Jack Shufelt wrote:Tony has directed a strong message to the ASR and that is, that it must develop and present a strong business case, which seems like good advice. When all of the emotion, innuendos, conjectures and fabrications are over with it will boil down to who has presented the best factual business case, resulting in the greatest benefit to New York State and the Adirondacks.
I really wish it were that simple but I don't believe that it is. Certainly the ASR would be better off with a defensible plan than without one.
Yet I've seen plenty of fabricated "business cases" that have won the day though they are basically fact-free... and that's in the private sector. Throw in politics and that's a whole 'nother story.
Obviously, nothing is ever that simple but without a well thought through and fact based business case one is behind the curve already. A winning attitude and commitment is paramount.
Certainly the what if's need to be recognized and indicated actions taken where possible but if one is going through the process with the idea that it will be decided by 3 people in a smoke filled room, regardless of the facts, then it is likely that the business case will not be all that it should be. Most assuredly there are political realities and no doubt each organization involved has a good sense of what they are and ideas on how they should be addressed.
I would expect that the most formidable political issues and how they should be handled effectively will be baked in to the business plan by each organization as much as possible. Not dealing with the difficult issues up front will force the decision makers to resolve them from their point of view. One needs to assist the decision makers in making the "right" decision.
Clearly there is significant emotion associated with some, if not all, of the issues and not everyone will be happy with the results.