So i know there is another thread here that has been started and i have no interest in taking away from it. The end of the post asked specifically what each of you thought about it? In this thread, i won't be asking your opinion, but i will gladly listen or read them. There's just so much meat on the bone, i want to take the time to do justice to all of the topics that were raised and address them all (sort of). As mentioned, the Sun City Advocates had discussed the option of meeting and preparing a list of items to put forth. After much back and forth, we decided not to do that and approach the meeting in a much more organic way by just letting nature take its course. I got there early, which i never do. When i drove into the Sundial parking lot at about 8;35 my first thought was "oh my goodness, no one will be here." To my delight, by about 9:50 the numbers about quadrupled. Now, to be clear, it wasn't a massive crowd, but it was amazingly vocal. It started slow, but dare i say the crescendo increased with each new speaker. My intention when i went was to ask one question of the board and not really wanting an answer. I had hoped to simply begin an ongoing dialogue regarding a topic i suspected they knew little or nothing about. Nope, wasn't interested in blindsiding them, it was all going to be a precursor for the months to come. Here's where the Karma hits them square in the mouth: every organization develops a culture from within. Over the past 15 years, the RCSC has become fixated on believing everyone living here loves everything they do, while almost everyone. The whole mantra from within was to paint with a brush those who were outspoken as the "haters." Literally, that's what some of us have been called. Usually it raises my hackles, but i've heard it so many times, it just is what it is. And that's why yesterday was so damned good. The member/board exchange showcased any number of folks with a grievance or an ax to grind. And to be clear, it wasn't started by the Advocates. Several of us added our 2 cents, but the real focus of what i will post here is from members frustrated by what is/has been going on in the community. The real tell was when the process included a show of hands regarding any given topic. I guess i could summarize it with the board's president's comment, "Oh my." Kind of says it all. Perhaps even more disturbing was the lack of knowledge when pressed on topics. As i was sitting in the crowd, i found myself mouthing answers to questions or comments, the information given often fell far short or was just outright wrong. I'm not being unkind. I have the history and a working knowledge of things most board members or even management haven't gotten their head around. It's called experience and actually doing my homework rather than just being told how everything works. I suspect, when board members watch the playback, they too will realize the importance of being prepared. To be fair, this was an all new process for them. It put both the board and management square in the cross hairs of problems many didn't know were even an issue. From the perspective, yesterday was really, really good and a learning experience for all involved. More thoughts when returning from a blood draw, off to see Count Dracula.
Let me begin with the one that most likely through the board and management for the biggest loop. Four women golfers spoke about issues they saw as a problem. The easiest to address should have been the question of walkers on the golf course during regular play. The courses are marked no trespassing, period. The signs clearly state when golfers are on the course, you can't be. Apparently the guys doing the maintenance have been told not to approach walkers (i get it). The general manager told the woman who raised the question they should contact the pro shop and they will find either the superintendent for the course or one of the handful of rangers to address it. Sounds reasonable, but is it? There might be one, maybe two rangers on duty (if that) and they are spread over 8 courses, what's the likelihood they will get there in time? No clue on how readily available the course superintendent is, but is seems to me they now may be splitting super's over a couple of courses. Does it make sense to have them chasing down walkers? It would seem to me to enhance the rules and penalties for trespassing would be better served. My best guess is once several stiff penalties are handed out, it would cease. The bigger issue is one i am acutely aware of; outside play. I just didn't realize how bad it had gotten. 3 female golfers reported the challenges of getting tee times. The director of golf wasn't there, but i guess they wished he had been. The first speaker mentioned those living outside the community buying a full play pass could now access the portal to make tee times. I was shocked to hear that. It wasn't the case when the program started. I have no idea if it is true or not. If you watched the video, one director assured me she would get to the bottom of it. Unfortunately it appears the point i was making when i spoke to the issue was lost. Whether they come in through the portal or not, there should never come a point where someone living outside the community gets to play cheaper than our residents. We used to argue about the "Golf Now" rates purchased online, but there were only a couple per day. Even that was a tough pill to swallow back when i was on the board, and that was stated by board members who played. I hate to admit this, but i have become a numbers wonk when it comes to golf. Finding the answers means digging through old financial statements. Unlike Sun City West, where you can go to their website and see breakouts of play by season, category and exactly how much revenue they derive from each (they hide or bury nothing). None of that is available on our site. In spite of that, what is clear, when the pandemic hit, there was an opportunity to make golf more lucrative (that is flat out a misnomer), what it did do was provide opportunities for the RCSC not to take the bath