Nelson: Co-oops! - The Sequel

.




.

From the Kootenay Co-op's meeting, with a Special General Meeting Adgenda (sic), March 19, 2012:

The Getting
Russell Precious - in charge of finding the Co-op's new, improved home - flip-flops between alternate scenarios as facts for how the Co-op could over a year ago announce as a done deal - after years of back-and-forth - that its move into Extra premises was imminent:
1. Extra had wanted to leave for years
2. The building's owner had wanted to get rid of Extra for years.
Either scenario is disingenuous! He vehemently sidesteps that legally there was no basis for negotiations - no matter what the relationship between the building's owner/Loblaw may have been - that his facts are anecdotal, hear-say only, as at the time Extra legally still had over a year left on its current lease, with first right of refusal following that. Bottomline. Tangible proof that Extra had no intention to leave: Loblaw - its parent-company - only recently installed an all-new cash-register system. But! Regardless! Negotiations between owner and Co-op seemingly had been proceeding all along.
Subsequently pulling back from leasing (nothing!) - we are told - but buying this year raises ethical questions about what transpired before and in the interim.
And that's where the Co-op's move comes from. As Joan Rivers used to say: Can we talk?

The Present Future
Dave Wahn, Nelson's manager of development services and sustainability, presents parts of the Downtown & Waterfront Plan - more a dreamy vision than a concrete plan - in which the Extra lot could figure prominently as a downtown-development block. The audience loves it! Eats it right up! Our Co-op! He does not mention that this plan is projecting way into the next 1 or 2 decades - it will not manifest anything overnight (if at all) and does not take economic conditions into account.
When an audience member brings-up the difficulties many may have getting to the only local alternative for Extra - the box store on Lakeshore - and wonders whether one in the Plan's envisioned gateways to the lake might not make access to it simpler, Mr. Wahn suggests there could (not will!) be a bridge across the tracks next to City Hall. Good enough for us, we hear what we want to hear - a general sigh of relief, nodded approval. Like handled! As soon as Extra closes! The slight whiff of guilt dissipates!
Actually, this bridge may never happen, and even if - it would be years! What with currently neither intention nor funds in place for this folly.

In the meantime - those without cars and with much time, mothers with strollers, seniors will walk down Dodgy-Sidewalks-Hall and turn left on No-Sidewalks/Markings-Lakeshore; after navigating difficult traffic-patterns without an identified foot-traffic crossing at their wide intersection; then walking alongside dense and fast traffic in often extreme weather-conditions; through all-over-the-place frequent deep mud-puddles, snow-banks or deep slush. And back and uphill, now also carrying heavy bags, and if they can't manage much in one go - they'll just have to go more often!

There are several clear reasons of need for Extra to remain - there is no discernible need for the Co-op to move (there). As magnanimous as its offer to let Extra remain in the premises for another year may seem: it was made only after a public back-lash - far too late to be considered practically - and also to get some easy money from the place, while contemplating the collective navel.

The Resolution + 75% =
The Special Resolution on the Special Agenda - this evening's heart of the matter - is about whether the administration should be allowed to use more than 75% of its available financial resources for acquisition/improvement of the property in question. Initially the wording was the other 25%. That was changed to more than 75% on this agenda. Sounding less drastic for sure!
Here concerns are voiced openly (and not) about the vagueness of more than 75%; all those speaking-up would prefer to see an amount or fixed percentage of what could be made available or should remain untouched. Finally some tension - they begin to think! Which should be taken as constructive, particularly as input from member/owners supposedly is what we're here for as well.
But somewhat frazzled, not very happy and seemingly in-overwhelm administration is not ready to address these floating question-marks: it matches the resolution's vagueness with more vagueness, in a clever tide-changing move falling back on trick 17 - emotional manipulation - what with having put much hard work into the whole thing for years and responsibly too! Being trustworthy and ready to be trusted. Being co-op, dammit! And the audience - having suddenly got its Co-op-cultish trust on - lets go of yet another sigh of relief. Handled! Not to worry! They promised, will take care of us!

So - seeing the light in a just-like-that group-swoon - over 100 approve the resolution and 6 don't! I am one of the 6.

An audience member declares enough with the questions; audience and administration take another deep breath - it's decided to move on to cookies in the back and signing-up for belonging and team-spirit.

The Developing Development

Thus far there are no plans whatsoever for what to do with the property - now that it's there there. The mantra: buying is more reasonable than leasing does not address: why this uberproperty? Particularly in today's general economic doldrums, with no local upswing now and in the near/far future even remotely probable - and for sure not in property development. On that scale yet.

Supposedly administration has wanted to move - and looked - for years. And those who looked seemingly worked very hard. So a big part of making this decision conceivably was: let's get on with this already! That and a dollop of: the wonderfulness of IT and me!

Why move exactly has never been made clear to the membership; if it were clearer to administration - it might know what to do next! Kind of like KHAOS the opera: many working hard to get there - but once there is where?

If a search for new quarters had indeed been on for a few years: shouldn't there be a vision of it by now?

For additional thoughts see post:

Nelson: Natural Organic Co-oops!

19 Feb. 2012

.