Sometimes when i romanticize about Sun City's history, i leave folks with the impression we were always our own perfect utopian existence. Nothing could be further from the truth. For anyone that has visited the Del Webb Sun Cities museum and seen that famous picture where they show some of the 100,000 visitors that poured through the community during the opening, it appeared to be perfection. If you read the cut lines around the picture, you know they sold more homes in the first year than had projected to sell in the first three years. Explosive. What you don't read is that by year 4, they sold less than 400 homes. You won't read how in 1964 they were fighting over incorporation (which lasted for 20 plus years). There's little written about the lawsuits that permeated Sun City during the early 70's as residents battled over school taxes and schools. There are stories about the feedlot stink, but that too resulted in non-stop legal challenges. My good friend Ben Roloff often does classes for the life long learning club that feature these stories. If you ever get a chance, you need take them. I have the good fortune of having coffee with him a couple times a month. He has usually made a trip or two to the state archives and read the old Sun City newspapers, where he digs this stuff up. At our last McDonald's senior coffee stop, he left me with his latest gems. In it were notes and copies from 1980, 1981 and 1983. I've been reading intently. Lots of fascinating stuff going on then with the incorporation battle getting really nasty, reprieve from a tax ruling, Sun City West's school struggle, DEVCO trying to sell us the Sun Bowl and one that captured my eye. The RCSC and their board had just taken over from DEVCO (1079) who had moved over to Sun City West. While they had done a good job getting the community documents in place, it became clear there were going to be growing pains. Some folks understood what they needed to do now the DEVCO subsidies were gone while others saw the potential for costs to explode and wanted to contain them. It was the prefect storm. We were still in the first wave of buyers, many who were on tight budgets and couldn't afford the increases that would be needed. Back then, those living here were well involved in the community. The newspapers were the standard means of communications. Everyone read them, and the comment sections were filled with opinions on the good, the bad and the ugly. As i was reading, it struck me, i had a folder in my collection from 1980/1981 that was the perfect compliment to what Ben had given me. I pulled it out and started reading. I couldn't put it down, it was that good. The RCSC and their 9 member board was embroiled in one of the ugliest fights one could imagine. The stories contained in the files i have were unlike any time in our history. Good people made bad decisions. Commentaries were startlingly frank and sides were taken that polarized the community. There's one commentary written by Doug Morris, editor of the Independent newspaper that was nothing short of brilliant. Before we go there, i will break this off for now. In the next segment i will lay out the fight that took place. Anyone curious about how were were formed will find it compelling reading. In the post after that, i will reprint Doug's comments.
When i began reading Ben's notebook, i had no idea it would get this entangled. The reality is, the story is just too good to pass up and not share. Especially in light of everything that has transpired over the last 12 years. The changes made to our corporate documents were done with barely a word of dissent, and as this story unfolds, it only amplifies how far we have moved from the way the community was managed back in the days when those living here cared about what was going on. For anyone that has read Jubilee, Sun City's 25th Anniversary book or visited the Del Webb Sun Cities Museum you may recognize the name Jane Freeman. She was co-author of Jubilee with Glenn Sanberg. From their efforts on the book, their research provided the impetus of founding the museum. Jane was a diminutive figure, much like Ruth Bader Ginsburg. She also had the drive, passion and fire to get things done. Without her tenacity, the museum would not exist. In in her death, she left a bequest that still helps keep the doors open. This story transcends all of that. Like many community leaders, she moved from one organization to another. In 1980, she was in her second year on the RCSC board of directors. One of the things she pushed for was a change from a nominating committee format where committee members would handpick candidates to appear on a nominated slate. Other candidates could be motioned from the floor, but it was a restrictive process that favored those selected by the committee. Jane pushed for a more open process and one we still use today; anyone gathering 100 signatures could become a candidate. The