they had been taking. Sadly, there was a cost to do that. What you saw and heard at the meeting yesterday was a direct result of their actions. I know from looking at revenue from 2019 and then again in 2021, they doubled their outside full play pass sales (approximately 50 to 100) and they added about 100 more full play resident passes. Those additional 150 full play passes only guaranteed tee times would be more difficult to secure. In fact, the RCSC leadership was near on giddy they had increased from around 300,000 rounds to about 350,000 rounds. Stop and think about it this way; every RCSC member that golfs and either buys the surcharge annual pass or pays the full price to play a weekly round increases the amount they pay to play. The full play pass, whether resident or non, the more they play, the less they pay per round. It is a self-defeating process because the more play there is, the higher the maintenance costs become. The harder it is to get tee times. The problem is, it gets worse, and you heard it yesterday. Tournaments and especially outside tournaments bump residents from the courses they regularly play. We heard one golfer tell us she schedules Sunday play for a group and the last three Sundays, they have been displaced by an outside tournament. The general manager told us he thought outside tournaments where only scheduled when courses weren't being booked. I'm sorry, does that not sound dumb? Tournaments are booked months, if not a year in advance. How would anyone know who was going to be trying to book a tee time months before hand? The problem has become we have created a monster that has taken over our courses. With roughly 5000 golfers, less than 25% of them own full play passes and get preferential treatment. As mentioned yesterday, groups of now up to 30 are treated differently than a foursome trying to book a tee time. The real question that needs to be asked is, how many of the tee times are actually taken by that 25% buying full play passes? The second question should be even easier; how many of the tee times are taken by non residents either from full play passes, or through tournaments? And so we are clear, here's why this matters. We now know we (the membership) has subsidized golf to the tune of 25 million dollars over the past 12 years (from the general ledger). We also know that the PIF has paid approximately 50 million dollars for the golf courses, out buildings and water infrastructure. Nope, this post isn't about moaning about it, but that 75 million dollars came directly from the membership, either in yearly lot assessments or the PIF. The point is simple; that subsidy should be enjoyed by the membership, not by those living outside the community. Booking outside tournaments and selling cheap full play passes to people who haven't spent a dime to help make it what it is have no business benefiting from it. More importantly, those living here should never be bumped from being able to play. While it's nice the director is looking at how an outsider can book a round of golf, that is the proverbial pimple on the elephants ass regarding this discussion. Stay tuned as the next one fits nicely with this one.
We need to keep plowing along because there is so much to cover. The member/board exchange was just that damned good. In another similar thread aggie mentioned Royal Oaks. This has long been a passion of hers, for a lot of reasons and rightly so. In the early 1980's, one of the southern state's (maybe Kentucky) University's did an in depth analysis of Sun City. They compiled a mountain of data and produced an even larger report on the good and the bad. The good was enormous, the bad focused on on single item; continuum of care. They said, we didn't have enough options for those who wanted to move out of their homes but to stay within the white walls of Sun City. Once the need was identified, all types of care type facilities were built and dot the community. Royal Oaks at the time was the second, save for the small one of Grand Ave and 103rd, Sun Valley Lodge. Royal Oaks was a wholly different beast and with it's church affiliation and was positioned perfectly to become the destination of choice for those who could afford it. Kind of like the difference between shopping at K-Mart (there's only 3 of them left BTW as of today) and Macy's. As the growth of that industry exploded across Sun City, there was a variety of options. Some were ownership (El Dorado), several were straight rentals and Royal Oaks was king with a substantial buy-in but no ownership. It really was a mishmash of living options and one of my challenges as a board member was understanding who paid what. Let me be more clear; i had no freaking idea. As a board member i was told, as you heard yesterday, there are a variety of agreements spread across some 20 or 30 years. When i asked to see them, it was like asking to see something beyond my ability to understand. I was shown nothing. At yesterday's meeting, early on, a woman got up and asked about what kind of deal "Inspirata Pointe" was getting. Who? Then is struck, she was talking about the massive building project north of Grand Ave and 103rd. She said she thought there were 160 or more units being built, then we heard it may only be 150. As she pressed the general manager for answers, he mentioned those old agreements. She wanted to know what their buy-in is/was? What a great freaking question. Which is the perfect chance to enlighten you all. The K-Hov building project behind the cemetery on Del Webb Blvd in phase 2 was being developed while i was on the board (2014). They had sent a letter to the board asking about a reduction in the lot buy-in to the RCSC. I/we came to find out, any new development in Sun City that wanted access to our centers had to pay a $5000 one time fee. The logic was it was way cheaper to pay that than to build and run their own amenities. They asked to have the first 25 or 50 homes be built and only pay half the going rate (no idea what happened after i left the board with the other 100 homes still to be built). We agreed to