County Water Authority Annual Meeting June 26

Notice of BCWA Annual Meeting with agenda

The Bristol County Water Authority is having its annual meeting on Tuesday, June 26 in the boardroom at 450 Child St., Warren.

The Board of Directors Monthly Meeting will be held at 6 p.m.; the agenda is as follows:

A. Call to Order
B. Approval of Minutes
C. Reports to the Board
1. Executive Directors Report
2. Financial Report
D. Old Business
1. FY12 Audit
2. Peterson/Morse Allegations – Executive Director Report
E. New Business
1. Strategic Planning Workshop
2. Pension Information
F. Committee Meetings
1. Audit Finance Committee Recommendations
1. Quarterly Charge-Offs
2. Revision of Purchasing/Bid Limits
2. Engineering Committee Recommendations
1. Request Regarding Fire Hydrant at Bristol Fire & Rescue Headquarters
G. Schedule of Meetings
H. Adjournment

The Annual Meeting for election of officers will be held at 6:30pm.

I. Call to Order.
II. Nomination and Election of Officers
Chairman (Requires a minimum of six affirmative votes of the Board members). Secretary (Requires a minimum of five affirmative votes of the Board members). Treasurer (Requires a minimum of five affirmative votes of the Board members). Assistant Secretary (Requires a minimum of five affirmative votes of the Board members).
III. Appointment of Vice Chairman by the Chairman.
IV. Designation of the Committees of the Board of Directors by the Chairman.
V. Appointment of committee members and selection of committee chairs by the Chairman.
VI. Schedule of Future Meetings.
VII. Adjournment to regular meeting.

Please try to attend this important meeting.