Del E Webb Development Corporation (DEVCO) worked closely with community leaders over the first 18 years to write community documents. The Articles of Incorporation are the base that everything stems from. The by-laws have to follow in alignment with the Articles. During the summer of 1980 a group was formed within the community called the Concerned Recreation Members (CRM). If you recall, in those years the documents called for quarterly membership meetings and if there were 100 members present, there was a quorum. It wasn't unusual for attendance to exceed that threshold and from the floor a majority of members could make motions. The safeguard for the board was a floor motion only meant it had to be taken back for the board to study the impact and then respond with their findings. And, with those findings, they could report back at the next meeting, but no actions could be taken until the next quarterly meeting. It was a built in buffer for the board to garner support for whatever direction they wanted to go. Apparently the board didn't break during the summers back then, because at the summer quarterly, the CRM made a motion for the board to consider adding a recall provision to the Articles of Incorporation. They suggested it set the trigger for the recall at 2% of the membership, which at that time was the other side of 40,000; meaning approximately 800 signatures would call for a vote. The board took advantage of the time lapse before the next membership meeting. They agreed with a recall provision, but they felt 10% was a better number (approximately 4000 signatures). By the way, back then, signatures could be gathered on RCSC property. By the fall membership meeting, the CRM had generated a lot of interest within the community. They had enhanced their platform by calling not only for the recall, but reducing expenses within the RCSC by $100,000, challenging an appeal on a tax status fight the RCSC was in and eliminating the ability for RCSC employees to get free golf. They were clearly pushing a more conservative approach in spending which appealed to any number of residents. Their floor motion regarding recall was passed at the quarterly meeting (in Sept) and the RCSC called for a special membership meeting in Oct. Great story so far, as we are watching democracy in action. Here's where it goes sideways: The board recommended a motion calling for the 10% while the floor motion called for 2%. Fair enough, let the majority decide. The special meeting to vote was held on Oct 18, 1980 from 9 am to 4 pm. The total in-person tally was 3,301 voters, with 2,297 supporting 2%, with the remainder going for the RCSC's 10%. There was clearly a fly in this ointment because the RCSC during this process had decided they should send out proxy ballots to the entire membership. Still sounds okay, right? Here's where it breaks down. The proxy they mailed was only on their behalf (the 10% threshold). Any of the proxies they mailed and were returned signed would then be allocated back to the RCSC proxy voters, Jane Freeman and Helmond Vogle (both RCSC board members). The CRM were able to collect proxy votes but obviously didn't have the money to mail them to anyone. The board used the RCSC resources and the reality was the proxies that came back all were for then used to support their position (it wasn't a real vote, all they were asking for was a signature authorizing them to vote for them).. The returned mail ballots were 11,896 for 10% to 1,297 gathered by the CRM. We can argue/debate how fair that was, but the oddity is, this is nothing compared to what happened in 1981. As an aside, Jane Freeman left the board at the end of her second year. She resigned in Jan of 1981 and said it was for personal reasons. I only wish i had been familiar with this story while she was still alive. We often had cause to sit and chat and i would have loved to hear what happened behind the scenes that caused her to walk away. I can speculate, but that is all it would be. Stay tuned this gets way, way uglier.
Before i move on, let me reflect a bit on Jane and what happened in 1980. It was the spring during a meeting she was chairing where the recommendation came forward to open the nominating process to something she saw as more fair. That was part of who she was and what she stood for. As you will read in the 1981 story, you will see a motion by the president to do away with that structure and return to the nominating committee. He didn't like the change because they lost "control" of who ran. And when you read the rest of the story, you will be stunned. My guess is, Jane was not happy with the game the RCSC board played with proxies. I suspect she expected the board to send out a ballot calling for the members to decide on 2% or 10%, but what they did was stack the deck to insure the recall figure was substantial. She believed in member involvement, not using them to get their way.
