Patron Everett Garrett was one of several who spoke out against the new BAN. After Union-North Board Attorney Kenneth Lukenbill read the resolution on the matter, Garrett objected to the use of the word “extended” in the wording. Lukenbill said the resolution was written by the bond attorneys of Ice Miller in Indianapolis and he felt the wording was correct.
Garrett contended that the proposed BAN was not an extension, but a new BAN.
Referring to the BAN proposal, Garrett said, “I am suggesting we only borrow enough money on this BAN loan to cover our indebtedness on the (current) BAN loan, and if you board members, superintendent, the architects and Skillman Corporation have enough faith in the present law suite ending in our favor, that all persons involved continue to work on the building project, no additional monies be spent until the major bonds are sold.”
He added, “Every dime we spend in interest on these BAN loans will end up coming out of the end project.”
Local resident George Moffett has a pending appeal with the Indiana Board of Tax Review. Until the matter is settled, the school corporation can not sell bonds to finance the project.
In the past, as he did Tuesday night, Moffett said, “I’m still moving forward. I’ve been in opposition to this project. I remain in opposition to this project.”
Despite the petition filed by Moffett for Judicial Review of the Final Determination of the Indiana Board of Tax Review concerning the project, the school board voted in October to authorize both Skillman Corporation and Hebard & Hebard to proceed with the first phase of the building plans.
According to figures compiled by Garrett, the corporation has already spent $650,480 on the project including architect fees, engineering-soil borings, attorney fees, road cut design, and bank monitoring fees.
Garrett was eventually gaveled down by Board President Larry Ort.
 Ort also shared his feelings on the monies that have been spent.
“This lawsuit has cost us $504,000. We can’t sell the bonds until it is settled,” he said.
Board Vice President Rob Swath-wood suggested that originally the board intended to sell the bonds at a time when they would have realized $800,000 in investment interest.
Referring to proceeding with the BAN, Ort said, “If you don’t have the dollars to work with, you have to shut the architects down. Do you want us to stop the project?”
Mark Dickson, also a board member said, “They are not going to continue to work for free.”
In the end, board member Don Berger cast the lone “no” vote to proceed with the BAN.
Berger said, “I think we need to sit down with these guys (architects and construction management firm) and see what they will do for us.”
The resolution to proceed with the $1,315,000 BAN that will mature in October of 2009 was passed.
Wayne Spaich reacted to the board’s vote saying, “We (opponents of the project) didn’t cost you guys anything. You put the cart before the horse. You guys should have waited until you had all of your ducks in a row. You’re going to bankrupt this school.”
The February board meetings for the Union-North Corporation are scheduled for Feb. 10 and Feb. 24.