Where do we go from here?

CM asked this in another thread: Okay, so lots of griping about wanting to have something done, but I don't see any answers as to what should be done. Club? Begging some more from the board, what does the solution look like? It's a good question given the threads direction on proposed changes to the by-laws.

Let's start with a simple given (at least for many of us): It doesn't get any better than Sun City...most amenities at the least cost.

That said, is there a way to make Sun City an even better place to live? Let's begin by examining our neighbor, Sun City West; the closest comparison there is to Sun City. I think they have made remarkable strides in the past several years.

Here's why: The most obvious is their open meeting policy (and by the way, it hasn't caused an implosion or explosion in any way shape or manner). Their Torch program is exceptional as they actually work to educate the residents as to how the community functions. Years back they started a boomer club that grew like crazy (we started one but it never reached anywhere near the success levels they did). Their auto restoration club is gorgeous, they have a wine and beer making club and have their own radio station run by a club created just for that purpose. I think it's a tragic mistake on their part to divorce themselves from the Del Webb brand and become Sun City West, but time will tell on that decision.

With that out of the way, let's turn back to Sun City. We've done lot's of things right/better than our neighbor; but that's yesterdays news. Our question for today is; what can we do in the coming years to make us better? I would argue it all starts in one simple action...REINSTATE THE LONG RANGE PLANNING COMMITTEE.

Huh? I know, still beating that dead horse and here's why: All too often Sun City functions in the now, their eye to the future has always been clouded by what folks are clamoring about at member exchanges and board meetings. Don't get me wrong, listening to people is critical, but letting the complaints become the basis of a long range plan is foolishness.

And here's where we take an abrupt turn from how i see a long range planning committee differing from what it used to be" In another thread, Cynthia said folks her age (way younger than me) would want to see a more transparent and open sense of governance. Ironically everyone runs on that promise and ultimately it only get worse. That's a topic for another time, another thread.

Back to my point, a true LRPC would look at coming trends and expectations of future buyers. They would try and shape decisions and direction for the board as we evolved as a society and as a community. Just a footnote; committees have no authority over the board, they can only make recommendations.

I think one of the most egregious mistakes made in the past 7 years was the decision to shovel millions at the golf courses and out buildings (close to 40 million dollars by the time we are done). There was no community input (other than the board agreeing to it and golfers cheering them on) and now we have angry and frustrated golfers.

Sun City's strength has always been embodied in committees and residents working in concert with one another. As committee's have been eliminated and by-laws changed to insulate the board and staff, we have lost part of our checks and balances. Wrong direction in my mind, but it appears too few folks care about it, and most board members think it perfectly fine.

Ultimately the answer lies where it always has...in the hands of those of us living here. Our current direction will only change when a slate of board members run with an aggressive and progressive slate of goals. They should be framed around: open meetings, residents education,restoring community safeguards and committees to work with the board in shaping decisions making.

I encourage all of you able to attend the candidates forum, nope, not running this year but i think you will find it enlightening how much candidates will talk about doing the right thing for the residents and how hamstrung they become once elected.

 

"...I encourage all of you able to attend the candidates forum, nope, not running this year but i think you will find it enlightening how much candidates will talk about doing the right thing for the residents and how hamstrung they become once elected."



So, what is the point of this exercise? It seems like we have already written the as yet elected board off as "same old, same old". You do know the definition of insanity, right? Doing the same thing over and over expecting a different outcome.

Another, so....So, the LRP Committee gets reinstated. Then what? They can be ignored just as well as anybody else.

There are some fundamental changes that need to happen at the top. Those welding the power need to be willing to accept community input. Control (such as it is) needs to be put back into the hands of the community. Then, and only then, will the community step into the 21st century and be ready for the millennialsame.

Before anyone lights into me and asks why I don't step up and run for the board...I'll be 53 on my next bday. I can run for POTUS but not the RCSC board of directors.

 

To Emily's questions there are several answers to a way forward for progress without imposing Title 33. The best of Title 33 is the broadcast of the meetings, open access to the board discussions, and no more secret, behind the doors, actions taking place without the knowledge of the RCSC members. There are some downsides to Title 33 which could cost additional monies to the RCSC members in their assessments, as well as how assessments are levied.

We can stay under Title 10 if the powers that be would recognize their first duty as the corporation is to its members, not the other way around. There is nothing stopping the RCSC from initiating an open meeting forum, to include televising the proceedings. It would be as simple as it is now to change a by-law, just do it.