get them up and running. To be clear, that builder buy-in was one thing, beyond that, the home buyers also had to pay their PIF fees when they closed. At that point it might have been $3000. No matter what, it was a nice piece of change into the RCSC's coffers (that's a good thing). That's why her question was so on point. These new units being opened by Royal Oaks are quite lovely; and they're not cheap. High end isn't a bad thing; especially if they pay their fair share to tap into our amenity package. Here's where it gets a little dicey, Royal Oaks has more money than God (perhaps because of the religious designation) and they have spared no expense over the years adding to, updating and enhancing every aspect of their "campus." They have bought up whole blocks of Sun City which to aggies chagrin has lost us tax revenue along the way. Royal Oaks will tell you they are a good corporate citizen and freely donate to all the appropriate bodies of their own free will. I choose not to get in the middle of the fray. Until now. The question asked was so appropriate, especially given the comments relative to our golf courses. If in fact those 150 plus new units are paying their $5000 buy-in fee plus each of the residents paying their PIF, access should be a given. If, however they are not, how does that square? They aren't owners (i don't think), they could be considered renters but they actually used to have a buy-in fee (300K, higher now i am sure) plus your monthly fees but it gave you access to move about the various continuing care options as you aged. My point here is, are they really buying into the incredible amenity package we have in Sun City via the RCSC (BTW, they have really nice amenities of their own, but clearly not a golf course)? Because if they are not, or if they are getting a really sweet heart deal and then getting access to even just the golf courses that we all subsidize, one could legitimately ask the question; Is that right? I know they can buy a privilege card for using the facilities, which includes golf and the membership pricing structure. But, what about the buy-in? What we don't know is how these new units are being treated. Is it like K-Hov and the buy-in they had? Are they grandfathered and have an arrangement on all new units? Perhaps of most importance, has the board been involved in any of this process or is it just up for management to decide what is happening? So many questions, so little time.
So much fertile ground to plow, so many topics, a constant drum beat: Clearly the "new and improved" member/board exchange meeting opened the eyes of many, perhaps even those sitting on the board. There was, in my humble opinion, one topic that garnered the most support from the audience. By the way, i've elected not to use posters names, but if you are interested you can see who said what by watching the video. Early on in the meeting, one speaker with ties to the Del Webb Sun Cities Museum spoke to a matter the RCSC board could fix in a nano second. It wouldn't take a motion or a by-laws rewrite. They could simply direct the communications director to do it. Some of this stuff isn't overwhelming, it's just common sense. The problem of course is; it would anger the now departed general manager. So, what possibly could this be. As the speaker argued, there is no historical reference to "Sun City being the original fun city." In fact, that came about around the time i was elected to the board. The argument goes PULTE wouldn't approve using the pinwheel sun logo so we needed to rebrand the look and feel of Sun City. This was shortly after the housing market crash of 2009/2010 and property values had plummeted. We actually had a substantial marketing budget back then and apparently the slogan came from the marketing firm we had hired. At the same time, the county agreed to redo the roadway signs telling those entering the same thing; "Sun City The Original Fun City." In 2012, while on the board we passed a motion to spend 850K to put up all the electronic marques you see at the rec centers as a way to be a constant reminder for the events going to be held. It was simply marketing 101. Once those were up, that same mantra about us being the "fun city' flashed repeatedly. There was some push back about abandoning our identity, but the gm was fixated on changing the image of the community. Why promote retiring and coming here to work (volunteering) when you can come here and just have fun? So we are clear, that message, "Sun City the city of volunteers," doesn't go back to the earliest days. A resident came up with it in the 80's or early 90's. The fact was, volunteerism had been a way of life in Sun City from almost it's opening. The logo was the perfect fit and as i said at the meeting, it was our identity, it defined us and set us apart from all the others (except Sun City West). When the proposal was made from the floor, there was some initial confusion regarding what signs she was talking about. Once straightened away and once she gave the historical reasoning behind her suggestion there was a floor vote for a show of support. It was stunning in numbers and if memory serves me, it was what caused the president to gasp, "oh my" when she saw how popular the idea was. It was a suggestion that just made sense. So we are clear, i have touted this return for years. I had no intent on raising the topic at the meeting, nor did i know the proposal was coming. I do however know when this movement to return those marques and the entry signs began some 3 plus years ago, there was a directive to remove the City of Volunteers from them. They used to co-share the signage but when the gm saw/heard some folks at SCHOA were pushing the county to replace the existing signs and it caused her to react and had it removed. It will truly be interesting to see if the floor proposal to return our marques and to return our identity will be followed through on. I suspect at best, they will cut the baby in half and let both statements appear. At worst, they will ignore the idea and leave it as is. We'll see eh?