If you are unable to make it the meeting will be shown on Cox TV on Sunday and and on Full Channel on Tuesday.  It will also be available on line at vimeo.com.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Gary Morse June 22, 2012 at 12:35 PM
Pertaining to an item on the agenda, on June 12, 2012, I received from BCWA's Executive Director, Pam Marchand, a surprising and unsolicited email which was copied to BCWA's attorney, Sandra Mack asking for my help to identify a certain land transaction. This transaction involved a 1996 BCWA eminent domain land taking as first reported in a May 29, 2012 “Bristol-Warren Patch” story, “Important BCWA Election for Chairman". submitted by Marina Peterson. Ms. Marchand's email reads: Dear Mr. Morse, We have been having some difficulty in trying to discover which parcel of property purchased by the BCWA under the RIWRB Water Quality Protection Program is being questioned through the "Patch" blogs. I have been researching land purchases in 1996, but I still do not have ANY specific information. It was brought to my attention that you mentioned a parcel that was purchased (by another) on January 31, 1996, for $280,000. Is this Assessors Plat 20, Lot 2? If not, could you please let me know which parcel you are referencing? I replied to Ms. Marchand the following day (next post as there was too many characters to fit in this post).
Gary Morse June 22, 2012 at 12:41 PM
garymm (continued) Dear Ms. Marchand, Regarding your June 12, 2012 email asking for my help to identify a certain land transaction that involved a 1996 BCWA eminent domain land taking as first reported in a May 29, 2012 “Bristol-Warren Patch” story, “Important BCWA Election for Chairman", I respond in as follows: I recognize that you are new in this BCWA position, but Ms. Mack is not. I found this request odd since for over two years, residents have been lobbying unsuccessfully for an independent audit of spending under the Bristol County Water Supply Act of 1993 (Act). There is no record that the tens of millions in taxpayer and rate payer spending under the Act has ever been audited. You stated that you were reading the “Patch” blogs in an attempt to gain information about the transaction in question. Needless to say, BCWA's reliance on information from internet blogs suggests that rate payers are more reliable than BCWA's own internal record keeping. I had hoped that BCWA would have conducted a swift, thorough, and independent investigation based on internal records in order to establish the full chain of the 1996 events. I imagined BCWA would use their records together with Town of Warren property records, and the “institutional knowledge” held by Ms. Mack, Director Klepper and the legacy members of the BCWA Board.
Gary Morse June 22, 2012 at 12:43 PM
garymm continued - The recently released 2012 BCWA Annual Report shows that the public has been correct about numerous BCWA controversies. Yet BCWA continues to ignore the need for even one independent audit of money spent under the Act. Clearly, Director Klepper should have the institutional knowledge about the land deal. He signed the paperwork. BCWA's legal counsel would have a certain level of involvement. Perhaps the due diligence, including a prior title search, would have revealed pertinent information. Maybe Ms. Mack prepared, or at least reviewed, the paperwork for signatures. Surely Ms. Mack and Mr. Klepper are privy to the reasons they felt they had to "take" the land the way they did. And what record of expenses substantiates the premium paid? BCWA now appears to be stuck, allegedly because the institution cannot even begin to locate the records related to the property transactions in question. BCWA has yet to get out of the chute on their internal investigation. I went to the Warren Town Hall to see exactly how long it takes to research land transactions. My summary follows: Log onto a free search terminal in the town hall (1 minute); search on the keyword "Bristol County Water Authority" with the date range "1996" (2 minutes); click on the documents (2 minutes); print the only recorded BCWA eminent domain land taking document in 1996 (1 minute). Total time: 6 minutes.
Gary Morse June 22, 2012 at 12:44 PM
garymm continued - The ultimate question in this matter appears to be whether Director Klepper, in his capacity as Board Secretary, carried out his duties in the manner of a "prudent man" being the standard of care required. There is no judge. There is no jury. There are simply questions by the BCWA Board as to whether or not any prior actions should prevent Director Klepper from serving as the new Chairman. The Act requires that for a period of at least 3 years after the final payment, all records must be kept readily available for inspection. We are two weeks into this investigation, and BCWA would have us believe that they are struggling to even begin to establish which property it was that they took by eminent domain in 1996. That alone is sufficient to question Director Klepper's prior service as BCWA Secretary.
Nard Glimrod June 22, 2012 at 01:20 PM