We can have the best of the both Arizona Statutes if the board of directors and the management team want it to happen, it is that simple. As long as the relationship between the board and the management team stays so symbiotic, there will never be any kind of positive changes to take effect, IMHO.

 

Waiting until early 2017 is only a small part of the answer. There exists board members remaining on the board, as members and leadership, who need to be willing to take the bull by the horns, so to speak. The opportunity to change things comes from within the board itself, the members directing the management team, not the other way around. The General Manager is by far the best there is for this corporation or any other corporation. She is by far the most talented and gifted GM I have ever met, bar none. We need the board and its members to direct the work of the GM with helpful input from her, and not steering the board, as it appears to be happening, in a direction that is against the Articles of Incorporation.

The LRP will evolve back into existence when there is a board willing to be free thinking, available to direct input, and understand who the corporation is beholding to. Having a full time long range plan means the board has decided it cares to participate in the direction it is going to take for the future and wants the input of its citizenry. All of the needs of the community relies on a board that is open minded enough to put the residents first, which, IMHO, is not happening at this time.

There needs to be a perfect storm, a confluence of great minds and spirit to say it is time to think of the members first, not the golf courses, not the buildings, but the needs of the people, especially those with something to say about how the business should be going. There is a claim the elected board members represent the people, but when was the last time a board member held an open forum with their constituents to verify what is needed? NO, not a 9 am meeting, but an actual Saturday meeting, late morning to allow everyone to participate if they so choose.

When was the last time there were members invited to give their input about a "hot topic" subject, such as guest fees? When was the last time members were allowed to voice their choices on a direction on a singular place such as the dog park? How about an open forum on recording of meetings and rebroadcasting for the members use? Start there. Move forward as things progress and tweak as needed. I truly believe the board members would find it painless to be on camera and have the board members display their intent to be available to the public.

Enough of my soapbox. Thank you for your time, it is a great gift that is appreciated.

 

Kind of says it all folks. Thanks Carole.

 

Yes, we'll said.

It is so hard to remain positive and hopeful when all you hear are the problems. Your post, CM brings forward possible solutions, or at least a possible path to solutions. Thank you.

 

Sounds like it's time for some action. Time to form a focus group to get clarity of direction for the 3 like minded candidates for 2017, 3 for 2018 and possibly 3 for 2019. Possibly BP or others in the audience may have some thoughts as to who could be a temporary organizer for this idea or something similar.

 

I’ve been following this thread with interest because of the intriguing question,
“Where do we go from here”.

There seems to be a lot of griping about the board and management on the direction
of Sun City. From this thread and others it would appear there are several issues that
have brought about ire to some in the community.

There have also been suggestions and ideas put forward by those concerned on
how to put Sun City back on the right track and return control of Sun City to the
residents. But those ideas are spread over several threads.

Based on the title of this thread I have the following questions;

One – What are all the gripes? A simple and complete list would be very helpful.

Two – Where do you want to go from here?

Three – What are the definitive plans for getting there? List would be helpful.

Four – Who is going to lead the charge to get there?

Unless you know the goal how can you make plans to reach that goal.

The folks following this thread apparently have an agenda in mind but there seems to be
no clear consensus on how to get there.

Griping does not get the job done.

 

Hello SCR,

Thank you for your interest in this thread. You are so right, a clear direction is needed, and I am willing to offer my opinion what I feel is being asked and what the needs are.

1. Taping and the rebroadcasting of the Board Meetings and the Member exchanges. This will afford those unable to attend the meeting to be able to view the RCSC in action at their own leisure. The meetings could be attached to the Facebook site and to the sunaz.org website. Utilizing youtube or vimeo should help keep costs down for the RCSC.

2.Would like to see this happen in a way conducive to encourage a greater audience, which I hope will then entice more people to attend other events, such as the annual meeting.

3. Would need a person/persons skilled in the use of A/V equipment to tape, reproduce, and post the information in a way that is usable and viewer friendly. Perhaps someone from the entertainment committee has the skills and talent needed to make such a proposition become a reality.

4. The "who is going to lead the charge" is still up in the air, although I had intended to speak to this very issue at the next board meeting. I know that I am limited to three minutes, but I feel the general idea could be conveyed in that amount of time. Based upon prior experience, as noted himself, Rich Hoffer should be the point on making this happen. As succession predicts, he will be the next president of the board, and who better to take on the challenge of supporting and initiating an open communication then he.

