Turning Lemons into Lemonade

Fellow members: I suspect you are as embarrassed as I was by the current library debacle. I simply cannot understand what the few Board members who participated in this were thinking. Who, if anyone, are they representing. And what do prospective buyers of property think when they see the level of dysfunction in our Board leadership? And why do we keep finding our leaders in the same loop over and over again. What happens this fall when those in power unveil the architects design of their elements? Same play different actors.

What if we took this as a challenge. How do we turn these sour grapes into a delicious bottle of our favorite wine that we all get to enjoy together? Take a pause and hire an expert is a good start. What do you think?

 

I thought Marlene had great ideas for the SAC. Why not bring her back? Who are the “board members” you made mention? I don’t really expect an answer, but it would be nice to know.

 

I, as a member of the Sun City Advocates, am challenged. How can we turn this situation around? We can offer suggestions on places to start, but before we get to that step, the Board itself has to realize that they need help.

The demise of the Board has been spiraling out of control for many years. And part of the problem is that the Board may not realize it nor know how to ask for help. We, the members, can see it, but none of us can force the Board to change; they have to want to. And they should also realize that there are a plethora of community members with backgrounds/working experiences that may be able to help.

It is the responsibility of the president of the Board to ensure that the Board and the committees are functioning as the bylaws and policies dictate. This past January, the General Manager attempted to restructure the Board's orientation training, but it wasn't totally successful. Plus, it's really not the GM's place to try to do that. He is the employee of the Board.

It was suggested at the Exchange meeting on Monday, 4/8 that they were dysfunctional, and they should seek professional help. I hope that they were listening. And I hope that they know that there are members who are willing to help.

Jean Totten as One Day at a Time

 

Help me out here John, you said this: "I simply cannot understand what the few Board members who participated in this were thinking." I counted 8 of the 9 board members seated and Karen explained Kat was on a long planned vacation. The meeting was for the members to express their concerns and thoughts so i hope you aren't suggesting they should have been responding. Curious?

Tom T is correct, Marlene did an amazing job and should have been brought in at the very beginning. Clearly mistakes were made as i saw competing agendas from board members and committee members alike. I was in the room for most of those meetings and the ones i missed, i watched. It would be easy to pick fly shit over the end result, but the reality was it was a wonderful step forward to try and reinvigorate member participation.

Anyone familiar with organizational structure in non-profits understands change is slow and is never perfectly executed. Compound it all with a mostly new management staff and 5 of the 9 board members being brand new and one quickly comes to understand the road back is filled with pot holes. Personally i think the board represented themselves well on Monday and if and when the resolutions are announced we will see first hand if they listened to what members were saying.

Finally, the path we are on is infinitely better than where we were just 3 short years ago. Can they do better? Absolutely. For my dime i am more than happy to see the outcome. I always measure success by what they do, not by what someone says.

 

If you want a true change stop previous board members from recommending future members. It's just a natural instinct to want someone with the same views you have. Let the residents make up their own minds without influence. In the last board member selection, there was a preferred list on this site.

 

Jean,
I agree 100% with what you said - You can lead a horse to water but you can't make them think.

 

Bill,
I am never quite sure where you are coming from or going to which is OK because I am not following you (literally or figuratively). But here goes: If the purpose of the meeting was for the members to express their concerns why was there a slick statement given at the beginning. The purpose of Karen's introductory remarks was to diffuse (spin) a situation that by all appearances had been created by the actions of Karen, Kat and Matthew. During her presentation she alluded to "casual conversations" regarding the leases and repurposing the libraries. She also said believe it or not there are nonfinancial reasons to take such actions. Her carefully chosen words were so deeply encrypted that it would take a cryptologist a month of work to understand anything she said other than I am sorry you caught us. Bill, I am tiring of you standing in judgement of everyone else. Please express your opinions without trying to slight other people or claim the moral high ground. (Anyone familiar with organizational structure in non-profits...) And yes, I am acutely aware members of this board seek your advice on board matters. A fact I am not comfortable with, but it is what it is.

So on to the subject at hand. I have had many meaningful conversations with highly respected members who held Board leadership positions and the conclusion we come to is this. This Board just needs to stop or be stopped before they do too much financial harm to the RCSC. No libraries, an indoor dog training facility and an orchestra pit show just how out of touch the board is with its members.

 

Tom, Please see my response to Bill below.

