Colette Marie Farkas
|
October 19, 2014
As Peter Lang made clear, it's incredulous that advocates for the "slate" believe voters are foolish enough to ignore the past and elect a slate just to maintain the status quo via institutional memory. Actual facts--in other letters and the Grand Jury Report--reveal repeating SLVWD mistakes is not something anyone would want repeated, other than those who profit from mismanagement.
Mark Meacham
|
October 18, 2014
Debra, I disagree we have "good discussions for four years" The Advisory Committee is only people for a merger. How can opposing views be presented/discussed? I have ask many of the same questions at every LAFCO meeting. Not one was answered. 1 Why are we replacing tanks with 10-20 years life on them? 2 Why do we need to pay for new meters as current SLVWD customes didn't. 3 How were the number created as I can not find matching budget/actual numbers? What will John Schneider and Merrie Schaller do if/when there is no merger/bond????? Why vote for some one who will only attend two meeting. What are they going to do???
Mark Meacham
|
October 18, 2014
Director Smallman, Name calling is not allowed in this forum. I will and have talked with you many times. I never called you names, even when I disagreed. If you have a problem with what people say address it.
Mark Meacham
|
October 18, 2014
Why is it wrong for a board member to research costs when that is the platform he ran on? Didn't the censure also try to stop Mr. Gott from participation on an 'anti-merger committee' as inappropriate? (- LCWD Meeting Minutes 10/18/11 Item 8A Motion by Smallman, seconded by Henry) Is this not what he ran for?
Marilyn Drozd
|
October 18, 2014
Very Very interesting!


We encourage your online comments in this public forum, but please keep them respectful and constructive. This is not a forum for personal attacks, libelous statements, profanity or racist slurs. Readers may report such inappropriate comments by e-mailing the editor at pbeditor@pressbanner.com.