PRS and RVM Planning and Development Lack Transparency

A personal  exploration by Mark Edy

This essay was prepared by Mark Edy following an extended discussion on RVMlist, stimulated in part by recent announcements concerning I-5 offramp modification.  It documents his research and reflections on recurring issues of management transparency that are of concern to residents.  It is an example of the sort of information and opinion that  VIEWPOINTS hopes to provide as a basis for discussion (use the Reply form at the end of the article to post comments).  To provide an easy overview, the issues have been summarized in a shorter document, Transparency in Decision-Making at RVM.

Item 1:  On Friday, April 23, Stan Solmonson announced that RVM was funding the expansion of the southbound off-ramp, exit 27, from I-5.  His report spoke of data studies of the number of vehicles traveling through this overpass to E. Burnett during peak hours.  The announcement focused upon a revision to the southbound exit which RVM was funding.  On the next day, Saturday, the Medford Mail-Tribune printed an article on page 2 that addressed this subject.  The MT article provided more information but in reality it only created more questions than answers relative to the information provided by Mr. Solmonson.  Key to the MT report was the statement of ODOT spokesman, Gary Learning, who said that RVM “is wanting to expand and the reason for this project—it’s part of their mitigation for some of the development that they are planning on building on their property.”  The article continued by stating that RVM was paying for the entire project including engineering the design through to the construction.

After having spoken with numerous residents, posting thoughts on rvmlist and listening and reading comments to those posts, I come away with the feeling that what we are dealing with is not just RVM’s payment of exit 27 expansion but instead goes much further.  In reality this is about Transparency or the lack thereof.  Let us examine some of the underlying cases.

First, let’s look at the exit 27 since that was the primary focus of my thoughts.  As I have stated previously, we were told of RVM’s involvement of the expansion of exit 27 southbound by Mr. Solmonson on Friday.  Some residents with whom I have spoken have said that this agreement with the city was made several years ago and that the RVM board believed they had no choice other than to vote in agreement.  Having not lived in residence here at that time, I do not have first-hand knowledge.  The Saturday, April 24, issue of the Medford Mail-Tribune provided more details as to the issue but it clearly stated that RVM had agreed to fund the entire widening of the offramp including the engineering design and construction.  Possibly this was knowledge shared to residents a few years ago, but I have been unable to confirm that it was.  Mr. Solmonson’s explanation primarily touched on the traffic flow data that showed current flow during peak times as well as projected flow after completion of the project.  With this completed, we were advised that RVM would have more valuable property to sell.  Many of those that shared their thoughts with me believed as did I that the properties involved were the two parcels near the two Hilton venues.  Another has stated that this actually referenced the property along Phoenix Road that PRS has proposed as being a European style construction where the ground floor would be commercial and floor above could be residential.  This would occupy the area alongside Phoenix Road and the 18^th hole of Centennial Golf Course.

My thought has been that Centennial is too far removed from exit 27 to be involved in this type of mitigation.  Anything off of Phoenix Road has closer access to both entrances and off ramps from exit 24. Any type of mitigation or negotiation with the city could include topics such as this area, but it would seem more likely to me that the properties involved are the two off Ellendale and/or easing the permitting for the construction of eighteen cottages between the fifth fairway and including the current ninth hole at Quail Point.

In exploring the Medford tax lot website, it would appear that there are actually four separate tax parcels listed as owned by RVM.  The one which is in front of the Hilton properties and has been for sale for a long time has an area of 2.43 acres.  The second one further up Ellendale and backing up against the Annex has 1.21 acres.  There are two separate additional parcels that front Bear Creek.  One has 0.79 acres and the other 1.04 acres.  One supposedly has issues with Bear Creek and I would assume that must be the one fronting Ellendale that includes 1.21 acres.  Quite possibly the two smaller parcels which have Bear Creek frontage could be combined and the access to them would be off Hospitality Way which accesses the two Hilton properties.  Regardless, the attractiveness as a restaurant site is questionable due to visibility.  More likely the 2.43 acre site would be more attractive as a two or three story office building. Under the current situation of ongoing Covid-19 restrictions and reduction in the need for office space due to higher volumes of office employees working from home, it would seem that this property could still sit unsold without a substantial reduction in the price.  The tax lot appraised valuations seem high.

What have we learned?  RVM has worked out an agreement with the city of Medford to pay $350,000 for the entire design and construction of an expansion of the southbound off-ramp off I-5 and in exchange they hope to increase the valuation of the properties they would like to sell.  Anything else is speculation and I choose not to take any more liberty than I already have without more concrete information.  What I would say is that the residents of RVM should not accept what has been said as being sufficient.  One resident has questioned whether it is legally possible for RVM to withdraw $350,000 from the Capital Improvements Fund.  I have no information as to from where the funds might originate.  If this agreement was made with the city several years ago, many residents who have moved here would have no knowledge of it.  That doesn’t explain the fact that I have no knowledge of anyone else remembering hearing of this, other than one person who was on the board and stated that they voted in favor under the belief that they had no choice.  The point is that there is not enough clarity in what has occurred and in what way it can realistically benefit RVM.  Without a doubt it could benefit PRS if they are able to pave the way for permit approval.  In my opinion this is a case of lack of transparency and that this needs to be addressed by RVM management.

The other topics I will consider relate to the Quail Point golf course.

