WECRD board should resign

Dear editor:

I found the WECRD's letter to the community in the July 22, 2009, Mountain Home News to be amusing, less than factual and hardly an honest representation of the facts to the people within this taxing district.

I feel it is (in their words) "important to address comments, errors, and omissions" found in their (the WECRD'S) letter entitled "WECRD board refutes charges."

First, their letter responded to very little and merely attempted to cloud the facts and divert attention from what is really going on within this organization.

Second, this board does not know the "facts" or "truth" based on their own documents and information, which makes it difficult, at best, to "refute" much of anything based on factual information.

Community members may address the WECRD Board, as time allows, once monthly. The public is "allowed" to ask questions, make suggestions, etc. and questions will be responded to at some point in the future, if at all.

This is the same board that for several months REFUSED to allow public comment at any of their meetings. It is stated that "we offer to hear public comment." Funny, I thought the goal of the WECRD Board was to listen and hear the public -- the same public who supports the WECRD through the hundreds of thousands of dollars in tax revenue each year. I have asked this board many questions in the last year and seldom obtain a response, much less a response based on factual, accurate information. Anyone who looks at recent WECRD Board meeting minutes can see that no public comments are included, which would lead the public to believe that there are no issues or problems.

The WECRD has stated, on the record, that they (the WECRD Board) has worked with the YMCA since project inception, yet your letter would lead readers to believe that this is a new development. So, which is it? I realize the formal relationship is recent, however the WECRD has been told by the YMCA for many, many years what steps needed to be taken to construct this facility. The WECRD Board chose not to act on the advice of the experts.

So, what makes this time different from the last? Oh yes! You have entered into a contract now with the YMCA (as of the July 22, 2009, WECRD Board Meeting) that anyone can back out of as long as you are not in the middle of a "phase" within the proposed process that the YMCA has outlined. So, what protects the citizens within this taxing district from another year or 18 months of bad decisions because the WECRD Board does not agree with the direction of the CLDC and the YMCA?

Oh yes, the WECRD Board made a motion to comply with the CLDC findings and abide by the recommendations of the CLDC -- a motion that can also be reversed.

Also, why is a WECRD Board member involved in this process (Jana Borgholthaus will serve as liaison and will be present at meetings) if this is supposed to be "steered" solely by the community and their ideas/recommendations? Kind of like the fox in the chicken coop.

The WECRD states that the 2010 Federal Appropriations Application was "completed and submitted on Feb. 9, 2009." Megan in Congressman Simpson's office states these documents were received and entered into their system on Feb. 15, 2009. When I went in to view the 2010 documents I made an information request and told the WECRD that I wanted to see ALL documents that were submitted. After a review of the copies I obtained, it was clear that some information was missing. I have been back two times since to obtain what the WECRD represents as the "complete" package.

Why is the "complete" package not in the binder with all of the other information which is stated to be a "complete" representation of the appropriation requests? Why does a member of the public have to police all that this group does and hound them for what are considered to be public information documents? Why represent a portion of these documents as the "complete" package when these same documents clearly reference other sources used/included?

The WECRD states: "Renewable Energy Resources is a term used as an illustration in the FY 2008 Federal Appropriations "packet" to convey the WECRD's interest in a sustainable facility by using our natural resources efficiently." Not exactly, WECRD Board! This is what is stated directly from the 2008 Application at page 8: "Renewable Energy Resources will implement a geo-exchange system in the building construction saving 50%-75% in operational heating/cooling costs." This is not an "illustration" as you would like to have people believe. This is a VERY clear statement (prepared by both Betty and Mollie who are educators) that you have a company to do the work and fully intend to use a geo-exchange system in this facility. This company is also listed in the 2010 Application as a "local business community project supporter." I would like to state once again that I have talked to Mark Hiddleston and he had no knowledge of his company being listed in the 2008 document above and I believe that to be the truth.

Finally, the WECRD Board stated in their letter the following inaccurate information: "DOD is now advertising reduced or free YMCA memberships through MilitaryOneSource.com for local YMCAs."

Ms. Sellers, here is the truth regarding that program. I obtained the information from their web location and also in a phone call with them. The bottom line is that this program was developed primarily for the families of deployed Guard/Reserve Members who do not have access to base recreation facilities. Use of the YMCA facilities for these select individuals is for a limited period of time and is funded with tax dollars through the DOD. The family Support Center at MHAFB acknowledged that this program is not applicable in our community. You should have checked your facts before representing such a misleading tidbit of information in the paper.

I will once again ask for the resignation of all three WECRD Board members based on your collective inability to represent the truth and be open with the public. Resign in order to save this project if you really want to see something built. Prove to this community that you are really the community minded individuals you claim to be. Please RESIGN!

Tracy Lauric