t
want to take responsibility and neither does the Council…but they’ll spend your
money.
Further proof that the Board
wants no responsibility – it decided NOT to vote on the Council’s
recommendation to impose a $750 special assessment. Per Ken Ryder, the
Council’s action will be binding if the Board does not vote within 60 days. The
waiting period terminates on Nov. 6, which is before the Board’s next meeting .
Such brave hearts.
Board participation in the FBTF
(Food and Beverage Task Force), CETF (Center Renovation Task Force) and CRC
(Center Renovation Committee) (conflict of interest??)
Rand (FBTF)
Sodano (CETF, CRC)
Webber (CETF, CRC)
Karash
(CETF) – actually, the husband of the Board member
These four voted for the $4.5M
Build New. Four of the six who did not
participate on the committees voted against!
Final thought – Why does it take
a 2/3 majority of the Council to approve major borrowing, but only a simple
majority of the Board?
Want to watch the Board’s Video,
which is in three parts? The first two
run 52 minutes each, the third only 12 minutes.
Submitted by Phil Schaefer
No comments:
Post a Comment