Item 2:  As we know over a year ago, PRS through RVM decided to close the putting course.  Although the idea of a putting course was a good one, the design was such that maintenance of it would be high.  If it had been constructed as one large putting green including mounds and varying levels it would have been both easier to maintain and an attraction to players of all skill levels.  The important point is that RVM never built in any funds in the budget to maintain this putting course after it was completed.  The result was that it in relatively short time began to show the effects of this.  Prior to closing a survey was submitted to all RVM residents to get their ideas on what should be done.  If I recall correctly the options were to return the putting course to its original condition, reduce the number of holes from 18 to 9 and restore the conditions or to close it completely.  My understanding was that the majority of respondents, both golfers and non-golfers, viewed it as an attractive feature of RVM.  It was visible for those potentially new residents as they drove into RVM and beyond that provided a venue for Senior Women and Men Putting Groups.  The vote was to keep the 18 hole format and to return it to its original condition.  Shortly after the vote, Sarah Lynch returned from an extended leave and announced that she would be departing as director of RVM and would be replaced in the interim by Anthony Sabatini.  It was also announced that the putting course would be abandoned.  I was asked by a couple of other men residents to attend a meeting with them and Mr., Sabatini on the putting course.  These two men were hopeful to get an explanation and possibly a chance to revisit the issue.  From the moment we sat down it was apparent that Mr. Sabatini was going through the motions to hear what we had to say but would not actually explain or consider anything new.  He said the issue was settled and that was all there was to it.  I told Mr. Sabatini that I had owned a couple businesses and as part of them we had company vehicles.  I explained that I could not just buy them but had to maintain them as well.  I asked how they could spend the funds to develop the putting course but not allocate funds to maintain it.  I didn’t receive an answer.

Item 3:  I recognize that RVM / PRS has had a master plan showing the construction of cottages between the fifth fairway and the ninth fairway.  Last year more information came out regarding the closure of the ninth hole as it exists today and the construction of a new hole beyond the current sixth hole.  This new hole would be a par 3 as is the current ninth hole.  The par for the course would not change, but this would create to par 3 holes running consecutively as the current seventh hole is also a par3.  This may not seem like much to the non-golfing residents, but in doing so they would be lowering the quality of the golf experience as there are few courses where par 3 holes run back to back.  Last fall we were advised that the decision on going ahead would be delayed most likely for three to four years.  In February this year, markers were placed and irrigation equipment was moved.  Following that, trees were cut down and bulldozers began to clear the ground for this new hole.  We were told that the tee grounds would be closer to the freeway so as to eliminate balls being hit onto I-5  The future green was constructed where drainage coming down from the Plaza would flow in the case of a large rain event.  Numerous dump truck loads were required to build in this location which was a geographical V-notch.  Now the ground preparation has been mostly completed.  However, the tee ground is up on the hill and tee shots will aim closer to the freeway.  It will not be difficult to hit onto I-5 unless a net is installed.

In reality, if they were convinced that construction of a new hole was needed, it could have been done by building it between the sixth green and the seventh tee.  When the course was constructed, the seventh hole was a longer hole and was a par 4.  It was shortened into a par 3 to prevent balls being hit onto I-5.  The tee ground was still remaining and it would have been less expensive to build a green nearer to the current seventh tee as little dirt would have been required.  Now that is not an option.  What would be possible however would be to erect a fence similar to that on Hole No.1 and move the tee back on hole number seven to again return it into a par 4.   Of course, a fence will require funds, but certainly not a huge amount.

The point here is credibility is being lost.  We were told that nothing would happen for a few years and then all of a sudden earth is being moved.  Of course, if these 18 cottages can be constructed soon, it is money in the pocket of PRS.  The jury is out on whether there is benefit to RVM.

As a final note, I believe that the majority of RVM residents feel that RVM has done made a strong effort to get us through the COVID pandemic.  In Mr. Solomonson’s address to us on April 23, he failed to announce the new positive cases that now have impacted our healthcare  and memory care facilities.    This announcement came via email to all residents an hour after his address was completed.  The discovery of these positive cases and the resultant quarantining of 8 skilled health workers was known on Tuesday, April 20.  In my opinion, we should have been notified of this occurrence on Wednesday or Thursday and why was it not even mentioned in Mr. Solmonson’s address on Friday morning?  This is mystifying.

All in all, the discussion of these points is to provide some insight into what appears to be going on.  Possibly I have taken too much liberty with assumptions although that was not the intent.  I am open to hearing all the comments both negative and positive on these thoughts.  What I feel is most important is the understanding that both RVM and PRS should recognize that the residents of RVM have all been successful in their careers.  We have moved here and seen many changes in a relatively short period of time (including the resignation of many key employees which is another issue that could be discussed).  The residents are intelligent and have proven to be focused upon working together to improve the lives of others residing here.  In order for that to continue, it is imperative that RVM / PRS become more transparent.  The residents deserve to have full understanding of changes and not have them white-washed over with a brief announcement on Channel 900.  Without this, skepticism will increase and trust will be lost.  RVM / PRS management needs to take that into strong consideration. In the past, residents were an extremely important conduit to prospective residents, more so than any marketing campaign. If management does not become more transparent and treats existing residents as being unimportant, the trust will vanish as well as the recommendations of our residents to friends, relatives and other potential recruits for life here.  Inclusion should be the word of the day as the current residents represent a wealth of experience and can be one of the greatest assets RVM / PRS has available.  RVM / PRS need to work towards rebuilding the relationship with the residents and that can only be done by effective communication and transparency.