9/22/23 SAC Meeting

WOWSA!!

 

More, please!!
Video likely won’t post until Tuesday…

 

I’m not exactly sure what happened. Listened to the meeting via phone. No numbers from architect until 10/20/23 so meetings are cancelled till then. You probably gotta see it to believe it. God Bless the committee and the people on it!

 

The one thing I will comment on was the fact that the meeting, as far as Robert's Rules and parliamentary procedure is concerned, it was heading off the rails!!!! But when nobody challenges the motions being made, they pass regardless of whether they violate the rules or not and life goes on!

 

Bump.

 

Confirmed in today’s Sun City AZ Week:
Friday, September 29 at 2pm: Strategic Alternatives Committee (SAC) - CANCELLED - Grand Center Sonoran Room. Next SAC Meeting will be held on Friday, October 20, 2023. NOTE: The Oakmont SAC Lab remains open to review additional materials/resources.

Waiting, somewhat patiently, to view the meeting video!!

 

Do you suppose reality will set in by the time they reconvene or will they continue to chase a pipe dream?

 

It was an interesting meeting for sure. With no architect in attendance, the goal was to review their efforts to date. Anyone who has agonizingly watched online or attended knows how repetitive this process has been with more than ample opportunity given to those pleading their case(s). I get it, i truly do. That said, the architect has done a pretty good job of drilling down the wants, to a more better fit list of needs.

The review went sideways when the three co-chair board members asked for a break halfway through the 2 hour meeting. Members didn't want to stop, but they did so the co-chairs could talk outside the room. That set the stage for the upheaval. When they finally returned (more than 10 minutes), an announcement was made the architect wouldn't have usable numbers until Oct 20. Apparently that had been communicated to one of the board members and he felt the need to share it with his co-chairs first.

It begged the question; why not just tell us all that at the beginning of the meeting? And worse yet; why did you need a break to tell the the other two chairs? By this time, the crowd was getting restless and an ad hoc committee member expressed her umbrage. She was dismayed at how the process was playing out and that she (and others) felt the co-chairs were subverting the direction to what they wanted. Ouch.

The good news is it stayed civil. The bad news is the group is splintered and fighting to stay on task. A motion was made to preclude the co-chair board members from voting...it failed. Another motion was made to allow a committee member to lead the coming meetings...it passed. More comments surfaced when it was revealed the rumors were running amuck about some of the 27 million dollars allocated for MV being high jacked and used for other PIF projects. No attribution as to who is attempting to do that, but apparently there was a different power point slide that originally been slated to be posted that suggested that be the case.

It was pulled to stop the meeting turning into a shit show. Suffice to say, in my opinion, a wise move. I've long been a fan of the idea of member involvement. The problem with elected boards is when you ask people to get involved, you then need to listen to their answers...irrespective of your personal wants. Stay tuned, as the committee has directed the board members to tell the architect to focus on Mountain View and leave Lakeview out of the discussion.

 

Thank YOU, Bill!
Tom T was right, “WOWSA!”

 

Sometimes video is available Monday afternoon on YouTube. Can hardly wait to read your reaction.

 

Transparency is obviously lacking.

 

In what way?

 

For one, the slide which wasn’t shown. Not being upfront with the architect not having the “usable” numbers. Agendas not followed or changed while meeting is being run. Numerous votes taken at spur of the moment. Poor use of voting procedure. Laurel and Hardy did a similar routine. Remember “who is on first.”

 

Abbott and Costello

 

good one FYI, Lol and not to the video!

 

It's good to see that video's are once again allowed in a post!

What a nice surprise!

 

We've spent 15 plus years running from the process of self-governance. I guess in a perfect world, everything would be executed perfectly. Returning to a more involved process is challenging and the reason it changed was because they wanted total control AND they didn't want to waste time asking members what they wanted.

If you think i am wrong, simply rewind to the point in 2022 (June to be exact) when the now departed board foisted the Mountain View Option 2 remodel on us all and then waived the second reading for fear members would be angry come September. Then when pushed, they argued the 40-50 million dollar Taj Mahal was a result of two town hall meetings back in 2018. You can watch them still (they are posted on the SAC site) and there is no resemblance to the nonsense they shoved down our throats.

So no, sorry Tom, the differences from then and now is night and day. The mere fact a member was allowed to get up and speak her mind on Friday speaks volumes to how much different this new board is. It's a work in progress and one i am delighted to watch as it unfolds...imperfect as it is.

 

Got it Bill. But I’m not comparing the last meeting to past years, though past years would prove my point. Bill you mentioned in earlier post about the slide being removed. That is a lack of transparency. And the take charge person at the meeting Friday, mentioned all the closed door politicking going on. Is this closed door conversing happening? Sounds like it. Not a big problem if it is, just let us know.

 

Bump.

 

VIDEO OF MEETING!
IT’S HERE! READY??
https://www.youtube.com/@suncityaz7348