A city with well-developed infrastructure and a distinct dominance of quiet suburban atmosphere, Tempe has recently become notorious for the lack of facilities for the numerous families, the number of which has been growing increasingly over the past few years.
The lack of rentable area has triggered the question concerning the possibilities of building several condominiums for families with children. In the course of the recent meeting, the given issue was discussed.
The meeting in question concerned the consideration of a request regarding building several three-story condominiums for family rentals, as well as families residence on baselines. Held by a committee of seven commissioners (Ron Collett, Lind Spears, Paul Vent, Dennis Webb, Peggy Tinsley, Angie Thornton, and Dare Meiza), the given meeting took several hours. In the course of the discussion, the following issues have been considered:
- Re-painting of the community art property;
- Designing the landscape plan;
- Getting the public approval for the re-painting of the property;
- Considering the possibility of redeveloping the property for investment;
- Reconsideration of the exterior building design;
- Implementation of the landscaping techniques to address the problem above.
For a discussion of the project that was going to not only define the further process of condominiums building, but also the design of the area in question, the conversation went rather smoothly. It is remarkable that each of the participants preferred to communicate his/her ideas in a coherent and adequate manner, with little to no interruptions.
For the most part, the participants were comfortable about the decisions that were made in the process; however, certain unevenness in the decisions of the committee could still be spotted. For example, the refusal to use green color as the basic one for the current building block was not unanimous; while most of the committee members agreed that green was inappropriate for painting the buildings.
However, in general, the members of the committee tended to agree with each other regarding the solutions that were provided to the conflicts mentioned above. It could be argued, though, that the process of decision making could have been improved a notch by allowing the members of the committee to consider the strategies of positive behavior enhancement among the residents of the building block in question.
Seeing how a number of issues considered in the course of the meeting have been triggered by the inappropriate behavior of the dwellers (e.g., throwing cans out of the window), it would be reasonable to spare some time discussing the opportunities of promoting positive behavior among the residents of the area, therefore, using transformation model to encourage positive behavior.
Instead, though, the members of the committee preferred to deal with the mess rather than with its sources.
Some of the problems concerning the inconsistency of the decisions undertaken by the members of the committee can be attributed to the choice of the people who were supposed to discuss the current concerns of the residents of the area. When taking a closer look at the committee, one will notice several specific details.
To start with, there is little diversity in the committee; the interests of all residents of the block are introduced by the people of the same social status, background, and concerns, which begs the question whether such a homogenous committee can evaluate all pros and cons adequately.
While having the members of the committee constantly arguing and being unable to conclude is an obvious problem as well, a one-sided perspective on the concerns of the many is not a way out, either. One of the most graphic examples of the negative effects that have people with similar interests in the committee can lead to, the solution concerning the Reception Hall should be mentioned.
On the one hand, the decision to build a Reception Hall works to the advantage of the community, since it not only provides an allocation for holding important events in, such as weddings but also seems to address the lack of order and spirituality in the community. The idea of building a Reception Hall to make a difference in the community, however, seems somewhat half-baked.
Establishing a reception Hall in the area will not solve the problem concerning the lack of spirituality and care – on the contrary, I may even spur further vandalism aimed at destroying the Hall. It would have been more reasonable to create a place where young people, who are usually responsible for the mess in the area, could engage in a positive, or at least harmless, activity.
However, the members of the committee are still admittedly good at making important decisions that address the needs of the community. It would have been much easier to throw the last-minute decisions to solve the problem of the area refurbishment and call it a day; instead, the members of the committee engaged into a thorough discussion and approached the solution of the major issues responsibly.
Since the meeting was carried out among the representatives of the committee, which was assigned to evaluate the state of the community in question, voice the concerns of its dwellers, and make important decisions regarding the changes to be made for the community to prosper, there was no obvious need in conducting extensive paperwork to register the participants for the discussion.
Instead, the members of the committee were merely to sign up for the discussion. After that, the meeting was held on the date that had been assigned beforehand. The lack of formalities and the choice of a closed meeting of the committee instead of a broad discussion involving the city residents was predetermined by the fact that some of the problems, including streets littering, have been tolerated for too long and, thus, needed an urgent solution.
The absence of the time limit should also be mentioned as one of the key specifics of the meeting. Instead of scheduling a series of discussions, the members of the committee decided to handle the problems on the agenda in a very decisive and efficient manner, considering each of these issues on the same day.
Hence, the only thing that the participants of the discussion were limited by was their ability to produce coherent and logical arguments to support their opinion. Despite the obvious flaws of the chosen method, it worked very well, with crucial decisions having been made on the very day that the discussion started.
Finally, the fact that the participants of the conversation used little to no supporting materials should be brought to the audience’s attention.
Naturally, the basic theses were outlined with the help of a PowerPoint presentation, yet most of the arguments were not supported by any visuals, and the members of the committee had only documented evidence to prove the point. Most of the visual aids included the pictures of the building blocks as they were at the moment of the refurbishment discussion, which was appropriate enough.
Nevertheless, it would have still been much better if the members of the committee could provide images of the buildings altered with the help of Photoshop according to the refurbishment ideas that each of the committee members supported.
Thus, the flaws of the decisions would have been much more evident, which means that the discussion process would have taken less time and effort, leaving more room for the discussion of other topical issues. The use of other software, such as Google Earth, would have also been a welcome change of pace in the traditional discussion techniques.
In a retrospective, though, the discussion process seems rather appropriate, and the solutions appear to be quite legitimate. Even though some of the suggestions are quite dubious, they are admittedly harmless. According to the results of the discussion procedure, the decision to refurbish the building block has been approved.
Also, the creation of a Reception Hall to be built in the community was accepted as a method to have a positive effect on the moods within the community, as well as shape the behavior patterns of some of the community members with the reputation that left much to be desired.
Speaking of the possible outcomes of the given decisions, one can assume that the creation of the Reception Hall will attract the attention of the community members, contributing to the cohesion of the community.