From:	muchodeanaero@aol.com
To:	Vivian Carvalho; Kwame Jackson
Subject:	Fw: Point of my question on the Town Hall
Date:	Friday, June 26, 2026 6:34:29 PM

ALERT: This message is from an external source.BE CAUTIOUS before clicking any link or attachment

Dean Matt
aka MuchoDeanAero aka The Pickleball Pilot 630.248.0646

MuchoDeanAero - aviation adventures and the home of The World Record 48-48-48 Pickleball Challenge

Golf Gear - golf accessories
Gone to Pot Book - cannabis industry non-fiction

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: muchodeanaero@aol.com <muchodeanaero@aol.com>
To: Vivian Carvalho <carvalhov@pfm.com>
Cc: Steve Heitzner <steve.heitzner@universityparkrd.com>; Scott Huebner
<scott.huebner@universityparkrd.com>; Greg Selep <greg.selep@universityparkrd.com>; Steve Swanson <steve.swanson4@universityparkrd.com>; dick.crouch@universityparkrd.com
<dick.crouch@universityparkrd.com>; Mark Barnebey <mbarnebey@blalockwalters.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2026 at 03:38:11 PM EDT
Subject: Point of my question on the Town Hall

Respectfully:

Based on information presented today, I think the 2024 referendum was based on KNOWINGLY FALSE information.

From TOWN HALL slides: Here we are told in the Town Halls for the 2024 referendum that the cost for kitchen would be $3mm, knowing that the kitchen was not to be started/completed until 2025

I remember asking many times about cost overruns and is this enough.

The answer from the Dickson Administration (Murphy, Dickson, Ludmerer) said, effectively: "Not a problem. We have a 9% contingency." I expressed concern and doubt that 9% was enough citing my experience with a project at Our Lady of The Angels Church. Dickson Administration again, assured, "not a problem."

Today, we learned that a project that residents were assured could be completed for $3 mm should have been advertised at $4.819 mm...a 60% increase! In other words: $1.819 mm of the increase from $3mm is from the Dickson Administration representing to residents that they can build this kitchen for $3 mm when that was impossible.

When you send out the summary of Q&A to residents, I believe residents are owed an explanation and apology.

Conclusions:

Residents were 100% correct to question UPRD at the time of the referendum
If an accurate, honest answer was provided (instead of using 3-year old stale numbers) this, too, would have affected the results of the referendum. [For the avoidance of doubt, I did not even argue this purposeful distortion of reality in the Supreme Court brief but will add this ammunition to my Tier II Litigation complaint.]
A Five-Year Plan would have caught this and prevented the Dickson Administration from lowballing Kitchen Costs by 60%.
Fetsick and the Dickson Administration spent more time defending a plan that didn't (and still doesn't) exist rather than developing a plan as required by 2-8-161 of the Charter.
We don't know what else is low balled...but we can suspect that the Activity Center and the Health Club are similarly disingenuous numbers. These projects would not have started until 2026/2027 at the earliest!
I pressed Sally that the bond was only $21 mm and what will we do if the capital plan exceeds that estimate? What will you do? Float a third bond?
Her answer was "We will not exceed $21 mm"

We now know there wasn't any thought in her statement...just virtue signaling.
Good thing this is all paused now while we await accurate numbers, input from SCS and definite plans and resident buy in at a specific cost before we proceed forward.

Other:

Overall, the presentation, especially Steve Heitzner's opening comments, was straightforward and the explanations were well thought out.

There was no mention of an assessment to golfers as discussed. Seems to me that this presentation was a great time to have done this...especially when Dick talked about inability to complete planned Front 9 and mid-nine capital projects.

The presentation, again, assumed that the Activity Center and the Fitness Center are a fait accompli	without any consideration of cost or what we can afford or
input from SCS. In light of the Dickson Administration's bogus numbers, I hope THIS administration puts pencil to paper, completes the 5-Year Plan and determine if the benefits from any planned capital improvements are worth the cost of the project. (The presentation assumes this. but you need to conduct proper due
diligence and act as fiduciaries and provide support for this assertion. So far, over two years have passed and no such support. Just statements without support.
And now we see that the statements and entire referendum were sold to residents with bogus numbers!

Residents are right to have questioned the Dickson Administration and deserve accurate, honest answers...not opinions. Having spent some time with Steve Heitzner, I am confident that he understands this perspective and hope that the entire UPRD Board takes this to heart.

Regards,

Dean Matt
aka MuchoDeanAero aka The Pickleball Pilot 630.248.0646

MuchoDeanAero - aviation adventures and the home of The World Record 48-48-48 Pickleball Challenge

Golf Gear - golf accessories
Gone to Pot Book - cannabis industry non-fiction