Community Recreation and Aquatic Center
Betsy: My thoughts exactly when I received the reminders. Why IS RMA spending MORE money to do this? We had our chance to vote and those who wanted to vote have already cast their ballot. Is the intent to keep this going long enough so the RMA Board will get their way? They've already extended the deadline. Enough already.
And on the agenda for tonight's RMA board meeting is a request for another extension to August 31. What's the point of that. It's already been a month. We've gotten mailed reminders - yes, another cost. Yet they say they have 1400 ballots back. Why are they trying to extend it another month? I agree, those that are going to vote have voted by now. This is so widely discussed for the last several years no one has forgotten about it. So what's up?
Why all the extensions. This has gotten a great deal of publicity. Those who care have sumbitted their ballots. Those who don't care have indicated their opinion by not submitting their ballots. Enough is enough!
Have those 1,400+ ballots that were received been counted?
Are the board members who voted for the SECOND 30-DAY EXTENSION waiting until the votes go their way? What if the national elections were run that way? "Let's just have a few more months of open ballot boxes until our issue/candidate is approved."
For how many more voting reminders will we pay printing and postage costs?
Carol Anderson has summarized the situation in a nutshell: an unsubmitted ballot is a silent vote: NO.
At the risk of being labeled a rabble rouser or impugning the reputation of various individuals, I would like to have answers to some questions prior to the opening of the Community Center Ballots. The questions may seem rude to some, but to many others, they are vital to determine how we reached this point and how much money has been spent to date on a project based on an informal survey of the residents.
So why am I asking these questions? The desire to construct the Community Center seems to have been entirely based on a questionnaire mailed to the residents asking if there was interest in constructing a Community Center. As I recall, it just had that single question with no way to vote no. I, like many others, did not return the questionnaire since a non-vote is normally considered to be a NO vote. Apparently based on the responses which, due to the nature of the questionnaire were YES, the RMA Board decided to move forward based upon those yes votes and to date has spent a unknown amount of our dues. Why the RMA Board did not allow all of the homeowners to vote prior to expending our dues is unknown, but based on their actions to date, appear to have decided that the Community Center must be forced upon a large number of reluctant residents.
The process of counting the ballots is also of great interest based on the determination of the RMA Board to force a costly and, again to many, an unrealistic determination of the construction and operating costs of the project, upon the homeowners in Rancho Murieta.
Those questions are:
-
How many questionnaires were mailed to determine interest in a Community Center?
-
How many questionnaires were returned with a YES vote?
-
Have any the individuals named in the RMA letter dated 6/1/12 and the members of the RMA Board, had or will have, any business or personal relationship with the firms and individuals that produced the building drawings, the several color mailers and the possible construction contractors.
-
How much money has been spent by the RMA Board re the Community Center project? That would include the cost of all mailings and contracts prior to the vote on the project.
-
Who, or what group, determined the projected operating costs of the Community Center?
-
Who will make up the initial assessment losses from the 200+ homeowners that were barred from voting on the project? That is a shortfall of over $240,000 (Two hundred and forty thousand dollars!) that will have to be made up by someone.
-
Will that $240,000 shortfall result in an additional assessment over and above the $1,200 already planned?
-
How many ballots were printed?
-
How many ballots were mailed?
-
Who will be present when the ballots are opened for counting?
Again, the above questions are not meant to impugn anyone's performance or reputation, but they are questions that are of interest to those of us that will be forced to pay an assessment of $1,200 and, most likely, additional assessments to cover the $240,000 plus shortfall, and dues that will be much greater than the proposed $12 per month.
For those interested in the current Community Center expenditures here they are:
Initial concept printing - $7,000 Competitive Bid won by Community Ink.
Site Appraisal - $3,000. Sole source award to Clark-Walcot based on a recommendation from a local land broker.
Conceptual Drawings - $5,000. Sole source award to Comstock Johnson Co based on a Committee members recommendation and their design work on the Catholic Church's multi-purpose room.
Ballot Printing - $6,838. Sole source to Supply Network. Committee says that they periodically check their prices but did not ask for other bids.
That is a total expenditure of over $23,000 of our dues and only $7,000 was spend via competitive bids. In other words, the Committee spent over $16,000 of our dues on sole source contracts based on Committee member recommendations!
The Committee said that the design award to Conceptual Drawings was because they had designed the Catholic Church's multi-purpose room. Be assured that the Church's multi-ourpose room has pass-through kitchen access and storage for tables and chairs. The Committee chose Conceptual Drawing because they were ONLY $5,000 and the others would have been more. There is no indication that any discussions took place with the other companies interested in the project. Well, as my ole daddy used to say: “You gets what you pays for,” and from my viewpoint, as well as posts from others, what we got was a dysfunctional design.
I have not received the data I requested on how many of the initial Community Center questionnaires were printed and how many were returned with a Yes vote. I have heard, but have no hard data, that less than 15% of the total questionnaires were in favor of the Community Center, and, I have not received any information as to how the operating costs were determined.
No matter what your perspective on this project is you should be appalled by what I have been hearing over the last few days culminating in the QUOTE someone made in a group of their friends who were all complaining about the project.
The quote was "I have been here since 1979 and I know what is best for every person in this neighborhood, and I will make sure that this thing does not pass no matter what the votes say."
This should make your skin crawl.
- « first
- ‹ previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
We have now received 2 reminders in the mail to vote on this topic. Has anyone else received them? Why is RMA spending the money to do this? I think there is enough talk about this topic that those that want to vote, have voted.