Comments from Readers

A Reader wrote:

Look. Golf should be a self-supporting endeavor. The restaurant in the Center should be a self-supporting endeavor. If they can't support themselves, they ought to be shut down. This is not the Eastman of over 30 years ago. Times and tastes change. Today's families have a different lifestyle and Eastman needs to change with it if we are to attract new families as residents.

Comment: ECA members acquired the Golf Course in 1980 under the condition it be self-supporting and only required it be run as a golf course for 15 years. (see Post of June 12 Eastman Direct Vote) Up until 2012 the restaurant concessionaire paid rent and a portion of the utility cost. Now Eastman members pick up both costs unless gross revenues exceed $650,000.

Another Reader wrote:

The Center reached the same state of collapse as did the Water System and the Sewer System. There was no schedule or moneys set aside for repairs/replacements for any of them. Was that because of inept, ignorant management? Was it a deliberate effort to "low-ball" fees and assessments to make Eastman more attractive to owners and purchasers? Was it a little bit of both? Who knows?

Comment: Contributing Writer Phil Schaefer wrote:

The Center is hardly in a state of collapse.  In fact the first consultants hired by the ECA to evaluate the Center reported that there were no structural problems. (New consultants were then hired.) Has anyone who claims that there are such problems identified even one specific structural problem!  No, because they don't exist.  So, wipe away those tears and allay those fears, The Center is not falling down.

Does The Center have issues that should be addressed?  Yes, and they are all noted in the ECA's 10-year budget plan.  All the problems are identified and already scheduled for remediation.  What's the rush?  People complain about the air conditioning, and it is definitely not optimal - it over cools and under cools. It should be upgraded or even replaced, but could we please see a written estimate for just that work?  The back of the envelope guess (high-balled??) is $600K!  I've replaced an AC system for a house about one-third the size of The Center and it didn't cost $25K - remember, when you replace an AC system, you usually don't have to touch the ducts, an expensive component - most of the cost is in a new compressor, heat exchanger and control systems.

So, what about the roof?  It's time to replace a roof when you see the first signs of leaks.  Has there been a report of any leaks at The Center?  No.  So what's the rush?   Here's the problem - a major portion of the AC system is located in the Center's attic, and it is not accessible for replacement (there) without opening the roof.  See the picture, need to open the roof, get a crane to remove the old AC system - hopefully the new AC system will not be located in the roof again!  However, you have to replace the portion of the roof that was opened....and we can't match the shingles so it would look strange....if you're flying overhead.  So, that is the reason for replacing a perfectly functioning roof.  It's because the AC system needs to be replaced.  On the other hand, why remove the old AC system, just leave it there, disconnect it and put in a new system, but NOT in the attic.  Voila, no need to disturb the roof at all.

What about the Water System?  It is and has been a separate 'municipality' (Village District of Eastman) for over 30 years.  Its leaders (elected commissioners) have had the power to create capital reserve funds since the district was formed.  The commissioners have generally been reactive, that is they have waited for a problem to occur before taking any action, including putting money aside for maintenance.  That is not such a terrible problem because the Village District can borrow money at very favorable rates.  If they match the duration of bonds (borrowed money) to the life expectancy of an 'investment' - e.g. replacing the well field with new deep wells, which project has been completed - then the people paying off the bonds at any given point in time are benefiting from the investment. 

The Sewer System is a totally different animal.  Until recently it was a private company, which was owned by ECA from 2000-2014.  During that time the ECA set aside the meager sum of $10,000 per year for capital reserve - to pay for 'major' maintenance and upgrades.  They claimed, incorrectly, that the NH PUC (Public Utility Commission) would not allow them to set aside (via rate increases) any more than $10,000 per year.  The fact is that the PUC would have permitted a greater amount had the ECA applied for an increase, but it did not.  Could the ECA have managed the sewer system better?  Indeed, they could have listened to the company they hired to do the actual sewer system work.  The contractor recommended replacement of some important components of the sewage processing for over a decade.  His advice fell on deaf ears, maybe because it was not very costly.  The Village District of Eastman has purchased the sewer company from ECA, so it is now a public utility and the commissioners have the power to raise more funds for capital expenditures and reserves, and they have started to do so - implementing as they have a $300/year charge for capital reserve funds.

To tear down a 15-year old building and build brand new is only possible with someone else's money.

Carole S. White