As crazy as 1980 was, 1981 would become even more bizarre. There were three expired board seats up for grabs and when Jane Freeman resigned, they filled the vacant position with the person who received the fourth highest vote total (sound familiar?). There were twelve candidates that year, nine men and three women. In reading the flyer, virtually every one running was focused on trying to create a more cohesive structure within the RCSC. Odd, because what ensues following the election was anything but. The four highest vote totals were as follows: Harold Kraft; 4663. Trudy Jankowski; 3471. Perry Jackson; 3388. Harold Lee; 3217. Harold Kraft, with easily the most votes, saw this as a mandate of sorts. His platform was the following: 1) Realistic budgets - Advanced Financial Planning. 2). Lower costs through reduction in management. 3). Elimination of all waste in expense dollars. 4). A board with greater credibility. 5). Open decisions openly arrived at. 6). Greater use of Sun Citians as Management Advisors. Once the new board was seated, Harold lost no time in aggressively pursuing his goals. On January 14, 1981, he presented a 4 page memo to board president J.F. Spellman detailing how all of the things he wanted to accomplish could be done. In it, he outlined the Bowling Division, the Administrative Division, the Golf Division, the Snack Shops, Course Maintenance and the Centers Division and what needed to happen within each. At that same time, the RCSC was proposing to operate with a budget deficit. One would have thought his proposals would have been met with more enthusiasm. As Harold was proposing to shrink costs through less management, the board hired a new general manager, Alton Thogerson. So we are clear, the function of the GM was to act on the day to day operations while the board oversaw virtually every aspect of running the RCSC. The apparent differences between some of the new board to those remaining from the past years quickly became clear. It set the stage in what was to become the most tumultuous time in the RCSC's short history. The Concerned Recreation Members (CRM) was alive and well. In spite of their setback last year, they began talking about recalls to several board members. 4000 plus signatures seemed tough to accomplish, but they did gather nearly 5000, just to be safe. Like the year before, they could ask members to sign their recall petition on rec center properties so the task became far easier than it would be today. It didn't help that once again the RCSC board was looking to rewrite the rules governing them. In a 4 part article written by Marvin "Pat" Cohen (a retired attorney) and printed in as a series in the newspaper he outlined all of the things the board was doing wrong. The last articles header said it all: "by-laws do disservice to Centers members." Ouch. There's no doubt his well written piece contributed to the signature drive, His contention was the board was trying to take away members rights and their voice. I will stop here for now and come back with just how ugly this got.
Basically what you had in 1981 were the old board members battling a couple of the upstart newbies. Harold Kraft and Trudy Jankowski were connected at the hip and while i have read nothing about them being part of CRM, their positions were clearly in alignment. Early on in 1981, Concerned Recreation Members started gathering petitions to recall board president Spellman and vice-president Vogel. Accusations were made about how they garnered signatures, but nothing was ever proven. The RCSC board didn't help themselves by proposing changes to the by-laws. Proxy voting was the hot button issue, and was the strategy the board used to their advantage the year before, They wanted to expand its use in everything the community needed to vote on. Oddly enough, one of the charges by ARS today is the right for proxy votes. Those against it argued the RCSC mailed out ballots because they knew they couldn't get residents to show up in person to vote, so this allowed them a better chance to pass what they wanted to pass. In both last year and the coming votes this year, that proved to be the case. The other changes were more minor in nature but after the bruising the RCSC board took last year, any changes they were suggesting were considered to be for spurious reasons. The board responded by beginning to publish an in-house newspaper the CRM claimed was little more than a propaganda tool. Then the board printed a survey asking for a show of support for the current board, proposing if the residents agreed with the survey, the CRM should drop the recall vote. They said, hell no. First up was the vote on by-law changes. It was scheduled for June 12, 1981 and 1500 people showed up to vote at the Sun Dial Rec Center. The meeting began with RCSC president Spellman telling the crowd that just under 15,000 proxy votes had been returned. There were 12,632 votes in favor of the new by-laws and that triggered several floor motions that were overruled by Spellman claiming the proxy votes overrode any of the motions from the floor. That in turn triggered a walkout led by CRM leader Len Haynes of over a 1000 of those in attendance. The newspapers were filled with scathing articles from both sides. Ugly was the rule of the day as civility was becoming non-existent. The two new board members questioned actions by Spellman and the rest of the board, casting even worse aspersions. The proxies had saved the day once again for the RCSC and in all likelihood they would continue to go to that way again and again. Tragically, this was far from over.
During this free-for-all, the legal affairs committee (all retired attorneys and judges) of the RCSC had weighed in on their findings on the by-law changes. The most damaging was the questions regarding the legality of the use of proxy voting. Several of them argued it wasn't legal under the current RCSC documents. Those concerns were ignored by the majority of the board and the course was set for the recall vote. If you read above, the by-law changes included greater use of proxy voting and the only way it passed was by the use of the proxy vote. Go figure. The recall election was set for ballots to be counted on August 4th. The RCSC sent out ballots in July. The CRM filed for an injunction to stop it, but failed in their bid. Due to the CRM disrupting meetings, the board took the extreme action of closing meetings to the members and allowed people to speak to the board only through an application process. In addition, Trudy Jankowski, the chair of elections committee, and her committee recommended the procedures for the recall vote. It included holding a one day vote at multiple locations, with no mail balloting. President Spellman and a majority of the board overruled them. It was the first time that had happened and of course triggered a fair amount of anger. Undaunted, Spellman argued it was their (the boards) right. Jankowski argued it was unprecedented. What was becoming clear was the challenges of working on a board where you are in the minority. The net result was there were more than 20,000 votes cast. Approximately 15,000 to keep Spellman and Vogel in office and 5000 to replace them with Len Haynes (running against Jack Spellman) and Joe Gaines (running against Hil Vogel). It was better than 50% of the membership, easily the highest total in Sun City's history. Interesting to note, while the incumbents won, Spellman lamented the high number of votes against them. In the next segment, i will rewrite the article by Doug Morris, editor of the Independent newspaper. He was a Sun City resident and his thoughts on this are simply stunning.