Gary: It's quite disturbing that the Director is sending unsolicited emails to the general public looking for info related to an ongoing (or soon-to-be launched) investigation. Make no mistake about it, I'm not a fan of the BCWA. While your 10-paragraph response is amusing, you didn't answer or even address the simple question in her email (i.e., "Is this Assessors Plat 20, Lot 2?"). I think a different response might have been: "Since the BCWA's counsel has been copied on this email, and since this matter is or soon will be the subject of a formal investigation, I do not believe it would be appropriate for me as a ratepayer to address your question. I am in no way qualified professionally to offer a definitive or binding answer concerning the exact parcel of land in question. However, if you go to the Warren Town Hall, I am sure you can confirm within minutes the exact property that was purchased by the BCWA on 12/31/96. I know, because I did this myself." I am suggesting this because the BCWA would appear to be in a difficult position on this issue. I wouldn't want anyone to give them the ability to say "We asked for specific details from the very same people who have been making allegations in online forums, yet they declined to answer or even address the one question we asked." They could write that sentence now in a news article and it would be 100% accurate. This would not be terribly helpful to a just cause. My $0.02.
Gary Morse June 22, 2012 at 01:37 PM
Nard, Your point is well taken. The issue on the table is whether or not BCWA, under Secretary Klepper, ever kept records of these important matters. The Act requires these records be kept readily available for an audit, even up to today (it requires 3 years after the final payment is made). A land taking by eminent domain is serious business, especially when the biggest polluter of the Kickemuit River was a mere 700 feet away from the intake pipe at the water treatment plant, yet there is no record that this polluter was ever considered for an eminent domain taking. Thus reconstruction of records is part of the issue. I think BCWA has some explaining to the Board of Directors, and saying someone else provided the records is not part of that explanation. Keep in mind that we've all been drinking this stuff for no good reason since water from the Scituate was available for less money. If you read the 2012 BCWA Annual report, you will find that they have finally shut down this polluted water source. It should have been done over a decade ago.
Gary Morse June 22, 2012 at 01:39 PM
Nard, I forgot to mention, thanks for posting. I was hoping someone would ask the question.
Jack Baillargeron June 22, 2012 at 03:50 PM
It has always amazed me that when a question is asked of the BCWA, they never have the answer, can't locate the paper work, it was lost etc. It is their job to find the paperwork in question period. (they have the damn records for Christ sake). If this is the continued policy of the BCWA to depend upon the ratepayers to supply and research the information, (which I am sure we are all getting sick of), perhaps they should be paid the just compensation that Jannitto always says mack is getting and deserves. Remember Delise Stating that the records in the basement are enormous and you can’t find anything, because of the cost it would take to have employees go through them. Mr. Klepper did not keep records of what he signed or what? I mean really does this sound like anyway to even run a lemonade state to teach a child basics of business. I am also amazed the new Director would not demand from either Klepper or Mack that they produce this BCWA transaction record. They used my ratepayer money did they not? Was it Gary who paid for the BCWA out of the goodness of his ratepayer heart and kept a receipt? Seriously this is disgusting smoke and mirrors yet again.
Jack Baillargeron June 22, 2012 at 03:56 PM
On another note, one wonders if under the "Freedom of information act", (notice I did not use its abbreviation FOIA so you will not have to Email me for it), If a rate payer requested this, would the BCWA or town not have to produce it? To the director, that is why you have employees, to do the work for the ratepayers, not the ratepayers do the work for the BCWA. What the heck are these employees paid for any way. I thought Ratepayers paid them to work. My mistake I guess. geeze
Jack Baillargeron June 22, 2012 at 03:58 PM
sorry "lemonade stand", though this State is a lemon also ;-}
Bristol County Anonymous June 25, 2012 at 07:26 PM
BCWA directors will nominate & vote for a new chairman... ...and then the new chairman will choose the new vice-chairman. We hear that Jannitto has informed the other directors that he will nominate Klepper to be the new chairman. Let’s hope the new directors stand up to Jannitto, and Klepper and do what's right for the public. We need honesty, integrity and new ideas at BCWA; not a continuation of the Jannitto / Klepper regime. It’s in the public’s best interest for two of the new directors to be chairman and vice-chairman. Let’s hope the new directors will make every effort to elect someone other than Mr. Klepper or Mr. Jannitto. A fresh-start with new leadership is badly needed at BCWA.
Manifold Witness June 25, 2012 at 11:27 PM
So, yes, it is just as we said – BCWA did not have “nominations” on their Annual Meeting agenda last month. So they had to delay the elections and blame it on the bloggers. But really it’s because “nominations” was not on the agenda. Okay, so this time they put “nominations” on the June 26, 2012 agenda: http://sos.ri.gov/documents/publicinfo/omdocs/notices/3883/2012/127381.pdf Good for them! What do they pay Mrs. Mack the big bucks for if they have to read this stuff in the comments? How embarrassing for Mrs. Mack, Mrs. Marchand, Chairman Jannitto & Mr. Klepper - they didn’t know how to do a proper agenda for the BCWA Annual Meeting. All that expensive old supposed "institutional knowledge" and they can't get the agenda right for the Annual Meeting. And Klepper wants to be our BCWA Chairman? What a disgrace. See comments about the lack of “nominations” on the agenda: http://barrington.patch.com/articles/allegation-derails-bcwa-election http://www.eastbayri.com/news/2012/may/31/bcwa-board-vote-delayed-after-online-post/
