Does the data and trends support the cost to build a Sun City theater?

I think the crux of the dilemma has surfaced in this thread. All recreational activities are a "want" vying for resources. Walking trails, Theaters, Indoor Pickleball Courts, and countless other options vie for their share of the resource pie. So the question is how do you reliably determine what is wanted by the majority of members (at what cost) when the majority of members do not participate in the decision making process. I argue that some expertly applied metrics or matrix should be applied through a consistent well vetted process. The metrics or matrix should align with the Mission Vision and Values so that decisions are made that support their achievement. This could be bolstered by data from objective online surveys that give some indication of the majority view.

I believe the way long term decision making really happens is special interest groups lobby or stack the board (or committees) and the board then decides what to spend money on. The group that controls the board controls management and has the power of the purse so to say. Not much different than Congress but without, we hope, the back door money.

In the last meeting Kat Fimmel said the members want to build a theater. I certainly know about 100 members from the Player's club that want a theater. Darla Aikens, a prospective Board member and member of the Players club wants to build a theater. Anita Borski, a current board member indicated she wants to give the Player's club a theater. I have heard others say they want to build a theater. On the flip side, I have heard many say a theater is a very expensive amenity that is designed to be underused. Others argue that the data (member activity hours provided) simply doesn't justify the cost. Still others point out that the trend in live entertainment venues is very negative and has been so for some time. Admittedly, I side with the analytical side of the aisle and not the emotional side.

So what? The troublesome part to me is the lack of focus and rationale in the decision making process. I think what the membership wants to hear are the options available and the pros and cons of each option. Just a thought or two...

 

My response will be about as popular as dog poo on a bun with onions and ketchup. Everyone hated Ann Randall, however she got herself out there and talked to the people. She had a lot of engagement like her or not. I think Tom McClain??? worked with her. I have offered before and will offer again but the hate is probably too great to make a difference. We need to get out, door to door, with information about what is happening in this community. Cost would be minimal, small packets of info. The folks I used to work with would let me use their does everything copier if I brought a ream of paper........or just sit behind the keyboard and type the same crap over and over.

 

I am in favor of an improved theater. Perhaps this is not the time with all of the other projects. However a multipurpose room with retractable seating in the Mountain View renovation might be the most favorable. If a larger or better theater is needed in the future, it could be incorporated with the Lakeview rebuild which is many, many years away. The MV multipurpose room could be used for other activities. Sounds like the best compromise to me.

 

I'm a BIG proponent for a flat floor with retractable seating! Not only can the space then be utilized by others, like the current use by the dog club, but I like what others have suggested and that's the ability to set-up tables and chairs and have a caterer come in and hold a dinner theater event! Can't do that without a flat floor!

Lake View is so far down the road it's not even worth worrying about it yet. Plus, I think it's safe to assume that the date set for its renovations will be pushed down the road just like the Mountain View rehab was! Engineering studies, Ad Hoc committees, Town Halls, proposals, blueprints, permits, etc. etc. not to mention, how many different Boards will be involved in the process? Every time the Board changed, so did the proposals for Mountain View, and as far as I know, nobody has yet to do a structural analysis on the building?!?!?!?

Does anybody know what the original date for the MV renovation was actually scheduled for?

 

It’s amazing how people try and justify having two libraries because they aren’t willing to travel that far but let’s convert a golf course. Oh and how much do you suppose it will cost in court to defend that decision when the surrounding homeowners sue?

 

I agree!

 

On balance, I am in favor of the flat floor retractable seating option to improve the theater at Mountainview because it allows much more flexibility in use of the building when not in use for the player's club. Anita Borski and I disagreed on this point and the elements the board approved does not allow consideration of retractable seating. I hope the Board gives the architect the freedom to consider this option. It is much more cost effective.