Enough of the griping, herein lies some ideas for accomplishing some of the goals. Additional interfacing with the folks that have the materials to make this happen would be a great help in doing a more clear and concise plan for the future. Me, I am now gone for 4 months out of the year, so I do not feel I have the consistency to be a fair representative to all of the needs to complete these items.

Thank you for listening and your time. And you are so right, Griping does not get it done!

 

To be fair, another portion of this thread has to do with Title 33 vs. Title 10. I don't want to be Title 33, as I feel Title 10 is a really useful position to be in. I feel it is possible to use the best of title 33, the open meetings and two way contact as a Title 10 Corporation without having to endure the extra costs and hardships of Title 33. I understand the opposition to the open meetings, but I also feel it is a way to allow the attendees to feel connected to their board members. Both ideas, open meetings and recording of meetings should have an open discussion to include the members, and move forward from there. It is possible to eat an elephant, one bite at a time. Starting with taping and posting the video on line is a great place to start to allow for the cardholders to get used to the idea of an open meeting concept.

These are my answers to some of the "gripes" posted herein. I hope this helps clarify some of my position. If there are others out there with additional solutions please speak up, as I am not the only voice that has addressed these issues on this board.

Thank you for the gift of your time, it is appreciated. Carole M

 

Recording and having the board meetings posted somewhere is a good start. Interactive online meetings would be better, but that could be an end goal.

I would like to see an effort by the board to really interact with the community. Periodic "Town Halls" where a board member answers questions from community members, and just talks with us would be nice. This would allow community members to understand where a board member stands on topics as well as hold the board member accountable for their votes.

As it is now, I don't believe community involvement is important to the board, and it should be.

 

HELLO......ANYONE?

There was plenty of talk and agreement to the content of what was being said, where is the support? You all must have some additional ideas as to what would work best to achieve these goals. I threw out some ideas, but they are not all inclusive. I wanted everyone to know there is at least one thought process going on, and this would start the creative juices flowing from the rest of you. I can step up and help with the movement forward, but I fear I am not enough to bring this whole idea to fruition. C'mon folks, give me some more creative ideas that show how we all want the same thing and are willing to work towards achieving it. How are we to affect change if all we are doing is complaining and not being a part of the solution? PLEASE?

 

Thank You JV, we were apparently typing at the same time. Appreciate your input

 

Well, Like it or not, I will be going to the board meeting on the 27th and share my ideas on streaming and posting member exchanges and board meetings. My presentation will be short, as I need to stay under the three minute rule. I am hoping others will also come to the meeting and share their desires about streaming video so others of the community will be able to view our board and management team in action. This month's board meeting is an evening meeting at Fairway, so perhaps some of you may be able to attend that would normally not be able to. If not, it wouldn't be the first time I have stood alone in the field with the crickets chirping in the background.

Thank you for your time, it is greatly appreciated

 

My thoughts on the goal of having board meetings recorded and then re-broadcast is a good idea,
but the board has always been against this.

The board is on a mission to insulate themselves from the community as a whole so they do not
have to accept responsibility for anything. The last thing they would want is to be recorded
saying something they cannot back up. They’ve started or improved upon this insulation with
the formation of the SCPH and changing the by-laws that have served Sun City well for 50 years.

Changing the policy resolution to exclude the word members is another good example. By
excluding the word members they are saying the members have no standing at all.

Because of the lack of community participation the board has taken the posture that since
the community doesn’t care what is going on they will be the absolute authority on all
decisions.

I believe that massive community involvement will be required to turn the boards thinking around.

The problem, however, is how do you communicate with and motivate the community to show
up in massive numbers at board meetings. Petitions are out of the question as they can’t be
circulated on Sun City grounds. Another insulation technique.

Unless the community gets involved, the board will continue to operate as a dictatorship.

Replacing board members with people who are sympathetic with the goals expressed here,
will be a very long and possibly insurmountable task.

The only other option may be title 33.

What are the repercussions of title 33. Is Sun City West title 33 and if so, what has been the
downside for them as opposed to the upside of open and recordable meetings?

I’m just throwing stuff out there to see what sticks.

 

I agree wholeheartedly with CM; making small but significant changes while remaining under Title 10 is far better for us than to fall under Title 33. The most obvious reason is under 33, there is far better opportunity to bring suit for not following the absolute letter of the law.

Let me once again preface my comments with this: Whether we change or stay on the current course, Sun City is head and shoulders above most other age restricted communities. Most have single entity governance, and while that makes it easier, it also make it less responsive and less tolerant.

