Today after the Member Exchange meeting, I was asked a question that was pretty good (not great) but pretty good. The person wanted to know why I thought we needed a Long Range Planning Committee in that we had a long range plan in place now through 2022. It was simple for me in that every nickel committed to the new long range plan came from only 2 sources; management or the board. The last project the Long Range Planning Committee recommended was the Marinette renovation. Immediately after that they were sent to Siberia as a way of thanking them for their service (said tongue in cheek but with a touch of resentment). Since then, every decision has been made by the 9 person board of directors or by the urging of the management staff (I used to be one of them and hated that mentality; I still do) The discussion lead us to a sentiment becoming popular since killing off the LRPC: We'll have town hall type meetings to involve the residents. I still laugh at that one. Their idea of a town hall meeting is to draw up the plans and then let the community decide if there should be 3 stalls or 4 to take a dump in. Sorry, that's hardly getting community involvement. If you really want to see how the community feels on a topic, begin planning now to hold an open meeting scheduled when folks get back from their summer break (late in October). Include on the agenda an open discussion about a true long range planning committee or perhaps even better ways to engage the residents. Don't hold your breath though, this board seems to like the idea of being the end game arbiters on where to spend the millions flooding into the RCSC.
Now those are great questions E. There's no requirement regarding committees that compel a board to do anything but respond to suggestions they make. It was why kicking the LRPC to the curb was nonsense. They have no power. Your second question was even better though: The previous LRPC was given a task, which excluded 75% of the available PIF funds. Talk about sharing information and when you consider that, eyes have to glaze over...at least it did for me, and I was on the board. Unfortunately we have had (and still do) board members who see everything in only 2 colors; black and white. They are so immersed in top down leadership they fail to understand there are dozens of other colors in the Crayola box. We pay our management staff to run the day to day operations and then also trust them to help make the board's decisions regarding policies. I struggle with that; not their input, but how much control they excerpt. I've argued this before and it' still my contention: I'm less concerned about the LRPC telling the board how much to spend where, but more focused on what will be happening as boomers become the majority of the home owners. Not because there's anything wrong with boomers, but they will bring different perspectives than the "greatest generation." Apparently the RCSC board is revisiting the long range planning committee, so we'll see where they go with it. This is the kind of stuff that gets reintroduced before the summer break and by the time they get back seems to fall off the table.
The history of sharing information by the Board/Management with committees is rather bleak. The LRPC would be so productive and valuable if it did have access to more information. They should only bring it back if it is aware of all major plans in the 2-10 year "RCSC Management" Long Range Plan.
Spot on aggie. Just imagine where Sun City could be if the RCSC ever got serious about building a true long range planning committee and sharing information like they should. Thjis community has a wealth of talent, but we tend to convince residents the only way to get truly involved is to run for the board. Historicaly Sun City was a built on a platform of community involvement. A good friend of mine (gentle Ben) is going through the state archive newspapers from Sun City and the stories he is relating back to me are staggeringly good. This c0mmunity would not have made it but for the perseverance of the folks who moved here. We've moved so far away from that structure of involevemnt and commitment, that it does give me pause for cconcern. Some of the changes the past years are troubling. I understand why, but i think it being streamlined isn't better than being judicious and inclusive.
I wouldn't hesitate to run for the Board if it weren't for the 3 year commitment. There are so many life events looming that could negate any chance to uphold the duties of the office. I won't take on a project or office unless I know I can follow through. Being on a committee is one way to be of value but it is important that you aren't just spinning your wheels.
