This topic was brought up by Director Collins during the 11.8 BOD meeting (1:03:36). As was explained, when all the money in the budget isn't spent - which was described as "a lot," the board "carries that money forward." Director Collins wanted to know why that money couldn't be given to the various Clubs for their "wish lists." Jan Ek, retired GM (but still consulting) (not acting Bill Cook), mentioned that for the past 6 years, that money has kept the yearly assessment from being raised. Is this typical of a non-profit? If there is so much money left, does that mean that the initial budget wasn't accurately created? I'm definitely not a finance/budget type of person so I have no idea if this is strange. Ye who have been here longer, enlighten me!
Interesting topic and one that has baffled many.While on the board i told the gm i had never seen budgets done like this (carry forward). It was a virtual slush fund and she told me by having that, it allowed her to sleep better at night knowing she had a reserve in the case of an emergency. Oddly enough, years back (around 2010) the board created just such a fund. They set aside monies to reach a set goal of 5 million dollars. You see it listed on the yearly reports (i forget the name of it, but it is there in case of an emergency). As i listened to her comment regarding having to raise the annual assessment if she didn't have the "carry-forward" i muttered to myself "bullshit." If you track those dollars year to year, you will see a constant million plus dollars. If they never spend it, they never need increase it. Now we know in all likelihood they will be using the "carry-forward to pay for the million plus dollar security system. If that happens, then the new gm, should he desire to replenish it, would either have to cut Capital Projects (coming from annual assessments) or increase the annual assessments to do so. Capital projects are often simply discretionary spending items often requested by clubs or preventive maintenance items that need be done. I have to laugh because the first year the new gm came here and saw the carry-forward he raised the question, why? As a "numbers guy," it simply isn't the way most businesses run. The simple reality is, the RCSC has a number of expense items they have to cover yearly. All of the money comes from revenue generated by "lot assessments," golf or bowling, rentals of space, club donations or investment income. The only other pool of money is from PIF which generates 7 to 8 million dollars yearly and can only be used for projects of more than 300K and have a life span of 15 years or more. Hope that explains it.
Why couldn't some of this carry forward money be put into the cost of adding the SunViews back into the thrown Sun City Independent newspapers? I heard "they" claimed the Independent wanted $10K more to add the insert once a month. The folks who rely on the Independent for their news on RCSC would probably welcome it back. It's really hard to read online, and I'd venture a guess that not everyone has internet or a computer to read it. Yes, they might have a smart phone, but I can't image trying to read it on one of those.
I think it is funny that they use a cost excuse to put SunViews online and then in the next breath are leery of online solutions for board and member meetings because 'we have a population' of technology challenged members.
If only it were funny Cheri, we could all enjoy the joke. It was a pathetic decision. If you noticed all the ads in the paper version, that revenue covered a good portion of the costs.
