Incompetence is Rampant in SCA
At
Anthem Opinions we try to keep you entertained by giving you a wide range of
topics to read. Just a fun and
informative place! Periodically we will
give some opinions that we have on tough subjects. The end game is that we try
to give you the facts so you can make your own decisions on agreeing or not
agreeing with our thoughts. The
following post was sent anonymously and after reviewing, we decided to post to
keep you more informed. This post is a summary of the recent meeting with the
various management companies that took place on Monday 4/15/2013.
Who is more incompetent – RMI or the current SCA
board? It's hard to determine!
The short, so-called RFP bidders conference yesterday
morning went OK, but the afternoon session started out as a mess and then
became a disaster. A major embarrassment
to all who live in this community – and a clear message why we need a better
management company and a better board.
In the morning session Dan Snell introduced the SCA
Board members and Committee Chairs who were in attendance, and conducted the
meeting in a professional way. On the
head table with him was Jean Capillupo and Mike Carey, RFP work group board
liaisons. Both of who should have stayed
home. Dan was well organized, and he
clearly outlined the plans for the day. Then there was a break of about one and
a half hours for tours of the community and lunch.
The meeting was to reconvene at 1:00 PM. The collapse started almost immediately.
A planned slide presentation could not be started
because the projection equipment refused to work. Various RMI personnel,
consisting of two custodians and an assistant facilities manager, struggled and
struggled but made no progress. This was an important meeting with many
distinguished guests. Why in the world did RMI fail to check and assure the
equipment was operating properly? They
had well over an hour to do so. And,
they never thought to call in their IT personnel for help. This was a huge
embarrassment for the board, and a clear demonstration of why SCA needs a more
competent and professional management company – whomever that might be.
Dan Snell then tried to recover and keep the meeting
momentum going by opening the session where the bidders could ask
questions. But, it was the board’s turn
to demonstrate their incompetence and lack of professionalism. Oh boy, did they do that.
Board members fumbled and bungled and failed to answer
even basic questions.
For example, one bidder asked what are the goals of
the board for this year? A competent and
professional board would be proud to give a clean smooth answer. Our board had no
answers. Clearly demonstrating they have had no goals since the year
began, and do had not even think they need any –- a total lack of
professionalism and leadership. Finally
Jim Long said his goal was to implement an archaic and obsolete management
system – but offered no agenda on how this would aid the community. In addition, he mentioned that the board
would be working on their goals after the new board members were seated early
next month. Every one of the prospective
management companies picked up on the fact that it is already half way through
the year, and that made Jim look even more incompetent.
Another example: One bidder asked about how the board
desired IT operations – in house, at the management company headquarters or
some combination? Board members sat
there dumfounded. It seems they did not even know what IT operations were. Final answer – “We
will get back to you on that later in writing.”
Final example: A bidder asked what the board's
expectations are for retaining or not retaining existing staff personnel, and
was there a no-hire clause in their current contracts? If there were such a clause, would RMI waive
it? There was no meaningful response so
the bidder later asked the question again. Still no response. Final answer – “We
will get back to you on that later in writing.”
There were a number of other questions asked, and many
were not answered. The board just looked thoroughly incompetent. It would seem all the bidders could do was
leave with the valid impression SCA is a mess and really needs help. Of course
can anyone help if the board is so deficient they will not
accept help? And what makes them think they alone can vet any of the potential
management companies? I doubt they can,
but what are they doing about it? I have
heard no mention of hiring a firm, or maybe one of our residents, who specializes
in vetting such companies, nor have I heard any board member admit they are in
over their collective heads in this (and many other) matters. Is the fix in? Is vetting other management companies
unnecessary. Sadly, and especially after Mike Carey's
words, I think RMI is a shoe-in. It's
simply too much work for our board to deal with a change in management company. Besides a new
company might straighten out the mess, and find things our board, and past
boards, do not want the residents to know about.
Sad isn't it?
And I especially pity our residents, AND the various companies who
spent their time and money to come here and involve them in this convoluted
process. Please vote, and vote for Jim Mayfield and Kay
Frank. The incumbents do not deserve our
votes, and the fiasco yesterday proves it.
Submitted
Anonymously
No comments:
Post a Comment