Town Council Has Full Plate but Should Make Room for Dessert—Humble Pie

"Now it is a strange thing, but things that are good to have and days that are good to spend are soon told about, and not much to listen to; while things that are uncomfortable, palpitating, and even gruesome, may make a good tale, and take a deal of telling anyway." J.R.R. Tolkien

At the Town Council meeting last Wednesday, the council members worked long (3 hours), and stayed interested and engaged through many agenda items. Citizens made worthwhile comments. Several comments were in relation to an unfortunate situation where Kinesawa residents felt the water regulations which were imposed in 2022 unfairly raised their rates. Riley Campbell’s brief comments are on page 2, in full.

There were several moments during this meeting when I found myself thinking, “This is important—people should know about this.” But then the next topic would come up and feel just as significant. At a certain point I wondered how much information a reader can reasonably want to take in at once.

If these issues interest you—as they do me—I encourage you to watch or listen to the meeting yourself. And feel free to call me afterward; I’d like to hear your thoughts about Randy’s slide presentation (a ten-minute reiteration which took 30 minutes, about the renewable energy program in which Springdale is a participant), or Darci Carlson’s prudent call out, or Paul Zimmerman’s comments. Perhaps you had reactions to the ongoing water discussions at Kinesawa, the explanation of where RFPs “go” when issued, the continued but slowed-down progress on WUI fire-mitigation efforts, the Barker River Park less expansive Expansion (WHAAAAAT?), the Mayor’s snide and inaccurate comment about a Town Council candidate’s remark, or the newest modification in a loooooong list of changes to the Red Hawk housing agreement. I had, perhaps, overly strong reaction to these items and others, from lampposts, to rudeness when citizens tried to question, to user rates — so much so that I do not trust my opinions enough to publish them. Love to publish yours, however.

Now for the “uncomfortable, palpitating, and even gruesome,” at least the one we will be discussing.

[Reminder: a Request for Proposal (RFP) is a document used by a town to announce a project need, in this case, someone to develop workforce housing on a town-owned lot on Trapper Circle.]

Two months ago, on September 16, Town Council held a special meeting to decide whether to have a company, Switchpoint, partner with the town to put workforce housing on a lot on Trapper Circle owned by the town. Most of the citizens at the meeting wanted to issue an RFP, as did Pat Campbell on Council. Issuing an RFP would slow the process down, Mayor Bruno and Randy Aton argued. Their disdain for such an action was obvious and stated by both of them — repeatedly. They had 3 options Mayor Bruno summarized, “We can, we can step away from Switchpoint, tell them thanks for your willingness. 2. We can decide we want to move forward with them and try to come to some agreement that's acceptable to everybody. 3. Or we can decide to do another RFP and we can spend the time and and money.”

It appeared Randy and Barbara convinced Kyla and Jack, and the vote to go with Switchpoint was 4 to 1.

They are now, at the meeting this past Wednesday, after getting more information, issuing an RFP, (whiplash) which if they had done two months ago, would probably have yielded results by now. That’s okay. They goofed. But to come back to the table without a hint of chagrin seems disrespectful and oblivious.

There are many nuances here which are difficult to state. Just one for instance: when people said Switchpoint should be vetted both Randy and the Mayor said that’s what they were doing then, at that meeting. They gave no direction to anyone, Housing Committee or anyone else to vet Switchpoint, yet the memorandum on the agenda for Wednesday’s meeting associated with this item said the Housing Committee was directed to “vet Switchpoint thoroughly,” completely out of sync with what had actually happened at that meeting and what had specifically been stated by the Mayor and Randy Aton. (If you watch that September 16 meeting, time stamp 1:54:25 and 1:36:25). That wording, pretending housing committee was tasked with vetting Switchpoint, helps them save face now that they are backtracking on what they said at the previous meeting and having to issue an RFP, but it doesn’t help us trust them.

I don’t believe they need to “save face.” Don’t they know we’re actually rooting for them? But when they put us off, are not up front with us, that feels disrespectful. Not admitting a mistake seems disrespectful and shows a lack of trust in us, thus making it harder to trust them. This whole article would probably not exist if they had just said something like, “Pat, looks like you were right. We absolutely should’ve issued that RFP two months ago. But we get it now.” or whatever, but something, something real and human.

Further, it leaves this resident wondering why the about face? Having read the report from the Housing Committee, there was no real new information, definitely more specifics, yet nothing that screamed, to my uneducated ear, why they now felt they needed an RFP when they hadn’t felt that way before. It was basically the kind of stuff residents had brought up at the meeting two months ago. What is going on? I’m sorry. It feels like we’re not being told something.

I welcome another take on this. What am I missing? Or, what am I seeing that is not there? Mayor? Jack Burns?

Springdale Town Council: Hard working? Dedicated? Absolutely. Transparent? Humble? Perhaps a place to improve.