(March 3, 2016) The prospect of building bathrooms at White Horse Park became an unlikely prospect last Thursday, as the matter ignited debate during a public meeting in Ocean Pines.
During the general manager’s report, early into the morning meeting at the community center, Bob Thompson said he received four bids, and recommended the lowest offer, by Beach Construction Company, for $86,000.
The board earmarked $145,000 for the project last year. Thompson’s proposal included a 15 percent contingency fee, bringing the project estimate to $98,900.
Director Dave Stevens said the item was not on the original agenda, and that he only learned of it that morning. Because of that, he said he had lingering questions about exactly where the bathrooms would be located, how Ocean Pines was addressing potential stormwater concerns, and what would happen to the existing arts and crafts building.
Currently, visitors to the park have three options for bathrooms: the small arts and crafts building, the administration building, and the community center. All three require crossing streets with heavy traffic.
Stevens also challenged whether the bathrooms were actually in the budget, saying the board was told several items in last year’s document were “just placeholders.”
“There was no discussion amongst the board or approval of the concept of a White Horse Park [bathroom],” Stevens said. “This is an unacceptable way of presenting a proposal to the board … This is being slipped under the wire.”
Thompson said the board received late notice of the item because work in evaluating the bids was only finished during the previous day.
“All I’m doing it presenting a budgeted item for a spring project,” Thompson said. “I haven’t asked you to take approval action on this. I’ve presented it with our recommendation. You can certainly table it until next month.
“There’s nothing being slipped under the wire when it’s a budgeted item,” Thompson continued. “My role is … to provide proposals for budgeted items. This shouldn’t be an argument at all … if you don’t want to do it, don’t do it.”
Stevens moved to table to project, prompting an objection from Director Cheryl Jacobs.
“This is an item that’s been in the budget for a couple of years. This is an item that is overdue. This, to me, is another example of delay, delay, delay and do nothing with things in this community,” she said.
She went on to say the bathrooms addressed a safety concern, brought standards up to ADA compliance, and offered convenience.
“The safety concern is children running across the road, where cars are traveling, to get to the existing bathrooms,” she said. “When we have large crowds at movie nights, concerts, etc., those are the only bathrooms available to the people. So this is … very much needed.
“This has been in the budget. Let’s more forward and do this,” Jacobs continued. “We have a proposal, we’ve been told the purpose, we’ve been told the size, we’ve been told the cost … I don’t understand why there are still all these questions about it. I’m opposed to delaying this.”
Director Jack Collins said his objection was not so much with the content, but with “form and format.”
Stevens went a step further.
“Why, on the day of a meeting, did we get a proposal … why don’t we have it a month ago? Why don’t we have it six months ago?” Stevens said. “The fact of the matter is, it was slipped in this morning, not even put on the agenda … We don’t even have a formal written motion for this. Cheryl, there are ways that you do these things, and this isn’t even close to meeting the standard for how to do it.”
When Director Bill Cordwell noted that Thompson had only finished the proposal the day before, Stevens suggested that was intentional.
“He finished it last night because we would be put in exactly in this present situation,” he said. “Answer my question as to why it wasn’t done a month ago or two months ago?”
“We’re making a simple issue more challenging unnecessarily,” Thompson said. “I didn’t say I need a motion to support this today. I said I finished this last night. I’m giving it to you. It’s up to the board what to do with it.”
In the past, Thompson said, similar items have been tabled, allowing the directors to ask questions and make a formal vote via email.
“Instead, we want to go on attack mode,” Thompson said. “It’s almost to a point where it gets absurd … to think I would try to slide in a bathroom. I’m sliding it in? Like you won’t see it built when it’s done? That doesn’t even make sense.”
Director Tom Terry suggested the board follow Thompson’s suggestion and commit to an email vote by March 3, giving the directors a week to review the project. He added, “I personally do not want to have a special meeting over a bathroom.”
The motion to table the matter passed 5-1, with Jacobs opposed and Terry abstaining.
During the general manager’s report, early into the morning meeting at the community center, Bob Thompson said he received four bids, and recommended the lowest offer, by Beach Construction Company, for $86,000.
The board earmarked $145,000 for the project last year. Thompson’s proposal included a 15 percent contingency fee, bringing the project estimate to $98,900.
Director Dave Stevens said the item was not on the original agenda, and that he only learned of it that morning. Because of that, he said he had lingering questions about exactly where the bathrooms would be located, how Ocean Pines was addressing potential stormwater concerns, and what would happen to the existing arts and crafts building.
Currently, visitors to the park have three options for bathrooms: the small arts and crafts building, the administration building, and the community center. All three require crossing streets with heavy traffic.
Stevens also challenged whether the bathrooms were actually in the budget, saying the board was told several items in last year’s document were “just placeholders.”
“There was no discussion amongst the board or approval of the concept of a White Horse Park [bathroom],” Stevens said. “This is an unacceptable way of presenting a proposal to the board … This is being slipped under the wire.”
Thompson said the board received late notice of the item because work in evaluating the bids was only finished during the previous day.
“All I’m doing it presenting a budgeted item for a spring project,” Thompson said. “I haven’t asked you to take approval action on this. I’ve presented it with our recommendation. You can certainly table it until next month.
“There’s nothing being slipped under the wire when it’s a budgeted item,” Thompson continued. “My role is … to provide proposals for budgeted items. This shouldn’t be an argument at all … if you don’t want to do it, don’t do it.”
Stevens moved to table to project, prompting an objection from Director Cheryl Jacobs.
“This is an item that’s been in the budget for a couple of years. This is an item that is overdue. This, to me, is another example of delay, delay, delay and do nothing with things in this community,” she said.
She went on to say the bathrooms addressed a safety concern, brought standards up to ADA compliance, and offered convenience.
“The safety concern is children running across the road, where cars are traveling, to get to the existing bathrooms,” she said. “When we have large crowds at movie nights, concerts, etc., those are the only bathrooms available to the people. So this is … very much needed.
“This has been in the budget. Let’s more forward and do this,” Jacobs continued. “We have a proposal, we’ve been told the purpose, we’ve been told the size, we’ve been told the cost … I don’t understand why there are still all these questions about it. I’m opposed to delaying this.”
Director Jack Collins said his objection was not so much with the content, but with “form and format.”
Stevens went a step further.
“Why, on the day of a meeting, did we get a proposal … why don’t we have it a month ago? Why don’t we have it six months ago?” Stevens said. “The fact of the matter is, it was slipped in this morning, not even put on the agenda … We don’t even have a formal written motion for this. Cheryl, there are ways that you do these things, and this isn’t even close to meeting the standard for how to do it.”
When Director Bill Cordwell noted that Thompson had only finished the proposal the day before, Stevens suggested that was intentional.
“He finished it last night because we would be put in exactly in this present situation,” he said. “Answer my question as to why it wasn’t done a month ago or two months ago?”
“We’re making a simple issue more challenging unnecessarily,” Thompson said. “I didn’t say I need a motion to support this today. I said I finished this last night. I’m giving it to you. It’s up to the board what to do with it.”
In the past, Thompson said, similar items have been tabled, allowing the directors to ask questions and make a formal vote via email.
“Instead, we want to go on attack mode,” Thompson said. “It’s almost to a point where it gets absurd … to think I would try to slide in a bathroom. I’m sliding it in? Like you won’t see it built when it’s done? That doesn’t even make sense.”
Director Tom Terry suggested the board follow Thompson’s suggestion and commit to an email vote by March 3, giving the directors a week to review the project. He added, “I personally do not want to have a special meeting over a bathroom.”
The motion to table the matter passed 5-1, with Jacobs opposed and Terry abstaining.