RMA Secret Meetings

[Matthew]

Is this progressive?

Cable committee closes meeting to discuss consultant's report | RanchoMurieta.com -- Rancho Murieta news, homes, golf, forums and people

[Zebra Top]

I just read that Matt, and I am still composing my thoughts. WOW was an understatement.

[pingtheduck]

Hopefully, this nonsense will make it clear to most that the big issue is not cable TV. It's how the RMA conducts itself. We're not a fiefdom for crying out loud.

[Luke]

A couple of things jump out to me:

1. Closed or not - why was it not announced to the membership?

2. Why is the ad hoc cable committee discussing the Peregrine report? It seems to me that it should have gone to the Communications Committee based on what each committee is chartered to do.

3. Talk about pass the buck - Ted Ryon and Jim Moore can't even get on the same page. I actually tend to trust Jim's version more that it was Ted's idea, but Jim is the President of RMA and should have known better than put up with such shenanigans.

4. On the surface, Ted's assertion, "We don’t want the general public to know how much money it’s going to be,” because it will undercut bidding is ludicrous. Again, compare that to Jim's statement that the numbers are “very preliminary … just estimates.” Either way, the membership has the absolute right to know how much money we are spending or is proposed to be spent. This isn't the frickin' CIA budget for crying out loud (and even then I think the big numbers are available). It makes me highly suspicious that the number is far more than anticipated and someone is trying to hide it to ram it through.

5. Why not release the report now? I think it's critical for the members to see it before the budget is voted on? Again, what are they trying to hide?

6. Where was Wilbur in all of this? He's long espoused openness, and isn't even mentioned in the article. Is he no longer on the committee?

7. I feel bad for Nick Arther. Less than a month on the job and he is already being thrown under the bus.

I want to make it clear - the Peregrine recommendations may be the way to go with the system. However, the way the committee with tacit if not explicit support of the Board is going about its business is completely unacceptable. The ad hoc committee has outlived its usefulness and mission, and it needs to be dissolved as soon as possible.

Ted is the chair of the committee and he must take responsibility for the actions of his committee. His comments seem highly disingenuous to me, and his pass the buck, blame the GM statements are ridiculous for a committee chair. Man up, for goodness sake. When his actions here are coupled with his statements at the RMA meeting awhile back, it further cements in my mind that his thought process and decision-making is not what we need in an RMA Board member.

[MoonMan]

Makes sense to me that we would not want the dollar figure attached to the upgrades made public...that's like showing up to a car lot and saying "I have 50,000 in hand...and I'm looking to buy a 2004 Honda Civic."

however, I don't see how the scope of the work that needs to be done has to be held hostage...the folks bidding on the project will need that information to bid. AND, we should not withhold that information from anyone (IMO), unless we were selling it and wanted the buyer to do their own homework.

Either way, if we have any confidence in our consultant, and are "buying" what we bought (the opinion)...then I'm not certain where this secret shell game is helping anyone.

The one thing that was truly classic was "Jim told me to...I followed olders."

"No, it was Tom's idea."

c'mon, at least get your lies (or CYA) straight before you speak up. At least Jim said he'd do it differently next time...glad to see that, and hope to see it in action next time. Man enough to say he made a mistake, which we are all prone to do for sure.

[cchand]

What in the world is going on at RMA? Cable is not an issue I'm interested in, one way or the other. However, I am interested in freedom of the press and the public's right to know. TV? Not so much. The first amendment? You betcha

It started with a vote to water down the minutes. (Why bother the public with all that pesky information?) Then, Ms. Muldoon was asked to turn off her tape recorder. And now, RanchoMurieta.com is told to leave the room.
These are not executive sessions. And this is not the People's Republic of Murieta.

As a writer, and a member of this association, the anti press/public information stance RMA seems to be taking scares me. For goodness sake, we're not talking about top-secret, nuclear-arms negotiations; we're just talking about television. Television!

In the future, welcome the press with open arms. It's the right thing to do.

Candy Chand

[MoonMan]

Isn't Ted running for RMA Director?

This probably sunk those hopes...bad move on many levels.

[Zebra Top]

Originally Posted by Luke

A couple of things jump out to me:

1. Closed or not - why was it not announced to the membership?

2. Why is the ad hoc cable committee discussing the Peregrine report? It seems to me that it should have gone to the Communications Committee based on what each committee is chartered to do.

3. Talk about pass the buck - Ted Ryon and Jim Moore can't even get on the same page. I actually tend to trust Jim's version more that it was Ted's idea, but Jim is the President of RMA and should have known better than put up with such shenanigans.

4. On the surface, Ted's assertion, "We don’t want the general public to know how much money it’s going to be,” because it will undercut bidding is ludicrous. Again, compare that to Jim's statement that the numbers are “very preliminary … just estimates.” Either way, the membership has the absolute right to know how much money we are spending or is proposed to be spent. This isn't the frickin' CIA budget for crying out loud (and even then I think the big numbers are available). It makes me highly suspicious that the number is far more than anticipated and someone is trying to hide it to ram it through.

5. Why not release the report now? I think it's critical for the members to see it before the budget is voted on? Again, what are they trying to hide?

6. Where was Wilbur in all of this? He's long espoused openness, and isn't even mentioned in the article. Is he no longer on the committee?

7. I feel bad for Nick Arther. Less than a month on the job and he is already being thrown under the bus.

I want to make it clear - the Peregrine recommendations may be the way to go with the system. However, the way the committee with tacit if not explicit support of the Board is going about its business is completely unacceptable. The ad hoc committee has outlived its usefulness and mission, and it needs to be dissolved as soon as possible.

Ted is the chair of the committee and he must take responsibility for the actions of his committee. His comments seem highly disingenuous to me, and his pass the buck, blame the GM statements are ridiculous for a committee chair. Man up, for goodness sake. When his actions here are coupled with his statements at the RMA meeting awhile back, it further cements in my mind that his thought process and decision-making is not what we need in an RMA Board member.

Oh good, you took my thoughts right out of my head and put them here. I appreciate that.

These are the two points that I most want to reiterate:

2. Why is the ad hoc cable committee discussing the Peregrine report? It seems to me that it should have gone to the Communications Committee based on what each committee is chartered to do.

This can't be said strongly enough! Also, in my opinion the ad Hoc Committee's work was finished when their report was received by the Board.

5. Why not release the report now? I think it's critical for the members to see it before the budget is voted on? Again, what are they trying to hide?

Especially if they are going to discuss it at the meeting on the 20th. I know I would sure like to have the report in hand to know what they are discussing WHILE they are discussing it.

[Matthew]

Originally Posted by Zebra Top

Oh good, you took my thoughts right out of my head and put them here. I appreciate that.

I agree. Luke you covered all of my talking points very well.

[fonwallet]

It simply is a lack of Command Presence and Leadership at the Top Spot of RMA Board.

However, no one seems to ask what the scope was to even get to the perigrine report in the first place, thus I would request that first, then request a second survey to make sure perigrine is accurate and in the range. Then I would formulate a RFP. The RFP is detailing everything and figures would not be released, thus the argument given for closing the meeting was weak. I am of course assuming they are going to an RFP (which is the right thing) and not hand-selecting a friend or business partner to complete the work.

To recap:
1. Where is the scope to see what we requested of peregrine
2. Where is the perigrine report
3. Who is making up the RFP for these bids?
4. Where is the RFP

Fon-Out