LETTERS EDITOR TO THE

What happened to Lake Bella Vista area?

My daughter and I recently went for a walk around Lake Bella Vista. What we found was a lake that is almost not there. The weeds between the trail and U.S. 71 are more than 10 feet tall in spots and the lake is very low. As we continued our walk across the main dam, we stopped and looked at the small amount of water flowing through it. What got to the both of us was the smell. It almost smelled like an outhouse. That smell was never present when the lake was up.

In 1915, William S. Baker, a Presbyterian minister and his wife, dammed Little Sugar Creek to make a swimming and recreational area. Since then, the dam has fallen on bad times because of flooding over the past few years. Bentonville was given a grant this past year of $3.7 million dollars from which the Federal Emergency Management Agency would cover 75 percent and the Arkansas Emergency Management Department would cover 12.5 percent to cover most of the expense of rebuilding the dam. That would leave 12.5 percent. Is this not enough to start or even mow the grass? What’s up?

I know people are fighting to put Little Sugar Creek back to it original state. My question is, does anyone know what it looked like 101 years ago? I know when I used to walk the lake before, you could pause by the bank and spot a largemouth bass once in a while. Not now — you cannot get that close to the water in most spots. The water you can get close to is so full of algae and goose feces I doubt anything much can live there. Is this what the save Little Sugar Creek people are trying to create? I would hope not.

The trail around Lake Bella Vista is in great shape and they do keep the grass mowed about six to eight feet from it. It is still a great trail to walk, but the beauty of the lake has long gone away.

Let’s bring it back to what it was, in one form or the other. Michael Holmquest Bella Vista

Care and Share

Many, many thanks to all the wonderful parishioners of St. Bernard Catholic Church who worked so hard at Care & Share in Gravette during our two weeks in August. It was a very successful two weeks and you all did a bang-up job. Thanks again. We will have a week in October, 4-8, so we may be calling again. We appreciate all you do

May God bless all of you. Marie Lutsky and Joan Holler Bella Vista

Ballot will divide and conquer

After attending a Rejuvenation Plan meeting led by Bella Vista chief operating office Tom Judson, I was concerned about how the proposed assessment election is to be conducted.

For the following discussion, improved lot owners will be referred to as “residents” and unimproved lot owners will be referred to as “non-residents.”

Tom Judson was contacted to confirm that the ballot will basically contain two measures to be voted upon.

Note that 19,000 of the 38,000 ballots, using rounded numbers, sent must be returned for the election to be valid.

Measure 1: Increase assessments of residents by $9. Yes or No (Circle One)

Measure 2: Increase assessments of non-residents by $3. Yes or No (Circle One)

There are approximately 12,000 resident lots and approximately 26,000non-resident lots in Bella Vista.

As you can see, 12,000 (32 percent) of the ballots will be sent to residents, while 26,000 (68 percent) will be sent to non-residents. With the non-residents having over twice (2.16 times, to be exact) as many votes as the residents, it is evident that if only 19,000 of the 26,000 ballots sent to the non-residents are returned, the non-residents will have complete control of the assessment election. With the incentive of keeping non-resident assessment fees at their current levels and increasing the assessment fees of residents, it is expected that ballots of non-residents will be returned in higher numbers than in previous elections.

Please understand that if all residents of the Village vote “No” on Measure 1 or do not return their ballots, it will have absolutely no effect on the outcome of the election. The non-residents will decide what the residents will pay in assessment fees.

When an election creates the possibility that one class of property owners can decide what is required of the other class of property owners it is, at a minimum, unethical.

And that is exactly what this election does, and it is unethical. Even proposing such an election makes one wonder about the make-up of the current board.

Using this divide-and-conquer approach to accomplish an assessment increase seems to violate the trust that residents and non-residents have placed in the current Board of Directors, not to mention the precedent that would be set.

It is believed that all Bella Vista lot owners would be better served if the Board would undertake a course of action to alter the Covenants, whereby only residents would vote on issues pertaining to residents only and only non-residents would vote on issues pertaining to non-residents only, thus eliminating the divide-and-conquer potential in future elections. Jack Bartlett Bentonville

Ballot plan quite unfair

The format of the upcoming ballot needs to be addressed, as I consider it to be quite unfair to the POA residents.

The format of the vote is two separate assessment questions; one is yes/no for a $9 increase for residents (water metered lot) and second is a yes/no for a $3 increase for non-metered lots. This format essentially divides Class A voters into two subcategories (legal?). The number of votes in each subcategory, according to the POA membership webpage, is 26,000 residents and 38,000 property owners (non-metered lots).

With these facts at hand, it is readily apparent to me that if the Quorum of 50 percent were met, the $9 increase would likely pass and the $3 increase would likely fail. Not fair to us homeowners. I agree that an assessment increase is necessary and certainly overdue, but in a fair manner for all class A voters. Richard E. Francis Bella Vista

Thanks from the Library Friends

As president of the Bella Vista Public Library Friends of the Library, I would like to thank you all for your support to the library during our recent Sock Hop at Riordan Hall.

