Information Pages

Tuesday, April 16, 2013

Request for Proposal Bidders Conference Review


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