Radisson Board’s answers to YMCA questions unsatisfactory

The following questions and answers were published in the Dec. 2 edition of Radisson’s Reflections by the Radisson Community Association. The questions were brought up during the Nov. 21 Radisson Board of Directors meeting and the answers are the BOD’s responses. Radisson resident James Kocik has added a “comments” section to address what he believes are unsatisfactory answers to the questions posed.

Had I asked the questions, I would have been more than disappointed in your answers and would now seriously question why the BOD, extemporaneously at the meeting, could not have given such overly simple “talking point” type answers. Possibly, they do not think well on their feet, or more realistically, it was a simple matter of stifling open, honest and public discussion. Why is it that your “vague and un-detailed” answers to serious questions and concerns of Radisson property owners seem to lack the ring of truth, sincerity and believability? Even when given the opportunity and time to prepare thoughtful and informative “written” answers, you apparently chose to provide just bare bones type answers, leaving the lasting impression of arrogance and a near total disregard for accountability.

Question: Why did the board decide to state their support for the Y now?

Answer: The board members discussed the feedback they were hearing from their “constituents” regarding the Y and the results reflected support for the Y.

Comments: “One way” limited and selective feedback is neither sufficient nor valid reason for an arbitrary decision that has the unquestionable potential to negatively impact home values and disrupt daily lives in Radisson, obviously some far more than others. You do not say how many “constituents” were heard from; was it one, 10 or 100, or if it included any negative Y feedback. More than likely, it was primarily the “conflict of interest” feedback from just one person, Mr. Raddell’s next-door neighbor, Hal Welsh, Executive Director of the YMCA. Of equal importance is the fact that you did not bother to actively solicit feedback from all Radisson homeowners until after the BOD published their sudden out-of-the-blue letter, supporting the YMCA’s plans for Drakes Landing. Like the old cliché, why bother to close the barn door after the horse is gone?

Vote on this Story by clicking on the Icon


Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.

Sign in to comment