The silence is deafening
Posted on Wednesday, July 2, 2008
There has been a great deal of talk, and some ink, on recent spending by the Bella Vista Property Owners Association.
There are those who believe the board members are wasting residents'assessments on such things as building renovations, new toilets on the golf courses and the hiring of a volunteer coordinator.
Whenever it appears the POA has done something wrong, or wasteful, people come out of the woodwork to take the board to task.
But where are those people when the board members actually save money - or at least don't spend it ?
Take, for instance, the recent decision to not overseed the golf courses next winter.
The process of overseeding involves spreading a shortlived rye grass on top of the dormant Bermuda, which allows for green fairways year-round and lets golfers go off the cart paths.
But overseeding costs money - tens of thousands of dollars initially - and could cost much more in the long run if the weeds that come with the process become too aggressive and take over the courses.
So, after listening to the experts - the association's very own maintenance manager and the opinions of United States Golf Association officials on the process - the board members voted not once, but twice, with the same result, to stop overseeding.
Of course, that decision isn't going to make everybody happy. It's doubtful any decison ever would.
The drawback to not overseeding is not allowing golf carts on the fairways while the Bermuda is springing back to life (typically Jan. 1 through mid-April ). Those tender chutes are just too fragile and cannot compete with the carts.
And then there are some people who will be inconvenienced by this. Two supporting board members admitted such, acknowledging it will impact their spouses as well because of their physical limitations.
While not overseeding doesn't automatically mean a carts-on-path policy will be necessary during this time period, more than likely it will be instituted.
In the end, a decision had to be made. And it was, with six of the eight directors voting to stop the process.
But very little has been said about this, either in print or through the proverbial grapevine.
If the board members are going to be criticized for spending your money, then in fairness, they should be recoginzed when they could have and didn't.
FEEDBACK:
Something to say about this topic? Submit a Letter to the Editor online