Finally, it all becomes more clear...

So this week we saw Gary Cotten, RCSC board member log into City pages and share some information with the TOSC community. It was welcomed by several posters to this site as a step in the right direction and perhaps a signal for the board to be more open. Aggie even suggested he watch his backside because talking opening is frowned on by the powers that be.

I guess it was no real surprise when i got the RCSC email announcing Gary's resignation from the board and the fact the board will be filling the vacancy. Perhaps the best thing that come from this, is for Gary to give us an inside look at what exactly has been going on behind those closed doors the RCSC so dearly loves.

 

GCotten

Thank you Emily. I do have to say in regards to your posting on another thread regarding Scar Faced Half Baked since I'm not familiar with that I did google it and nearly fell out of my chair laughing because if my board resignation would have occurred in my younger less wise years that could have been the exact scenario. I applaud your insight and you are right not everything is as it looks on the surface. Earlier I did prepare a posting regarding the resignation with thoughts and comments and for what ever reason it disappeared. Maybe a good thing because it may have shown too much anger on my part. I will give it another shot in the next day or two.

 

My irreverence (as seen in a seperate thread) aside, thank you Mr. Cotton for your time on the board.

I hope you, and other former (or current) board members, will feel comfortable sharing your knowledge of how our board works. Good and bad.

Maybe this (a sharing of info from former board members) could be part of the Civics club...right BP?

 

Spot on V. I'm sure Gary would make a valuable addition to the new club we are looking to start.

 

At this point, with only months left in Gary's term, it will probably be a former Board member that will be appointed to fill out the term until this November's election. They will most likely want someone who knows the ropes and can hit the ground running.

So four members will be elected to the Board as long as the 4th vote getter receives at least 100 votes. Will be interesting to see how this all shakes out.

 

The word that has been lingering about is there are a couple of former board members interested in getting back in the game, and perhaps some who's term is ending running again. Nothing wrong with that, if you happen to like what has happened over the last 5 or 10 years.

Of course the first thing i would do is point to the unprecedented commitment to all things golf and wonder how we got fixated on spending 40 million dollars on a game struggling to survive, but what the heck do i know eh?

Hopefully Gary sheds some light on what went down and why? In my humble opinion, the only way to improve on the process is to open it up and let some light shine on the decisions made behind locked doors and how we got there.

 

Got a question for anyone who would like to reply. When we talk about the "board" are we talking about all 8 or 9 members individually or are we going to lump all of them together? We know that the votes at an open board meeting can be seen. I think some of us are aware that the vote in work sessions (I mean the consensus) is most often an unclear number and it can change on any given day because a director can change their mind anytime prior to the intended action. But the membership never knows how individual directors are responding to any particular issue. Should actual names be used to clarify where the problems are concentrated? Or do you want to be generic?

 

And there-in lies the problem for all of us "little people" Gary. The board for us on the outside looking in is generic because whatever goes on in work sessions is simply an unknown. Hell, you can't even talk about it, and if you do, threats of expulsion are ever looming.

It's exactly why i would love to see work sessions open to the public. We all would know who was shoving something down our/your (the rest of the board's) throat. I advocated for it while on the board, and especially given what has gone on of late, it becomes even more important to stop hiding behind closed doors.

I always wrestled with how much i could say and about whom without ****ing off people, but then again, i was never overly concerned about hurting someone's feelings by being honest.

 

"Ditto" although at first I was hesitant because of being new but it didn't take long to start seeing all the issues that turns sound thinking into "incompetency" but we'll talk more about that later. I think I may start using board member names when I start discussing or responding to issues if I think it is necessary unless of course this group thinks that is off limits. Board members have got to start becoming individually accountable for their actions and that will never happen if they are continued to be lumped into just a group. There are several responsible directors that do try to make the best decisions but a majority of them have great difficulty in that arena. Please understand that I am not excluding myself from making some wrong decisions while on the board but at least I have taken a direction to correct that issue.

 

Please, Please, Please, May I just Rest In Peace in Sun City without all the politics?
Just let me pay my annual fee.

 

Gary,
I think the problem some of us "little people" have is we NEVER have an opportunity to interact with the board members.
At the monthly board meetings, we are read the reports like the imbeciles they we apparently are, and then a handful of people get up to complain. Responses to the complaints are never given and there is no follow up (that I know of).
The "member exchange" just seems like something is done so the board can say they did it. The facial expressions of board members during the "exchange" is priceless.
There is never any real discussion between board members and community members, so we can't tell who is who. We do witness the votes, but without knowing the discussion behind the votes it's tough to know if the vote is real.

Peg...No, SC is a self governed community. We are all responsible for how this city works.

 

J_and_V - "Maybe this (a sharing of info from former board members)
could be part of the Civics club...right BP?"

What is this Civics Club that you mention? What is the purpose
and mission of this club? Will this be an RCSC sanctioned club?


GCotten - "Should actual names be used to clarify where the problems are
concentrated? Or do you want to be generic?".

I think BPearson pretty much answered this question with the following;
BPearson - "Hell, you can't even talk about it, and if you do,
threats of expulsion are ever looming."

Sounds to me as if board members are muzzled once they become board members.

GCotten - "Board members have got to start becoming individually accountable
for their actions and that will never happen if they are continued
to be lumped into just a group."

