message board home
Next
3/31/2016 3:58:15 PM
 
Reply
or ReplyNewSubject
Section 5: OPA Board Subject: Money is No Object Msg# 945490
|
||||||
|
Joe,
I watched the meeting and was very disturbed with the demeanor of some of the sitting board members when association members were giving public comment. It appeared that some directors could have cared less about the comments. It appeared that all of the directors knew how they were going to vote before they entered the meeting. Some directors, as I perceived it, were downright rude. As an example when one gentleman was speaking, Tom Terry never even looked up and continued to write something the whole time the man was speaking. It appears to me that the meeting was a waste of time and the board majority will give our GM whatever he wants whenever he asks for it. Compromise and listening to alternatives seem to be missing. When Dave Stevens asked where the difference in numbers came from and Tom Terry emphatically said "right here, here are the numbers." and they turned out to not be dollar figures but line item numbers, a red flag should have gone up. I totally agree with your letter to the BOD. This whole bid process in phases and the dollar numbers just don't add up. John Cacchio |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
For reference, the above message is a reply to a message where: I sent the following to the Board of Directors: During the board meeting on Tuesday the question was asked about how the $150,000 number in Tom Terry’s motion was determined. At some point the GM said the $150,000 came about due to the difference in two proposals he received for doing Phase One. Terra Firma submitted a bid of $207,000; Rayne’s submitted a bid of $142,370. The GM recommended the $207,000 bid in his report last week. At the meeting on Tuesday this week, the GM said the $150,000 in the Terry motion was derived by comparing the two bids he submitted to the board last week. The GM said specifically that the difference in the two bids was due to one contractor including construction of four pickleball courts and the other not including construction of the four pickleball courts. It appears to me the GM’s statement to the board on Tuesday was incorrect. Page 3 of The RFP Analysis submitted by the GM to the board last week clearly indicates both bids include construction of the four pickleball courts. The only difference is that Raynes did not include, per the analysis, “fencing, painting, posts, nets not specified.” Beyond that, one must wonder if the GM even asked if those items were included and just not specified. Then the analysis references the initial RFP with the high price, and make it sound like a positive that Terra Firma had joined with Harkins and that costs for the new bid in Phase 1 were in line with that original high proposal. Based on the GM’s language in the analysis report, one must also wonder if the analysis was properly and professionally done, and whether or not Raynes would have been the better choice. I believe the board acted in a manner inconsistent with its fiduciary responsibility.
Joe Reynolds
|
| Calendar |
Special Board Meeting - Board Room
11/25/2024 - 7:00 P.M. 3 days or less away! |
|
OPA Board Meeting - Golf Clubhouse
12/21/2024 - 9:00 A.M. |
|
OPA Board Meeting - Golf Clubhouse
1/25/2025 - 9: A.M. |
|
OPA Board Meeting - Golf Clubhouse
2/22/2025 - 9:00 A.M. |
|
OPA Board Meeting - Golf Clubhouse
3/29/2025 - 9:00 A.M. |