Thank you for being one of our most loyal readers. Please consider supporting community journalism by subscribing.
I read with interest about the most recent South Granville Water and Sewer Authority meeting, especially a request from Stem to add another board member to represent that town (“SGWASA lobbying for federal funds,” March 13).
My question is: why? I have listened to every board meeting for the past four years, and not heard one suggestion or recommendation coming from the board that the executive director or engineers felt strong enough about to compel them to change the direction of plans already laid out.
In short, board members do not have the expertise required to actually navigate the tedious and technical details encompassed with the operation. The new director and finance director are very experienced in that regard.
None of the towns contribute any funds to the operation of SGWASA; therefore, why the need for paid representation? Customers actually fuel the SGWASA engine. Information is really all the board goes back to share with their respective towns, and information sharing has changed dramatically since the inception of the SGWASA board.
In the beginning, seven members may have been required; however, now information could be more efficiently shared via technology at a lower cost. (it currently costs customers $28K a year for board compensation. Emailing is free.)
It sounds good and hopeful to say new members will bring new perspectives; however, those new perspectives basically amount to little more than different questions being asked, which result in the same answers.
Finally, the pushback I received regarding eliminating the board was put to rest during the last board meeting when Attorney Jim Wrenn said “All participating jurisdictions would need to come together to address it.”
SGWASA has a long arduous road ahead of it, and becoming more efficient and cost effective should be at the top of its agenda. Eliminating the board would be a great start.