 

It wasn't that difficult John, really. You implied, no wait you said straight out this: "I simply cannot understand what the few Board members who participated in this were thinking." It's a simple question that required a simple answer. Were you suggesting that "few Board members" were in attendance? Or were you miffed that few responded? Instead you went on the same tirade that makes it clear you hate Kat, Karen and anyone else that got in your way and caused you to "resign." The reality is with that size crowd the best tact was to make the opening remarks (which were short) and then let the members vent. How that is wrong escapes me?

My real angst comes from your hollier than thou attitude as you've thrown all kinds of their sins out and ignored your own. Sorry John, we all make them. As i watched you do this i felt compelled to share with the world yours, but for what purpose? You were in a position to make a difference and you elected to resign. Which by the way, is not by any means unusual. Board members have been quitting for years and for a variety of reasons. I've written often my guiding principle regarding being a volunteer was if it's not fun why do it? The one exception i made was while on the RCSC board, Lord knows i wanted to, but i stuck around for three years hating most of it. There's nothing fun in being in the minority position.

It's almost laughable as you started out your remarks the other day following the meeting commending Karen's handling of it (which was exceptional by the way) along with the opening statement where she apologized (damn, no sack cloth and ashes). Two sentences in you went on the attack. I get it, you hate them and what they did to you. I guess this is the beginning of a long campaign season eh?

I also noted your comments on how i am supportive of the board, (which i was and still am and by the way that included your campaign and ultimate election). I also applauded your efforts regarding both Mountain View being put on hold and the creation of SAC. Were there mistakes made in it's formation and how it was run? Absolutely. It's to be expected as all of you who were trying to create something better/different had your hands full. The good news was the process was changed for the better.

That said, when the board steps in it, i will be more than blunt how i feel, you know, my opinion. Odd how what you say are facts while others only have opinions. Must be the lawyer in you coming out eh? This latest release regarding the library was tripe (my exact words sent in a text to them). I've been critical of the handling of the indoor dog arena since the day it was initially passed in 2022 (before Kat was president). It was a mistake back then and the motion to allocate funds was just as dumb/poorly thought out.

It's damned difficult being a board member. I always viewed the management and their actions as fair game. And to be clear, when board's have voted to support what i felt were wrong/bad decisions, i spoke up and out. The personal stuff is over the top, but if that's what float's you boat, it's obvious you'll go for it.

 

Here you go again with the personal attacks. Bill, I was hoping my comments would spur a moment of humility. The points on which we agree is the dog thing is dumb/poorly thought out. The other stuff does not deserve a response other than to say I find it a waste of time to hate anyone.

 

You keep saying i am attacking you John, please feel free to highlight what you read as attacks in the above post. I dealt with attorneys for a living John. My goal in every engagement with them was clear and concise communication. You may not like what i say or how i ask it, but pretending you don't know what i am saying shouldn't be an issue.

If there's any hate going on here brother its contained in your raging against those who stayed around trying to pick up the pieces. I've never hated you, i don't to this day. That said some of the stuff you did i hated, but i left it off the table and elected not to try and drag you down with it.

 

Time for a “Time Out?”

 

Sounds good to me. But then i'm easy.

 

The original subject matter is how to make the best of a bad situation. It is not how to make a bad situation worse. One of the lessons I think that needs to be institutionalized is what Jean Totten calls transparency. How to institutionalize transparency in an ever changing volunteer board with significant sums of money at stake is, I admit, a difficult task.

 

John, some thoughts, when I served on the Board and thereafter I thought some Board members and at times some members should have been institutionalized. I have also found that the term transparency is a lot like peace, it’s an illusion that is being sold.

Just my thoughts from an ex college antiwar later paralegal hippie, button down corporate person, atheist, flaming liberal Democrat and proud of it. A life well lived.

 

You can stop pretending now. SIU Carbondale?? 1972??
College — Science Concentration, Secondary Education Minor and History Major
Ranked @285 with a 95% acceptance rate.

 

Why are many of these people getting personal on these posts? It's frustrating, to say the least!

 

100% agree - If someone is posting false information please call them out otherwise stick to the topic at hand...

 

Quick question, does this apply to Bill's post:

"Her statement in Oct is exactly what i would expect from someone who made a mistake in Sept. Your turn barrister; did you forget the incident or were you just playing your same old tired word games? McCarthyism indeed...go swill another cocktail."
BPearson, 7 minutes ago

.......or just to things I post.

 

To everyone! When I said "Boys! Boys! Boys!", I wasn't referring to you HH.