Well, let's just spitball here a little. Suppose the answer is NO. What then?

See, this is where my Tier 3 education lets me down. It says What is the viability, not  Is the memberships ability......viable?

So No is not an answer to the question, the question may well not have an answer without specifying some other requirements to be met to define what is viable.  Now there a good reason for a follow on contract if ever there was one.

See, here is where a Tier 1 institution, or someone with an 8th grade parochial education, would have asked the question properly, or at least if they asked it improperly, that would have defined the proper way to ask the question because they come from a Tier 1 institution.

And then there is:

2. Is the OPA practicing the fiscal responsibility of assuring operational & capital improvement costs are viable and/or affordable by the membership?

My ignorance is unbounded here, but again someone would have to define "fiscal responsibility" before this question has an answer independent of whether or not the OPA has such a responsibility. Again, give me a Tier 1 institution that would have identified the OPA responsibilities before asking if the OPA meets them. Another follow on contract is in view.

Did any of the BoD read this thing before they voted? If someone out there is on the BoD and has read it, maybe they can clear this up for us lower, slower members of the OPA.