And what does that tell us? It tells us that they are out of touch with the community. It's like there's two different entities, each heading in a different direction! One entity wanting to know and understand what's going on (transparency) with the ability to offer input, and the other who thinks they know best so just don't worry about it, shut-up and pay your assessment fees!
Spot on FYI. Hopefully the meeting Monday was an eye opener. They saw the angst in the crowd and it wasn't just from those of us who are members of the Sun City Advocates. Shocker! Let's keep plowing through this exercise and start with the very first speaker stepping to the mic. It truly is a teachable moment for anyone thinking about running for the board. A good number of members in attendance were from the Dog Club (not to be confused with the Duffeeland Park dog club). Before, during and after kicking around as a board member, we had heard from this group of dog owners. They badly wanted a covered area at the new and much improved Fairway Rec Center. I was acutely familiar with the club, we were members when we first arrived. We took advantage of their dog training classes. They used to have an area near the corner of 107th and Peoria Ave. It was a small fenced setting with some shade from trees and the building adjacent to it. It was nicely situated, though in the hot summer months it simply wasn't used. Temperatures drives almost everyone indoors in our extreme heat. When the building was rebuilt, the dog club area was moved to the other side of the building and got way more direct sunshine than the old location. Once it opened the dog club members began an almost immediate appeal to the powers that be install sun shade coverings that dotted several of the swimming pools in Sun City. The quest for a covered area lingered for a long time. As a board member i recall going down and looking at the area. The asst general manager at the time wasn't enamored with the idea, but he met with them a number of times. They refused to give up and they finally got some sort of coverings over a portion of the area. The problem of course was this was real grass and the fear was a cover would cause the grass to die. By the time it was resolved, i had left the board and didn't pay much attention as to the final resolution. Imagine my surprise when the first members stepping to the mic read a well written letter requesting a covered indoor dog arena (for lack of a better word). Obviously they wanted something air conditioned for year round use. Honestly, i was stunned to hear the request. Not because it didn't make sense, certainly in their minds, but because during the long fight to get the covered area, this was never once mentioned. New ground for me, for sure. Here's the teachable moment for potential board members, going forward, with each new building project, you will have members clamoring, "what about me." This is where data, numbers becomes so important. We have virtually nothing close to good accounting. To get to that information requires the RCSC to enhance and refine their data collection so far removed from what they have now. Card readers at every location should be a given. It's exactly why we should have stayed ahead of the technology curve, not 20 miles behind it. It's exactly why all that money we shoveled into the bank accounts rather than upgrading and updating our IT was a fools game. I know, it was "nobody's fault," but we all are paying the price of saving money rather than in investing in our future. If there was good news at the meeting the chair of the technology committee told us everything was moving along nicely. She was the candidate who had run on the premise our technology being inadequate. Unfortunately it took three or four whacks at getting elected. My biggest concern is we are throwing too little too late at it. Hopefully i am wrong, hopefully they don't follow the gm's message to be conservative in their approach to resolve it. We'll see.
"but because during the long fight to get the covered area," She also stated that the club paid $5K to get the area covered with shade. Gosh, isn't that what Carry Forward money is for? Items that the clubs wish for?
As long as we are on the topic of dogs, let's move north and head up to Duffeeland Dog Park. There was an enlightening exchange with a member whose dog had been attacked by an outsider using our dog park. He reported it was the second time this non-member's dog had done this. He went on to say he had $2000 in vet bills to date and expected more. He had gotten the owners license plate number, hired an investigator to track him down and found he was from Glendale. He contacted the police and they would do nothing, same with animal control. His point was pretty clear; something has to change at Duffeeland. For those who don't know we bought the property back while i was on the board (circa 2013). It had been owned by a resident who ran it along with some financial help from the SCHOA foundation and donations from the users. He had gotten sick and needed to move on and out of Sun City. The RCSC was looking at a site in phase 1 adjacent to the Sun Bowl for a small fenced dog park (in the water retention area behind the softball fields). When Duffeeland became available we (the board) had an assessment of the value of the lot and we bought it for less than half the assessed value. It was a bargain and helped us get on par with other age restricted communities having dog parks. It took a fair amount of upgrades and even more growing pains. Now that the land was owned by the RCSC, some of the owners behind it came after the RCSC. During those first years, we tried several different ideas, including putting a monitor there for checking in. New fencing, new gating systems and a constant churning of opening/closing times were all tried. The best solution came when members stepped up and agreed to take on some of the responsibilities by creating a dog club for the park. Honestly they did an amazing job and still do to this day. The problem was and still is access. Anyone can go there and based on the comments, they still do. BTW, you don't have to belong to the dog club to use it. All of which takes us full circle to the question of why haven't we incorporated technology into entering the park? Why aren't there cameras in an area where shit happens (literally and figuratively)? These questions should have been answered long ago. The problem simply was, we would have had to admit our technology was so bad we weren't capable of using it. No one likes to admit how badly they suck at getting stuff done. One of the board members i was with on it with (Carole Martinez), had campaigned on that dog park in phase 1. When we bought Duffeeland and all the problems that came with it, her dog park fell by the wayside. Tragically it might have solved some of the problems as members have repeatedly requested both a big dog park and one for small dogs. Technology yet again rears it's ugly head and more often than not, plays a huge part of the solutions to the problems we are facing.
