April
20, 2018
Bayview
Water & Sewer District
Attn: Sharon K. Meyer, Vice Chair
P.O.
Box 637
Bayview,
ID 83803
Dear
Sharon:
Thank
you for the response letter dated April 11, 2018. It is appreciated that the financial /
treasures report was uploaded at the March meeting for the public to follow
along to better understand how our money is being spent. This too should help with less public records
requests to the District.
To
help you further understand my points from the original letter I sent to the
board dated, March 20, 2018 regarding my suggestions / concerns, I am
responding to your April 11th letter.
1.
The
point of the agenda not being printed is plain and simple, it is not useful. I
use a similar format in my professional position with medical staff, MDs, ARNPs
and Nursing staff. The agenda put out by the District does not contain a one-line
description of the topic, so the public can understand the discussion that
follows.
2.
Regarding
transparency and accountability with the consent agenda, there is not a problem
with reviewing and discussing prior to the meeting and address concerns,
however; when presented by the Board to the public, it seems to be an inside
conversation. It is difficult to
understand the discussion. You can
compare it to an “inside joke” and everyone else trying to decipher the
meaning. Fiscal responsibility should require that the Board very
definitively set out each item contained in the consent agenda and that it be
on the overhead projector or a handout. It not only is confusing to the public
when they don't know what the Board is specifically approving on the consent
agenda, it leaves open the possibility of approving items without proper
oversight, especially in the area of financials. For months the
Board indicated to the public they go to great lengths in review and assessment
of all financial transactions, yet the balance sheet has incorrectly
overstated the District's assets by more than $4.7 million dollars. Since there
has been no review in the public meetings, I assume that this has all happened
as a "consent agenda". This seems to indicate that there is not
a diligent review by the board member of this information. If the review
is as thorough as it should be for consent agenda items, seems to me
that one of the board members should have questioned that. It is
still incorrect for the third month in row, after approval of the March
financials, there is a serious lack of oversight in the district's record
keeping and negligence in transparency and accountability of the consent agenda
items.
3.
It
is understood that each “Board Meeting” is
not a “public hearing” and in no way did my March letter make that
implication. As a matter of fact, it
certainly is “the one time per month for the board of directors to discuss
important issues among themselves in a public setting”. Problem is that it is apparent that the
issues have already been discussed and decided upon prior to presentation to
the public, which does not allow for clarifying questions.
4.
Regarding
scolding and intimidation by Mr. Doney or any other member of the board, I am
not in any way intimidated. However; Mr.
Doney did scold in the form of a direct threat to stop the meeting when I
responded to an interruption from another member of the audience who was not
acting in a “professional” manner and completely off topic. Please do not use condescending language
implying that I was not “playing nice” in the setting to work toward a more
meaningful interchange”. Mr. Doney
should be more careful when discussing Board
Business at the post office or any other public setting. He was heard saying in December or January,
“I will make sure we have others at the evening meeting in February to counter
the “group of 8 naysayers”. Based on Mr.
Doney’s own words, it is apparent this person that so rudely interrupted me
about how wonderful you all are for conducting 4 evening meetings per year was
one of his “planted / staged” individuals.
Not acceptable and several in the audience saw through this ridiculous
tactic. As I have previously requested
and am doing it again, please consider conducting evening meetings, on the
minimum, at least every other month, if it is not possible to do it every
month. All other local, county and some
state agencies conduct evening meetings, so why is this Board not willing to
follow suit? I would also like to suggest
trainings on Open Meeting Laws and Roberts Rules of Order, the basics of
serving on a public board.
In
conclusion, it is my opinion and observation that this board is not “carrying
out their duties with focused, diligent efforts in the best interest of the
District.” The change you speak of is
this board’s lack of knowledge as you so stated that “each of you is actively
learning more and more about water & sewer systems individually and
collectively.” Board members should have
had some knowledge of water and sewer systems, public utilities operations,
Open Meeting Laws and Roberts Rules of Order prior to running for the positions
you hold. The refusal to create a smooth
transition between employees to contracted services and the refusal to learn
from the previous board and ask questions of them and the former employees was
a huge mistake on your part. It is
apparent that this board came in with their own agenda and have continually
blamed the previous board and employees for the shortcomings of the decisions
you all are making. As “elected / appointed public servants” this Board does
not seem to be “dedicated to improving all aspects of this district” because
you were unwilling to ask questions, admit mistakes and attempt to rectify the
financial irresponsibility created by such decisions.
Regards,
Jamie
Berube
Concerned
Public Customer
No comments:
Post a Comment