[SJAAboard] Quick report on PRN meeting

[Rob Hawley]

Craig took more extensive notes than I did so consider this is the Cliff Notes
version.

We will be bidding for Houge along with an Arab-American group.  Craig and I met
with them after the meeting.  They primarily want Building 2. I believe our use
is complementary. Our proposal will commit us to cooperate with them.

The day care center did not show which excludes them from bidding. The other
groups there seemed to be focused on other properties.

Craig is accumulating questions to ask the city during the question period.  We
have a couple so far. If you have any more contact Craig not me. Craig is going
to ask some questions whether the city is open to modifying the building (e.g.
building a storage area for the loaner program). 

The Arab American group would like to build offices in building two.  I think we
convinced them to let us build in building one. Both parties agree they would
like to preserve building one as a large meeting area. They would like to
schedule meetings on Friday nights in building one, but are willing work around
our schedule.

Money making events such as the auction and swap are allowed under the RFP.  We
need to paint PRN a picture that shows the money goes back into supporting the
public program (at least as insurance).

We are listed in the community input section of the RFP (exhibit I).  That means
we qualify for Priority One consideration. Our proposal needs to highlight that.

25% of the evaluation is convincing the city we have the stability to implement.
Our board remaining stable as well as the length officers have served and have
been members all paint a picture of stability.

Beyond that PRN reviewed the parts of the response as they expect it.  I think
the current draft is a start.  I will review Phil's comments when I get back.
The draft was done quickly so no harm no foul if we trash it and start again.
Look most closely at the proposed Exhibit A. That was where I spent the most
brain cycles. We will have to add a provision to Exhibit A to cooperate with the
other group.

When I get back I would like to understand why people oppose Robert and I paying
for having a lawyer review Exhibit A (our formal statement of work). I
appreciate that the board might object to paying for it themselves. Why object
it if the legal review is free?  There must be some disadvantage that I do not
understand.

The senior group is moving.  That was the reason for the move-in delay.  I guess
I lose bragging rights.

Call me at home until Tuesday night if you have any further questions. Thanks to
Craig for attending and being part of the proposal preparation process.


Rob Hawley