Never, ever take anything you say or write too seriously, at least i never do. I just sound like i do.
I don't knew who is or isn't a member of the Sun City Advocates, i do know several of the speakers were not members and in all likelihood never will be. I also know several of those stepping to the mic were members of the Advocates and some i expect are or at some point will be. I know they (our critics) try and paint us as "haters" but nothing could be further from the truth. There was one comment most often made and repeated. Rather than just blurt it out, years back after a board member/president had left his position, he appeared at a board meeting. I will never forget his comment because it stunned me to hear him say it. He pointedly said; "I hate the word transparency, but you guys have to be more transparent." I almost crapped my pants because he was a massive supporter of the gm. We heard that refrain over and over again Monday, more transparency. We even listened to push back from the general manager about posting more information when the board vice president suggested another page of information to be posted on the website. This was the second time in two meetings where the gm "suggested" the board should rethink their position. What was so fascinating was that one member who came to the mic flat out asked; "doesn't the gm work for the board? " Damn dude, he outright nailed it with that comment. It almost was if he had read the by-laws; because that is exactly what they say. From my perspective, that is/was the one worst outcome we have witnessed over the past 15 years. It looks like to me the board has become subservient to the general manager. Worse yet, i could start listing a variety of other things that has shifted as the management team was given authority to make decisions. Things that impacted clubs and how we/they conducted business. While insignificant in the big picture, at the club level having incredible impact. No review, no oversight, just people able to act. The second comment the gentleman made was this; his observation included "the board serves at the pleasure of the membership." Yup, they used to. The past 15 years, the mantra has been board members are there to serve the corporation. In turn, many of them interpreted it to mean loyalty to the general manager. Would anyone be surprised if i told you there used to be a 5 page document telling board members how to function? Better yet, the first item on it was "how to better serve the membership." How far afield have we gone? Transparency shouldn't be hard, or for that matter, even an issue. It is our community, it is our money and showing us how it is spent is just common sense. Why hiding anything from those of us living here is reasonable is beyond my grasp. The more we know, the better able we are as a community to grasp what they are doing. When we don't know, when they won't tell or show us is when we become suspicious. Gang...THERE'S NOTHING TO HIDE, NOTHING!. I'll sum it all up with a comment from a new RCSC resident and member when she said this: "as i sat through this meeting i found myself getting an upset stomach." Unsettling for sure. She mentioned where she came from is wholly different. They have a mayor and city council members. Sun City wasn't built like that. The whole cloth we were cut from was unique, we were special. Sadly, we've drifted. Could Monday's meeting begin to return us to our past? Time will tell.
If she bought here not understanding SC was an unincorporated part of the County, that's on her. But I'd guess anyone who lived where they were subject to an HOA would expect the RCSC to function as a typical HOA. They likely wouldn't understand why SC essentially has two HOA's, each with separate responsibilities, but it probably doesn't make a difference to them. T33 was intended to rein in unscrupulous HOA's -- the fact that the RCSC refuses to comply with even the intent of T33 says it all. The deceptive and partisan shenanigans the RCSC Management and Board have used to make their governance autocratic should warn future SC buyers away. But alas, SC do-gooders continue saying all is wonderful, we have great amenities (that part's true) and in doing so have provided a wonderful coverup of the cancer within. When new buyers realize the real situation -- that they committed to giving unlimited funding to the RCSC with little chance of controlling what they do with the money, it's not surprising they get sick.
Yesterday following the board meeting i asked board president Dale Lehrer how they would handle the myriad of issues that arose at the member/board exchange. She told me the white board would be back and they would review the items. That was great news. I have a suggestion and in that i know you all read these comments, give yourselves a break and put tables and real chairs on the floor in front of you. It looked terribly uncomfortable sitting there with nowhere to write on and nothing to put coffee or water on. Coming off the stage was great, there's nothing wrong with being comfortable while we are "chatting."
