| OCR Text |
Show AVW&SD rescinds con? roc? tfo Air Village wafer system The Ashley Valley Water and Sewer District (AVW&SD) board rescinded a contract signed by the board Nov. 7, to assume ownership of the Air Village Hills water system. The rescission came after the board listened to the concerns of 50 residents present at the Dec. 6 meeting of the board Tempers began to flare and personal attacks, prevalent during the entire course of the eathering, erupted when only 20 of 50 persons could crowd into the small meeting room of the board in the Uintah Engineering Building. "You will speak in order or I will call the sheriff to haul you off, if I have to," Board Chairman Lyle McKeachnie warned a resident after an outburst. McKeachnie is also the major owner of the Air Village Hills water system. At first it appeared that McKeachnie would not let the meeting be moved to a larger room or even hear the reasons why the residents were present at the meeting, but after the arrival of Ray Nash, district clerk, and corrections to the minutes were made, the board moved the meeting to another larger room. The regular agenda was set aside to hear the concerns of the persons per-sons present. Prior to changing rooms, Gilmer Chivers, district board member, requested that the minutes of the last meeting (Nov. 7) be changed to read that he "strongly" opposed the acquiring of the Air Village water system instead of just "opposed" as the minutes read and he requested a clarification of when the board went into executive session it discussed the Air Village water system instead of just "subdivision" water system as written in the minutes. After the meeting was moved to a larger room, each person was allowed five minutes to voice their reason for being at the meeting. Dan Coney took the floor and requested that Gilmer Chivers read a letter from McKeachnie which listed 17 objections Chivers had to acquiring the Air Village water system. Among his objections were concerns about the construction of the system, whether the pipes were deep enough, sufficient valves, adequate storage, ample pressure, and quality of water. One resident asked what McKeachnie was getting out of the deal and the reply was 100 connections valued at about $1300 each. It was argued whether it would cost McKeachnie more to install the fnnnpptions than he would gain from the 1300 per connection. It was brought to light that the board had approved an 11-page contract to acquire ownership of the water system after studying the contract for only one hour prior to the meeting. Most of the residents showed concern because they couldn't understand any of the contract which they had read. Robert Tui ner, board member, stated that he thought acquiring the water system was right. He explained that the board had decided, except for Chivers, that they would let the developers put in a water system and the district would later buy the system with the developer regaining all the money invested in the system. "There's going to be inequalities somewhere," Turner said. "Everybody somewhere along the line will get the short end, but maybe the next time he won't. We've got to get into the water business and we've got to start somewhere," he concluded. Also present at tne meeting were persons to be hooked onto the Air Village water system and given water for the price of a water rnnnecMon, if tne uistrict assumed uwnersnip ol Hie Air Village system. "Why can't we get water'; ' Mrs. William Holfetz asked the board members. Chivers suggested they pay for a line to be built to deliver them the water. Chivers moved to hold the Air Village contract in abeyance until the new board members took office. Results of the election were already in from the voting that day. The motion was overruled by a tie breaking vote by McKeachnie. After McKeachnie was questioned why he could vote when he abstained on previous action of the board on the matter, he said it didn't matter if the water system was in the district or not and that he would vote for a motion to rescind the contract. Owen Spiers, board member, made a motion to rescind the contract until it could be studied further. The motion carried unanimously. |