With that out of the way, the questions asked by SCR were a good starting point. Rather than repeating them, i will simply say the only way to change the current course is run candidates with a platform of changes. Three candidates committed to things like open work sessions, regular town hall meetings with real topics, reducing the quorum to something attainable for membership meetings and restoring the long range planning committee. And so we are clear, it is a two year plan, because until/unless there is a majority of board members who feel that way, it's all just becomes infighting.

The beauty of this kind of approach is simple: If the community at large accepts it, they would vote for the slate of three in year one and three in year two. If they didn't, no one would waste their retirement trying to make changes people don't care about.

Finally, let me close with a simple premise that has served Sun City so well since its inception: No one person has ever been the reason Sun City has succeeded. It was built as a collective and cumulative process and while some voices have been louder than others, the narrative has always been driven by the we, not the me.

If you saw the article in the Independent, you read this comment: "the business judgement rule calls for board members to exercise fiduciary duties, including acting in the best interests and benefits of the corporation, exercising the duties of care and undivided loyalty."

This has been the bone of my contention and the reason i struggled as a board member to support many of the positions and votes taken. I always felt i was elected by the residents to serve them, not the corporation. And of course the oddity is, the corporation exists to serve the members/residents (that is if you believe what the Articles of Incorporation say).

Perhaps one more platform item is to make sure we clarify documents to say board members are elected to serve the members and take a "loyalty oath" to a corporation.

 

Sun City West chose to voluntarily instill Title 33. The are actually also a Title 10 community based upon the legal descriptions of what constitutes each designation. I am willing to bet there have been times when some were wishing they were not utilizing Title 33. Example: Two friends out playing a round of golf, go and sit down after their game and talk about wives, grandkids, and how the last shot should have been birdie. Someone sees the two of them together, and reports them for having an illegal board meeting and accuses them of collusion. Two more board members gone. High turnover over there between the board members as they almost have to give up their lives to be on the board. Lots of infighting and recalls happening in SCW as well. Don't live there, so I don't follow the political scene, but there always seems to be turmoil there. With the meeting structure at SCW, as they have it set up, decorum has been lost from time to time, almost having fisticuffs break out, and they have had a few times when threats were made against those on the board. Can anyone insulate themselves from this, no. Open meetings does not preclude a "loose screw" from voicing their "opinion". That can happen today at member exchanges and board meetings. The difference is, the RCSC does not afford anyone the option to voice an opinion in real time with the board members. SCW does. The quorum would go up to 3750 members, which is not attainable at anytime. Instead, under Title 10, we could lower the quorum to 1000, which we know is obtainable, and finally have a real annual meeting.

I feel having meetings broadcast would involve the community in the process, allowing them to see how the RCSC is governed and this would allow the membership to want to come and see their board members in person and in action. Making the meetings easily accessible to the members that may be shut-ins, caretakers, or don't have transportation to the meetings can induce them to want to participate and feel encouraged by what they see, IMHO. Broadcasting the meetings can only be a good thing. The nut cases that fallout from this are already out there, and most have already been identified. So, let us join the 21st century of communications and provide the ways and means of keeping our membership connected.

Thank you for your time, cam.

 

Along with shut-ins, caretaker, and people without transportation, include people who own but do not yet live here and snowbirds.

If this meeting could become what it should be, an exchange of ideas, there should also be a way to get feedback from those within a reasonable amount of time.

Having a meeting where people read reports verbatim is ridiculous. But content of the meetings is a seperate topic.

 

It's sad to see what has become of both the disbanding of the Long Range Planning Committee and the Member Communications Committee. The downfall of the Communications Committee was when they tried to combine it with Marketing. They lost their direction and purpose which was to improve communication between the RCSC Board/Management and its members.

We need to see an infusion of committee members which can mount a campaign to get the Board Exchange and Monthly Board Meetings recorded for re-broadcast via uTube or on the RCSC website. It can be done as the RCSC has the equipment and personnel to do it. They have already done this for the Town Hall Election Forums and the Annual Meeting presentation. Seems to be a simple step to take.

I wish the Ad Hoc Long Range Committee would have another name. There will be nothing long range about the planning and it is so specific in focus. Ad Hoc Grand Avenue Property Committee would have been a much more appropriate title.

Okay....that's my 2 cents and I can spend the rest of they day enjoying all Sun City has to offer!!

 

Yes Aggie, in hindsight I would agree. Who knew the marketing of Sun City would become primarily a management function. Seems it is time for the board to modify the committee back to member communications and reword their duties and responsibilities to the board.