![]() ![]() ![]() Section 5: OPA Board Subject: Swim/Racquet Marina Msg# 156043
|
||||||
Thanks to you and Nancy for the defense. I am not sure I deserve the flattery. I didn't mean to imply any conclusion but to provide a sample of the speculation about motives likely when there are persistent questions about actions (e.g., Why spend $25,000. on a design if you don't intend to proceed with construction?) without very satisfying answers. If I had said "The lack of widely accepted answers invites unfavorable speculation." would the point have been as clear? Yours were the only answers to my other questions. Should I conclude that there is no disagreement with an assertion that the addition of the marina slips will add nothing to the sales value of my house? Is it also universally accepted that the slip charge will not cover all the costs of construction, maintenance, operation, and management of the marina? If so, then, as I think you have pointed out, it is the financial interest of only about 57 to 100 homeowners to have the added marina space. Also (my main point), it is in the net financial interest of about 7900 to 7943 homeowners to NOT have the marina expansion even after including any effect on housing values. You have implied this, but it bears emphasis. It is not a matter of being absolutely neutral for 98% of the population. |
||||||
|
||||||
For reference, the above message is a reply to a message where: David can certainly defend himself. However as I said to Joe Schanno - I don't believe he intended to make an accusation. He was trying to say that all the talk about the marina might lead some people to a conclusion. It's just the way some might intrepret his comment. Read what he actually wrote. I'm sure, in retrospect, he would think of a different way of phrasing the comment. From my limited experience with David, he is a gentleman. |
Calendar |
![]() 5/24/2025 - 9:00 A.M. |
![]() 6/28/2025 - 9:00 A.M. |
![]() 7/26/2025 - 9:00 A.M. |
![]() 8/9/2025 - 9:00 A.M. |