Vail Daily letter: Paralysis by analysis
In the movie “Finding Forrester,” Sean Connery’s character watched from his window as Bronx teenagers played basketball on a severely deteriorated court. Change the script of the movie from basketball to tennis and the director could not find a more suitable location to shoot than Eagle-Vail’s tennis facility. Don’t take my word. Go see for yourself. Years and years of neglect by previous boards have taken their toll.
At their June 30 meeting the Eagle-Vail Metro District Board claimed a fiduciary duty to pursue a GOCO grant to offset part of the tennis court cost, and in a 4-1 vote reneged on their earlier June 2 promise to rebuild the tennis courts this summer. The problem with their claim is two-fold. The word fiduciary means involving trust in acting on behalf of another. Thus their primary fiduciary duty is to rebuild a long neglected amenity which they can no longer credibly claim as a functioning amenity.
The second problem with their claim is that they are highly unlikely to receive a GOCO grant. So this is more properly viewed as a ploy to delay and gain time to think of some other objections, no matter how implausible such objection may turn out to be.
Another of their objections was that the tennis court plan was being rushed without adequate time and thought being invested. In this case the four who reneged were clearly speaking only for themselves as they had spent little if any time informing themselves. Three very competent, knowledgeable members of the combined board along with the director of parks and golf course maintenance worked long and hard on this project and came up with a very good workable plan that had the added advantage of being affordable and included of all things an actual bid from an experienced tennis court contractor. These men accomplished their task quickly, without hurrying.
Unfortunately all their hard work was for naught. Even though fixing the courts was a part of the most recent reserve study and was not an addition to the amount cited in that study, the four who reversed found the cost objectionable. In fact the total cost of the proposal was only slightly more than half the amount estimated in the reserve study.
So, it looks like paralysis by analysis will forever reign in Eagle-Vail. An ability to make decisions and implement them should be a prerequisite for board members. If they are unwilling or unable to do so, they should resign.