Lots
of unhappy things happening in Rochester city government recently. There is
definitely a lot of backroom dealing that needs to be brought into the light,
and lots to pray for. A few references:
Handling
of how to use "the Castle" (former Senior Center/Armory):
Here
is a FB entry from Dave Beal on 8/25/16. Unfortunately, the screenshots that are referenced here just don't seem to work, but I am still posting as much as I can from the thread.
Look:
1. The council president waited months after the deadline to finally bring the
proposals for the re-use of the Armory before the Committee of the Whole
2. Then, after those presentations, the council president attempted to include
another proposal 16 weeks after the deadline.
3. Then, after raising their questions and concerns during the presentation of
the proposals, the majority of the council declined offers from proponents to
meet with them to answer their questions and address their concerns. The one
council member who was not present at the proposal presentations and was later
concern by his "unanswered questions" also refused the opportunity to
meet with proponents.
4. Then, some council members complained in their discussion of the proposals
that they did not have sufficient information or answers to questions they
admitted they had not asked.
5. Now we learn today that information favorable to the RACC/ACI proposal was
withheld from the council by the city administrator and the mayor during COW
deliberations that included the RACC/ACI proposal.
At this point, one wonders if it is enough for the council to say they'll need
to review their process and do better next time. Sure it would be nice if once
they set down a process they would respect it. What would be even nicer is if
they treated the people they have been elected to serve with some respect as
well. A great deal more respect.
Or, maybe they have in place exactly the process they want and it is working
just as they intend it to work.
As for the interminable, solemn invocation of "due diligence"...well,
if you can't manage it in a year maybe you can't manage it. And you certainly
can't manage it by making it up as you go along and hiding important data.
"Due diligence" does mean research and analysis of a company or
organization done in preparation for a business transaction. But you know what
it also means: the care that a reasonable person exercises to avoid harm to
other persons or their property. That sort of due diligence is overdue.
No surprise city/county planning is a broken system. We're struggling with
basic good government, simple decency, and fair play. There is not an ox in
this city that hasn't been gored. Bloody hell.
Comments
Raymond Schmitz To repeat, why did they not refer to
proposals to administrators for evaluation and comment! That would be due
diligence in any other transaction with the city. Had they done so perhaps they
would have the information to base a decision on. Incidentally what were the
grounds for the motion to reject the proposals?
Unlike · Reply · 3 · 9 hrs
Dave Beal Raymond, no joke, these were the
grounds: There's stuff we don't know that we didn't ask about and there's stuff
we didn't ask about that we didn't find out.
Unlike · Reply · 2 · 8 hrs
Raymond Schmitz Beginning to wonder if this and
planning, and library and senior center new building, are surfacing serious and
deep issues in city administration? That is if the top officials are not
monitoring and helping council avoid these issues why not?
Unlike · Reply · 1 · 6 hrs
Dave Beal It is a wonder that's for sure.
Like · Reply · 2 hrs
Jessica Schmitt Raymond Schmitz Bingo!
Like · Reply · 1 hr
Donny Rowles What if it's not a failed process - but forces behind the
scenes already know what they want to be done with the Armory, and the Library
- and under their direction the council is being told to remain
"impotent" on these issues?
Like · Reply · 36 mins
Raymond Schmitz Mr. Beal, is it time to move to your
discussion group for this. Sounds to me as though there is public support to be
stoked?
Like · Reply · 27 mins
And
yet another Dave Beal FB entry:
(entered
on 8/25, around 8 am)
It
it now clear that Webb Management Services, the consultant contracted by the
Chateau Theatre Re-use Task Force, has issued a report. That report contains at
least three recommendations. #3 was read at the recent COW meeting. #2 was made
public yesterday.
It's
time we see the whole report with the data and research supporting those
recommendations. This 2nd recommendation has a direct bearing on a matter
currently before the council and needs to become part of that deliberative
process. Those council members from whom it was withheld should see it. The
public whose interests it addresses should see it. Any claims that it cannot
yet be made public were rendered invalid when with the cherry picking of
recommendations to share at COW.
The
report needs to be released today.
Report
from outside consultants on city/county planning department/process:
Compass
Report findings:
(Note
that this is only a draft at this point)
This just makes my blood boil. I though the
Rochester
Arts and Culture Collaborative (link included so you can like their
Facebook page) did an great job preparing and presenting a proposal to
keep the local arts scene vibrant in Downtown Rochester. It seemed a number of
times there were games being played behind the scenes to attempt to derail the
proposal.
This was a great project, not only for the Arts community, but also for the
numerous cultural groups that were looking for a home. I am saddened by any
vision of Rochester or DMC that does not keep our vibrant arts &
cultures downtown, I am saddened for the politics that are clearly going on
behind the scenes.
I find it particularly interesting that no staff person ever evaluated or
make recommendations on the 2 proposals. As it turns out the Mayor and city
administrator withheld some pretty important information from the council.
First here is what the city administrator read, at first I thought that
someone had told him, but he claims he did this on his own.
More importantly here is what was withheld by the Mayor and Administrator:
Does this change the discussion? I think so.
I received verification from the city administrator that both he and the
Mayor were aware of this. The city administrator acknowledged he should have
shared Recommendation #2. Mark Bilderback who had the report, had not yet read
it. I think he was also irritated.
So basically arts community, I think Nick & I are pretty supportive,
Sandra seemed willing to consider this… Get 4 votes, 5 if the mayor vetoes this.
I know many of you in the RACC are disappointed of angry, so take action, write
letters, contact elected officials. Don’t lose this opportunity. You have
assembled an incredible team. I have been and will continue to be there for
you.
Posted by mwojcik @ 5:16 pm
Another development that is not acceptable to the neighborhood:
http://www.postbulletin.com/news/local/planning-commission-torn-on-alatus-development/article_e7492ab8-145a-52da-84de-746ef05a7e33.html
More
Dave Beal:
Labels: consultant recommendations ignored, disposition of the Castle, DMC Discovery Square, Rochester problems