Special thanks goes to the POA for allowing us to use Riordan Hall for our dance and to Kathy, the manager there, and her staff for all their help in getting the room ready for our dancers. Extra special thanks to Steve at Allen’s Food Market who donated all the pop and ice cream we used as well as Arvest Bank for donating all the popcorn.

Thanks for the great music of the Rockin’ Roads Band.

The Sock Hop could not be put together without the help of it’s board members. Thanks to all who worked from making signs, publicity, decorating (thanks to Leah for the new decorations you gave us) and manning the food table.

The money raised from our dance will be used to support the ongoing drive to expand our library’s physical space. Anyone who comes to the library can see that we really need to have more space for the library’s many activities. Janel Stryker President BVPL Friends of the Library

Fact check of Leffler’s letter

Regarding Chuck Leffler’s letter in the Aug. 17, Weekly Vista:

• The ARK-MO land sale would have yielded a one-time $700,000 gain. The trade-off was to forever lose a potentially more valuable future asset. The Rejuvenation Plan calls for $26 million in costs through 2021. Selling the ARK-MO land would have contributed less than 3 percent of that.

• Chuck suggests changing our annual greens fee program would generate up to $1 million annually. Any rational analyses, using actual figures, shows that conclusion to be absurd.

• The POA transferred police, fire, streets, and trash to the city. Those things had a total budget of about $6 million. However, the POA collected $1.7 million in revenue to offset the trash expense, leaving a net savings of $4.3 million. Chuck either selectively chooses not to include the revenue to get to the net expense, or previous statements he seems to recall neglected to include it.

• Chuck suggests that temporarily closing a golf course on a rotating basis would save at least $1 million a year. This has been studied extensively. Whether closed or open during a given week, golf courses must be mowed and maintained. There will be no meaningful cost savings.

• He arbitrarily claims the POA has kept more than $2 million in annual excess overhead and payroll. He offers no analysis or rationale for that statement. He adds all these things to come up with a large number that is based on a series of imaginary or fabricated items and conclusions. The numbers and conclusions he quotes look very similar to those Stephen McKee has been publishing and communicating. We have reviewed those extensively and found them to be invalid. Ron Stratton POA Vice Chairman Bella Vista

Vote “No” on assessment

First, let me assure all readers that I would gladly vote YES to increase my POA assessment to $33 a month if it applied to ALL Bella Vista POA property owners. Unfortunately, that’s not the case. The proposed increase is $9 (37.5 percent to $33) for the resident property owners and only $3 (18.75 percent to $19) for the nonresidents. Let me review a little history for the newcomers to Bella Vista. In 2001, following several unsuccessful attempts to increase the POA assessments that were always voted down by the non-residents, the POA Board decided to throw the non-residents a bone and established the “two-tier” assessment schedule, which the non-residents approved overwhelmingly. The logic was that if you don’t live here, you don’t get any benefit from the police, fire protection and other municipal services that the residents benefit from and, therefore, should pay less monthly assessment.

However, now that Bella Vista incorporated many years ago, the municipal services are paid for with turnback funds from various taxes that the nonresidents don’t pay. The POA dues now are used only for the recreational amenities that are equally available to residents and nonresidents alike. So what justification is there today for the nonresidents to pay so much less than those of us who live here? The fact that they don’t live here is their choice, and the residents should not be penalized for it.

Why not eliminate the two-tier assessment now that it is no longer justifiable and put a standard POA assessment of maybe $27 per month to a vote and see if the” Yes” votes of the residents, following an aggressive local campaign, would overwhelm the “No” votes from the nonresidents? And just so you don’t think I’m totally unreasonable, I just may agree to vote “Yes” if the proposed $9 a month increase would apply to ALL property owners equally. Paul VandenBerge Bella Vista

A loud mess

I spent some time with the television today Listening to pundits shout out what they have to say

They speak loud and fast To get the word that is last And assume that the loudest wins the day I spent some time with the television today Listening to pundits play the games that they play They think loud is best To overwhelm the guest With no regard for the rudeness display I spent some time with the television today Trying to separate the curds from the whey But I have to confess It was such a loud mess I couldn’t tell the weeds from the hay I spent some time with the television today Trying to keep my attention from going astray Two pundits with screams Were rattling the beams So I decided to just go away Gerald Elsbury Bella Vista

Invisible walkers dangerous

To the guy I narrowly avoided on the curve coming up Lambeth at 7 a.m. Monday, Aug. 22: If you are going to continue to walk down Lambeth at that time of the morning, please step off the pavement when you see a car approaching, and please don’t wear a dark green T-shirt that blends right into the background of the trees behind you.

I am thankful I barely saw you in time to swerve before the oncoming vehicle reached us. Xyta Lucas Bella Vista