“Competition”

I stayed away from your comment R because it is an area i have virtually no expertise on. I do remember there was an amount of concern from the golfing community years back when there was a question regarding Quail Run and the fact their deed restrictions were different than the other courses. How, i am still not sure other than what has been written above. Before i trudge forward, let me just say the motives for the private courses selling is purely profit driven with enormous amounts of money to be made. The RCSC is wholly different because in the end, any attempt to change a golf course to almost anything else will be met with anger and legal battles that will result in ill will forever.

Further, i've made this point before and will make it again because it is relevant to the discussion. There was always an understanding that golf and 10 pin bowling would be self-sustaining. Webb/DEVCO understood the costs associated with those two sports could break the bank if they were to be subsidized by the community at large. For years there was always a balancing of the budget where the cost of playing them was increased by the cost to run them. Cost/revenue neutral was the goal. That's not been the case of late. Capital expenditures have been used on several occasions and not been added to the yearly budget calculations to determine how much it should cost to play.

That matters because it is one thing to use PIF funds to enhance/maintain the amenities; one could argue that has little impact on the existing community yearly fees. It is wholly another to use assessment dues to "subsidize" golf, it flies in the face of how the community was set up. I get it, golfers get crazed when they face increases, but if the community at large is and has been subsidizing the game, then they aren't having to worry about whether the game is growing or diminishing in numbers. If they are paying their actual cost (not including PIF), then they might begin to look at whether there are too many golf courses.

It seems to me the deed restrictions should be available from the county. I've never bothered to look for them, because i am not sure i could read them and tell you legally what they say or mean. That said, it would behoove Sun City to do as other communities are doing and at least try and get their arms and head around what they say and what options exist. It would also help if the board did a forensic audit of capital expenditures since 2005 to see how much money has been dumped into golf without balancing the budget which is in fact a subsidy.

Don't hold your breath on either count.

 

Looks like this land is no longer going to remain vacant. Lots of activity going on and it may have something to do with the major work to be done at Boswell Hospital. It may just be the staging area or temporary parking?

 

Wouldn't it be great to see what the Long Range Plan for PIF Funds looks like? Golf seems to have a constant stream of funds. Just look at what's up for a vote at the January BOD meeting:

I MOVE for the release of $1.5M in Preservation and Improvement Funds for the previously approved PIF project to include demolition and re-construction of the Lakes East/West golf course and grounds maintenance facilities.

 

Here's the real kick in the teeth on that aggie: The RCSC bills those maintenance building rebuilds back against facilities, not assigning it to golf. Helps keep those percentages artificially low when comparing facility costs to golf costs at the yearly membership meetings when they give us the pie chart showing us how little they spend on golf. You know the one i'm talking about where we never come near a quorum so there is never an official meeting.

BTW, weren't those numbers for the maintenance sheds originally set at 750K?

 

You have to go to the BOD Meeting Minutes Archive to look at the most recent PIF Long Range Plan which was in June 2016. According to that flexible plan the cost for sheds was an average of 750 per course at TBD locations. The surprise to me was that the Lakes East/West wasn't supposed to be on the schedule until 2024 so saying that it was "previously approved" is a real stretch.

 

Easy to do whatever you want when there are no checks and balances.

 

Not only are there no checks and balances, the Board seems to have forgotten that one of their own had the auditors (who were reviewing golfing) fired. Auditors are one of the ways the Board ensures that it is meeting it’s fiduciary responsibilities to the community. The breaking and entering (isn’t that a crime) by a Director seems to have been last to time. This Board won’t police it’s own, why would we think they would follow their own rules or plans, or police others.

If we are up to 2024 on golf, perhaps all of the Board’s financial expenditures for the next 6 years should be to directed towards other community assets. At 6.5 million a year that should even things out, and make Sun City one hell of a competitive community, and a spectacular place to live.

 

Hey E, welcome. I tried talking the candidate who was put under the microscope to come forward with the names of those grilled but she was unwilling to put anyone in that position. I understand, but unless and until people are willing to speak up and out, denial just becomes the way it is.

Carole is spot on, if people saw the real numbers shoveled at golf, they would be far more inclined to pay attention. Boards come and go and live solely with the information they get put in front of them. I hate to tell you how many times i've argued over the real number only to be told the PIF numbers they get from management are what they go by. Tragic.

 

It appears as Jerry will be the president for 2019 and so it will be business as usual. Our best hope for a more transparent operation is if the lawsuit currently in the courts forces us to fall under Title 33. And if it does, there will be the gnashing of teeth and cries of eminent collapse, while in reality all it will do will force them to be more open in how they function. It will cost a few dollars more, but nothing that will break the bank. And that may well be the point an effective and articulate president could make a world of difference.

Clearly the potential of becoming Title 33 bound will present an opportunity to shape the discussion in a positive way. Rather than lamenting it, embracing it will enhance the role the community at large could play as we move forward. A president who could do that would make the transition far more simple and way less threatening. If there is a ray of sunshine in this discussion, that damn lawsuit should be settled this year sometime. No one knows the outcome, but it has dragged on way too long.

For those of us who have served on the board and left frustrated by our ability to make any significant inroads to a more open style of governance, let me just say this: We don't write these things because we hate the community or the players, we simply know we could be far better than we are. There's no question, Sun City is a great place to live, but it could be so much more. Hopefully this new board will take on a stronger leadership role, but i sense they will continue to just play follow the leader, and for those of us who have served, we clearly know who that is

 

Carole: Did this discussion all take place within the context of a discussion (chat) board, or did the RCSC Board come out with some official statement outside the discussion board that the golf courses are golf courses for perpetuity? Is this discussion board still active?

