Editor’s note: Peter Brown submitted the following thoughts following the SCA Board meeting of Thursday 11/19/2020
Restaurant Comments-November 19, 2020 Board Meeting
Director Perlstein (Restaurant Committee Chairman) stated his remarks regarding the restaurant at the beginning of the Board meeting as follows:
**The Restaurant Committee (RC) is still working on the Survey.
**The option of a Multi-purpose usage creates a problem for the RC as none of the Committee members have knowledge or experience regarding establishing a Multi-purpose space. This may require a separate Task Force or may need to be incorporated with the Strategic Planning Task Force.
**Cost of Survey is expected to be $5,000-$10,000
**RC met with SODEXO, a nationwide food service company; they assess the current restaurant space and going to have their designers prepare a plan for use of the space.
**Perlstein indicated no major decision has been made and they are waiting for a proposal from SODEXO. This company also does Grocery delivery; Coffee; Grab and Go.
Thereafter Director Linow and Anderson expressed excitement about the SODEXO option.
My thoughts:
1. After 6 ½ months the RC is just realizing they do not have the expertise to consider the multi-purpose usage. That is simply unacceptable and poor planning. Remember Perlstein indicates he was a Project Manager. Further, what expertise is needed to include in the survey.
2. The estimated cost of the survey is based on what? Where is the outline and objectives the RC intends to include in the survey? If your providing an estimate you must know what will be in the survey including the multipurpose room.
3. What was the established objective of the RC? I understood it was to prepare and distribute a survey to SCA residents to determine if any food service was wanted by the community. If so, why is the RC wasting time with SODEXO? The RC focus should be on completing the survey! Why waste SODEXO time also?
4. No major decision was made! There is no decision to be made until the survey is completed.
5. Perlstein did not address his August 27 Board comments that the survey would be completed in one or two months (October 27 at the latest). He also did not give a new estimated completion date.
6. My previous letter and comments were read at the end of the meeting; Perlstein did not respond to my specific questions and concerns. Sandy Seddon, after the Board was silent indicated she would reach out to “Peter” and determine if Perlstein’s earlier comments resolved his questions. Obviously, his comments answered nothing and added more questions and concerns. I will advise Ms. Seddon accordingly.
Peter Brown