How does one hold an individual board member accountable? And what
does "hold one accountable" mean? Can anyone outside the board
hold an individual accountable if names can't be mentioned and/or
closed sessions cannot be talked about? Am I missing something here?

"Originally Posted by J_and_V
Gary,
I think the problem some of us "little people" have is we NEVER have
an opportunity to interact with the board members. At the monthly board
meetings, we are read the reports like the imbeciles they we apparently
are, and then a handful of people get up to complain. Responses to the
complaints are never given and there is no follow up (that I know of).
The "member exchange" just seems like something is done so the board
can say they did it. The facial expressions of board members during
the "exchange" is priceless.
There is never any real discussion between board members and community
members, so we can't tell who is who. We do witness the votes, but without
knowing the discussion behind the votes it's tough to know if the vote is real.

Peg...No, SC is a self governed community. We are all responsible for how
this city works."

By "member exchange" I assume you are talking about the meetings where board members
and community members are present and community members get to air their gripes.
I've been at some of these and learned early on that this is nothing more than the
board completing a requirement to hear from the community. Their is no discussion.

Sun City is supposed to be self governed, but that responsibility has been given
to the board by lack of participation by the community. I think this occurred
because the community realized as I did that the member exchange never produces
meaningful discussions or results. Thus participation is left to a few.

 

SCR,
The civics club is nothing but a figment of my imagination.
A wish that we had a living breathing "something" where interested community members could regularly gather and talk about/learn the history and future of Sun City.
A place where we we could all get along and have a real dialog with nothing on the agenda but the betterment of where we live.
A place that has the good of the whole instead of the few as their top priority.

"...Sun City is supposed to be self governed, but that responsibility has been given
to the board by lack of participation by the community..."


And shame on us for letting that happen.

 

I hope you good folks have all this fixed before I get there.

Sorry Peg, there is always politics when you have folks that are power hungry and driving their own agenda. The job of the board members is supposed to be a service position where you serve to the betterment of the community. The only politics should be listening to the voice of the people of the community you serve. Personal agendas should not come into play, but sadly the reality is there are selfish people in this world... I'll leave it at that.


The carefree part of me feels like Peg, just let me pay my dues and enjoy life.
The optimistic part of me says; "when I get to Sun City I believe I can help make a difference."
The vindictive part of me says; "the buggers can only serve for so long, then they will have to live with what others decide for them, then they can be the ones complaining with no feedback".

The realistic part of me says; "I'll do the best I can trying to do some combination of the above".

 

Two thumbs up Bruce.

 

Emily....(to clarify) the use of directors names would not be for the purpose of mudslinging but to see what particular position they take on any particular subject past or present. If they choose to participate or respond to a particular question any mudslinging would be on their part which I doubt would occur....but any type of response from them would be more than occurs now or in the past. Most or possibly all of them read the comments on this site and more than you think have signed up. When they are referred to as the "board" it is easy to evade the question but when you say "Hey Rich what to do think about having a mock forum for the candidates so they can get over their stage fright" or "Hey Carol do you think the cost of the turf removal on the golf courses is worth it" and so on. That's what I'm talking about if I wasn't clear.

 

I obviously have no say in this yet, but what would really be great is to see how each director voted on a particular issue and to have a brief explanation as to why that person voted that way. Not for the purpose of beating them up for their vote, but to understand why they felt a yea or nay was needed for the good of the community. This is sort of a reality check and accountability, if you have to explain your vote you may or may not vote differently... hopefully not.

I think it would do two things;

1. It would help the residents to understand why their elected BOD voted for a particular thing, aka: the reasoning behind it. I think if I knew why each director voted for something it would give me a chance to consider how I would have voted. I would then have a better understanding of why an issue passed or didn't. I may not agree, but I would at least have a better understanding of why each director felt the way they voted.

2. As a director I would be able to voice my reasons which would open lines of communication from director to the community without having to sit in front of a bunch of angry residents. Directors should not feel they have to keep their reasons secret, tell the community what you were thinking. They were voted in to be representatives, the community should know what their representatives are thinking.

I may be naive, but it just seems to me it would open the lines of communication. If talking about issues in person is intimidating just do it in writing. A few short sentences would usually be plenty and would go a long way to starting the trust factor. IMHO you don't have to agree with someone to trust them.

For instance, I have a lot of liberal friends that I don't agree with, but it doesn't mean I don't respect their opinion... I just think they are wrong. We are still friends, we just disagree on issues.

 

That's good BruceW...you said it a lot better than I did. Lets hope some if not all of the directors read your comments.

 

Knowing the names might also give some power to those who feel they have the community's' best interests in mind but feel others have persuaded them to vote differently. Anonymity is a luxury that can no longer be afforded. Emily is correct..it might inhibit some with good ideas from running for the board. But the balance of knowing how decisions are made outweighs that luxury when trust has been eroded.

 

All really good comments gang and all part and parcel of how a community should engage in the process of self-governance. Open discussions will most often bring about a wider range of ideas and the potential to reach better solutions. The simplicity of opening the work sessions to the general public would stop all of the speculation about who may have said what or who voted how and why on any given issue.

Take away the perception of wrong doing and then everything becomes clear as to why they did it and who supported it.