G.L.U.E. Member Report November 14, 2008

On Wednesday, November 12^th, the GRDA board of directors took action on the habitable structure issue. The end result was the approval of a motion by Director David Chernicky which called for a moratorium on any new construction or modification of existing structures and directed the GRDA staff to develop a set of rules and regulations specifically for these structures. And although the Tulsa World reported in their Thursday edition that Habitable Structures appeared to be in Grand Lake’s future, in reality, this is only the first step.

I plan on taking the same approach we utilized during the SMP process and to provide our recommendations as to how these new rules and regulations should look. The ones we will provide will use the ones currently in place on Lake Texoma, with some modifications, for application to Grand Lake. One of the backbones of the plan will be to recommend outsourcing to the private sector the electrical and plumbing inspections and associated negotiations with the public regarding the application of the rules. I also plan to incorporate a recommendation to include all aspects of interfacing with dock owners whose docks don’t meet current specifications and need attention. This private sector involvement could be funded by an increase in dock permit fees for habitable structures.

I see three major roadblocks with respect to this issue; One: the authority sees it as a pain if its personnel are to track and conduct all the associated activities required to monitor these types of docks. Two: The authority’s track record regarding the enforcement of rules is suspect at best. Three: even after an effective set of rules is developed and passed by the board, the feds will still have to approve the deal. It’s my personal belief that the public’s doubts about the GRDA’s ability to enforce these rules could be alleviated by use of the private sector and I also believe FERC would have more confidence in a contractor, who’s not distracted by other duties like making the almighty kilowatt, to get the job done.

The X factor in this entire issue is a demonstrated reluctance by the GRDA staff to submit anything to FERC which they perceive the federal agency might frown on. There might not be a rule or statute addressing a particular issue, but they certainly seem to be reluctant to challenge the agency on much of anything with the exception of what I’m going to call FERC’s annual commission check on GRDA activity. To their credit, they did modify the SMP to be more user friendly, but Grand Lakers would be hard pressed to find a single staff member who is confident that plan will be approved at FERC. If our country was dominated with this type of thinking, where would technological advancements like the internet and the cell phone be if the federal agency overseeing such things had been less than impressed by their importance? Fortunately, the current board is dominated by successful people who are not as reluctant to embrace change.

The assets committee meeting afforded a more than ample opportunity to discuss our position on this issue with its three members… Director Kerns, Director Chernicky and Director Spears. During the committee meeting, I elaborated on my thoughts about privatizing this endeavor and my opinion that the biggest objection from GRDA was the required manpower to handle the issue.

During the full board meeting, the Duck Creek Property Owners Association once again attempted to misinform the board with claims that habitable structures were already disallowed by an existing federal CFR and that didn’t want them. I informed the board, again, that the CFR they referred to did not address habitable structures according to my sources at FERC. That particular statute addresses mobile homes and cottages inside the project boundary and not structures constructed on docks. I also pointed out there was no one in attendance at this meeting even remotely qualified to speak for FERC.

Most of those in attendance, who were there to protest habitable structures, were most concerned about docks, enclosed or otherwise, in a state of disrepair. For those of you interested, I’ll have a more lengthy report on both meetings in next week’s Chronicle.

Cheers