For those who may have dozed off or been away for the summer, SAC is an abbreviation for the Strategic Alternatives Committee. This ad hoc group was formed as the board was breaking for summer and the Mountain View boondoggle was put on hold. The 8 year, 40 million dollar (projected costs) were far below what has happened to construction costs and the project had little to no chance of fitting on the property. If you have been following, or attending, this committee's efforts have been Herculean in nature. They met nearly every Friday and the amount of ground they covered was awesome to watch and read. Especially when you consider that RCSC board's have historically taken summer months off for a very long time. Literally everything they have done is posted on the SAC pages of the RCSC website. You can find the link here but if you intend to be thorough, bring popcorn and a strong adult beverage, Their transparency has been stellar and their scope, very wide. Some have argued too wide' i'll leave that to others smarter than me to decide. In retrospect, many of us who have watched or participated have come to understand the new architect should have been invited far earlier than she was. Having said, it is what it is, and she has brought an air of legitimacy (or is credibility a better word?) and a sense of direction. She has been a terrific facilitator and has drilled down to what the needs (not wants) are at the Mountain View center. It's been an interesting process to watch from the sidelines, having no skin in the game; other than i want Sun City to continue to evolve and become better. That's why the 1999 action by the RCSC board was arguably the best decision ever made. The point of sale revenue was slated to rebuild aging amenities. I've written before the mantra has been the importance of compromise. It's such a powerful word unless or until those using it means it to be for everyone but them. I get it, human nature is such that many of us living here now just want what we want. That sense of community is almost a thing of the past. All of which leads me back to the header: "Is The SAC Failing?" Up until their last meeting and now the posts appearing on the SAC site that were drafted and posted just a few days ago, i thought the SAC was moving along nicely. The architect was given the charge to put together numbers/costs on either new buildings, refurbishing or a combination thereof. The fly in the ointment came when the architect called one of the chairs and said she wouldn't have anything until Oct 20. She told me when she (her firm) does proposals, they want and have a record of getting it right 95% of the time. The odd 5% is when they find snafus they weren't expecting. For those who don't know, cost overruns were almost standard operating procedure for RCSC PIf projects. At that last meeting, the three co-chairs stepped out of the room (to talk about her call), which triggered some angst. There's been a level of mistrust, some of it earned, some not. Rumors in Sun City are a way of life which is why i prefer being absolutely blunt and straight-forward. Having hidden agendas has proven all too often to be a bad business plan. The implosion at the last meeting triggered a flurry of activity, now posted on SAC. What i can guarantee from those actions is a further splintering of the committee and the community. The one proposal suggests the Performing Arts Theater (PAC) be gone and an indoor Pickleball venue replace it. Odd given the majority recommendation by the ad hoc group was for the PAC to be a Mountain View, even if it meant having to refurbish the existing auditorium (all subject to cost differences between new build versus renovation). Then suddenly along with the new proposal was a dozen or more recent letters to board members from pickleball players. They were well written, articulate and clearly prompted. Sorry to be cynical, but i have seen three emails from the pickleball club urging members to contact the board about more courts. Nope, nothing wrong with activism, i've just always had an aversion to the RCSC resolving problems at the expense of another clubs space. What's the saying? Taking from Peter to pay Paul. Be that as it may, it gets worse. Rumors (yes, i've heard them as well), have been flying that a co-chair or two has decided that the Mountain View project costs should be kept at 10 million dollars. I was one of those critics who saw the Option 2 fiasco as ludicrous on its face. Phase 3 was never going to be built and phase 1 and 2's costs were going to become something we couldn't afford. Kudos to the current board for the redirect. That said, any suggestion that we pinch pennies on the remodel is short-sighted and just as foolish. PIF was passed to address our future needs and doing so on the cheap is the mindset we're now trapped in. The SAC has asked time and time again: "how much money do we have for the project?" The answer, time and time again has been, "27 million dollars." If that wasn't the case, somebody should have had the balls to say otherwise. Furthermore, if the behind the scenes agenda was to not put the PAC there, rigorous honesty would have been appreciated. The point here is really, really simple and clear: If this board truly believes the membership's voices matter, then listening to them and not playing them along is essential. This process has been impressive, unless the end game was predetermined by a select few. Hell, that how we've done it for years and exactly how we got in trouble.
Appreciate your thoughts on the situation Bill. The 27 million for the project seems to me was not really emphasized until a couple weeks ago. I was told by a board member months ago to focus on what you want to see done as opposed to the amount to spend. And with about $8 million per year coming in for PIF the $27 million seems low to me. People involved are anxious. Best in my mind to wait and hear what the architect has to say. Again what are the numbers? Once that is known everyone needs to reflect on and discuss the best path forward. Some committee folks seem to want to decide before hearing numbers from the architect. I’m guessing things will be much more clear when numbers are presented by the architect. Or maybe numbers are already known?
I couldn't agree more Tom, i just wish everyone had taken a deep breath and waited until the 20th to start throwing bricks at one another.