Again, while I am reviewing the deed restrictions for all the courses as they are a matter of public record, my preliminary investigation indicates to me that the RCSC has many alternatives other than golf they could pursue for using the Quail Run golf course. One would think the BOD and management team would be fully versed in all the deed restrictions so they could carry out their fiscal responsibilities according to the reasonable people standard.

 

Bill:

You have made several excellent points which bear repeating:

1. There was always an understanding that golf and 10 pin bowling would be self-sustaining. Webb/DEVCO understood the costs associated with those two sports could break the bank if they were to be subsidized by the community at large. For years there was always a balancing of the budget where the cost of playing them was increased by the cost to run them. Cost/revenue neutral was the goal. That's not been the case of late. Capital expenditures have been used on several occasions and not been added to the yearly budget calculations to determine how much it should cost to play.

2. That matters because it is one thing to use PIF funds to enhance/maintain the amenities; one could argue that has little impact on the existing community yearly fees. It is wholly another to use assessment dues to "subsidize" golf, it flies in the face of how the community was set up. I get it, golfers get crazed when they face increases, but if the community at large is and has been subsidizing the game, then they aren't having to worry about whether the game is growing or diminishing in numbers. If they are paying their actual cost (not including PIF), then they might begin to look at whether there are too many golf courses.

3. That said, it would behoove Sun City to do as other communities are doing and at least try and get their arms and head around what they say and what options exist. It would also help if the board did a forensic audit of capital expenditures since 2005 to see how much money has been dumped into golf without balancing the budget which is in fact a subsidy.

I will repeat some in my own words.

1. It is a community principle that golf be self-sustaining.
2. Any consideration of whether golf is self-sustaining must examine capital expenditures.

Not including capital expenditures in the examination of whether golf is self-sustaining does not pass the "reasonable person" test and violates ones fiduciary duty in my opinion.

 

This may be the best post I have ever read on Talk of Sun City.

 

This is one of those sore spots for me Carole, because the past years there has been an ever moving reduction in how much time board members spend on the "job." Someone can correct me, but i do believe all or most of the "work sessions" in Dec were cancelled. Really, nothing to do? Committee meetings appear to be measured now by how quickly they can get done and out of the room. Board meetings and member/exchanges take a fraction of the time they used to. Hell, when Carole and i were on the board, one of the board members biggest concerns was what they would be serving for lunch? Of course all too often the golfers were worried about missing their afternoon tee time.

Management has become brilliant in feeding the board information to move the process along. If all you consider are what you are spoon fed, the decisions are easy and quick. If input is reduced to minimal levels, output has similar results. That's why what Sun City West is doing is producing better more well thought out results. They are involving the community and not relying on 9 board members and the GM.

 

CM – I remember the furor over the Quail Run fiasco quite well. The uproar from those living on the course or playing the course was loud and clear. In the end, the RCSC invoked the dreaded “In Perpetuity” clause and the issue was closed forever. Deeds, Wills, Covenants, etc. have been and will continue to be broken by the courts in favor of those intending to profit from such changes. Like it or not, it’s all about the money.



Any forensic audit of RCSC transactions, especially golf must be conducted by an independent agency and the Board and GM will never allow that to happen.



Forcing RCSC into Title 33 can and only will be done through the courts. Before that were to happen the community at large will have to be educated on the pros and cons of such a change. I would wager that maybe 5% of Sun City residents even know what Title 33 is and how it would affect them if the RCSC were forced into it. Title 33 was discussed on this board or its predecessor board years ago and from what I remember there was great opposition to Title 33 and any further mention of it just dried up completely.





Fixj - Riggo – The vacant lots at 103rd Ave and Grand have been vacant for 20 years or more. Those parcels are owned by Sun Health Services and they will not sell them as they will become big time money makers for them in the future. Living on a golf course in my opinion will never become a liability (at least in my life time). As to whether golf is a dying game – that will be debated long after most of us have moved to the golf courses above. Should there be planning with regard to all the golf courses in Sun City? Yes, going forward, their existence as a liability or asset to Sun City will have to be looked at very closely and planned for accordingly. Those playing the courses should expect to pay more out of their own pocket to support their desire to play the game. However, in order to do that and make informed decisions that will affect the whole of Sun City, work has to be done now. Statistics must be gathered independent of the RCSC and GM starting now. All of which can be done electronically by independent organizations. Long range planning is a good idea, but it must be backed up by independent data/statistics. Will that ever happen? NO.





IC – You are correct, deed restrictions can and have been overturned/removed by the courts often in favor of those who will profit most by those changes. Will this ever happen in Sun City? Probably not, as the guiding principle of folks in Sun City is “if it costs me money (a law suit) – I won’t support it”. A-la the Anne Randall Stewart law suit.



You would think this board/forum would be the perfect place to discuss these issues and affect change, but unfortunately, there is very little interaction from the masses of Sun City. The same folks post here discussing the same issues over and over and expecting a change. That’s pretty much the definition of insanity.



I don’t have any answers, but I do know that discussing the issues covered in this thread by less than 1% of the community will never produce any tangible results. Will it get people talking – yes, the 1% who visit this forum regularly.

 

Because someone or some body (such as the RCSC), says it is so, doesn't always make it so. Show me a document that says Quail Run has a golf only deed restriction in perpetuity. I have already produced a document that says otherwise.

 

“Lost causes are the only causes worth fighting for.”
- Mr. Smith Goes to Washington

“Love thy neighbor” is the reason that Senator Smith gives for fighting for “lost causes.”

 

I wasn't suggesting that RCSC was correct. All I was saying is that because in perpetuity was mentioned the whole Quail Run discussion ceased.