DownTown June 26, 2012 at 01:31 AM
Since she read this blog perhaps Ms Marchand can take a look into who paid for Ferry Rd in Bristol to be dug up for the new feed for the Roger Williams water tower. Why the water tower was accepted as a gift to the BCWA (ratepayers will be on the hook for maintenance forever)? Why and how legally did Ms Mack represent both the Water company and RWU in the negotiation? That transaction should be dissolved just because of that conflict of interest. There are hundreds of customers in Bristol and Warren with unacceptable water pressure yet the BCWA does not build a new feed for them nor do they maintain their water tanks and equipment for them as they will be for RWU. The former head of the BCWA said that people should not have built homes where they did but putting a University at the far end of the water supply with thousands of students, hundreds of toilets and showers plus a swimming pool and they not only don't have a problem with it but they pay the bills too.
Jack Baillargeron June 26, 2012 at 04:49 AM
When in the course of BCWA events, it is best to take information from the BCWA and its legal Council with a grain of salt or grain treatment chemical, which ever cost more. It is striking that the BCWA seems to have not changed much and that the new director is out of the loop on some things if the Director is depending on the board to get records. I still do not understand what the administrative employees do, if they are not capable of locating a record. Why is legal always involved in records that are public? Hint! (How about a Whistle Blower there BCWA employees)? Why after all this time can the Board or the BCWA not even get a simple meeting agenda right? Is there something at the BCWA that does not allow them to do it well millions of other government employees around the country seem to accomplish it, with out running to a lawyer. Where exactly is the efficiency and fiscal responsibility at? Were we not told, that it will take time? It has been quite some time, far as I can tell. Has the transparency happen yet? Because it sure still looks opaque to me.
DownTown June 26, 2012 at 03:45 PM
Just to add, if ratepayers did pay for the new pipe & construction on Ferry Rd which solely benefited RWU how much did ratepayers put out for that? Thank you Ms Marchand in advance for getting to the bottom of this.
marina peterson June 26, 2012 at 05:34 PM
The agenda for the Board of Directors Meeting has been revised. Looks like they plan to cover a lot of ground before the nomination and election of officers. I hope that there is a good turnout by concerned ratepayers. This is an important meeting. Revised Agenda for 6:00pm meeting: AGENDA A. Call to Order B. Approval of Minutes C. Reports to the Board 1. Executive Directors Report 2. Financial Report – Presentation – M. Champagne D. Old Business 1. FY12 Audit – Presentation - Cayer Caccia, LLP 2. Peterson/Morse Allegations – Executive Directors Report 3. RFP for Legal Services – Presentation – Director Klepper (Vote Requested) 4. Status of Rate Review - RFP E. New Business 1. Strategic Planning Workshop – Presentation – Director Allio 2. Pension Information – Presentation – Benefit Management Inc. F. Committee Meetings 1. Audit Finance Committee Recommendations 1. Quarterly Charge-Offs (Vote Requested) 2. Revision of Purchasing/Bid Limits (Vote Requested) 2. Engineering Committee Recommendations 1. Request Regarding Fire Hydrant at Bristol Fire & Rescue Headquarters G. Schedule of Meetings H. Adjournment
marina peterson June 27, 2012 at 02:44 AM
Just got home.. Allen Klepper is Chairman, Bill Gosselin, Vice-Chairman, Frank Sylvia Treasurer, and Kevin Fitta Secretary...
Jack Baillargeron June 27, 2012 at 03:15 AM
I really hate to say I told you so, so I won't ;-}. More proof that status quo is the "Deal of the day at the BCWA."
Jack Baillargeron June 27, 2012 at 03:19 AM
"Six months later, a bill for the first piece of property being the subdivision land was submitted to the RI Water Resources Board for payment, but marked up by around $90K from the purchase price in January.” Now that’s a pretty piece of profit there, for a BCWA secretary to sign off on and not have a clue about it, so it could be questioned at the time, which it obviously was not. Wonder if these guys trained at the "Shilling School" of raping the taxpayers? As is par for the course in R.I. the victims get trashed (Ratepayers & Taxpayers) well the perpetrator’s (Secretary Klepper) gets a pass and then put in a possible position tonight, (Hopefully Not) to yet again commit Ratepayer/Taxpayer rape, under the guise of (I don’t look at everything I sign excuse) with the blessing of the BCWA board and the Past “legend in his own mind” BCWA Chairman Jannetto, picking his own personal successor. Zero votes should go to this piece of work Klepper of the Status quo. I hope the board members see that, and the ones still not replaced, (But need To Be) better wake up and get some integrity by not voting for the new “Legend in his own mind” Klepper. Dissolve this BCWA abortion today; it is an affront to any person with half a brain and not worth attempts to make it right. The infection is to deep, time to amputate and turn it into an extended pumping station for Providence water.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something