This opinion piece by Doug Morris pretty well captures the essence of what this year long fight for "members rights" felt like for those living in Sun City. It is very long, but worth the read. His column was called "The Editors Chair." Enjoy, i know i did. Paradise Lost. I am neither a Pioneer nor a Johnny-come-lately. In about a month I'll celebrate - and i mean! celebrate - my eighth anniversary of being a Sun Citian. I came here to avoid retiring, because I don't believe any of us has full right to withdraw those experiences and talents from the society which has payed a heavy price for their development. It's been an exciting, gratifying and sometimes disturbing eight years. Being naturally inclined to involvement, I've played minor and major roles in many activities and organizations. There have been periods of abrasion and conflict - and there still are - but the environment has changed. We used to tangle on things, and then walk away, not necessarily as close friends, but certainly not as bitter enemies. That's where we changed. That's what is changing this community. The issue that brings this to a head is the Rec Board versus the Concerned Rec Members. It could be amusing, except that it involves the most important organization in the community, and effects every one of us, very materially. If this were only a few people with tickets for an ego trip, or who like to stir up things to fill in idle hours, we could all lean back and applaud or hiss in accordance with our inclinations.That isn't the way things are; it's a lot more serious than that. Our total investment in this community could be at stake. Certainly our comfort is already in jeopardy. Fatuous as it may be, I can't resist recalling the plaque that hung on my bedroom wall as a child: "There's so much good in the worst of us; and so much bad in the best of us, that it hardly behooves any of us to talk about the rest of us." Yet, as i go from meetings with Rec Board members, and attendance at CRM meetings - and private conversations with representatives from each side - all i hear is"They are totally wrong" ... "They must be destroyed completely." The way things are going, you and I are the only ones who'll be destroyed. In my opinion - and that's all it is; an opinion - Jack Spellman and Hil Vogel have earned a considerable part of the thumping they're now being subjected to with little more give in the early stages...a little more willingness to listen...a little less strict reliance on their "book" authority...a little less starchy defensiveness...a little less inclination to seek legal recourse instead of neighborly discussion...a little less formality and a little more friendliness...and a lot more sense of humor - all of this could have been handled the way adults are supposed to be able to handle things. In my opinion - and that's all it is: an opinion - Len Haynes, Joe Gaines, John Stec et al, have lost sight of the purpose of their cause in the lust for battle. The smell of blood is their intoxicant. I know these men well. They are outstanding Sun Citians. One, in particular, Len Haynes, is of that rare breed; a natural-born leader. He's articulate, a mast of the microphone, and he does his homework. It takes a good man to stand against him in an open confrontation. There's nobody on the Rec Board equipped to do this. This is a benefaction in terms of public discourse; it's a great danger in terms of public welfare. There are fifty at the meeting of the CRM I attended last Wednesday. That fifty, and whatever others they can persuade to their cause, cannot be allowed to be the "voice of the community." But neither can their protest be stifled. Fewer than that number dumped the tea in Boston Harbor; and about the same number put their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor" on the line by signing the Declaration of Independence." After tortuous hours of deliberation, I am convinced that important issues affecting the Rec Centers should be decided by ballot-box elections rather than mail voting. This conclusion leaps over all the pros and cons - which would be endless - and seeks the most simplistic solution available. I want to see the Rec Board returned to its rightful position of respected authority. I want the membership - "establishment" and dissident" to accept their responsibility for sound judgement and fair play. Above all, I don't want to lose Paradise.
The first thing i noticed in reading the newspaper articles was they were from a time when people both read and wrote more than they do today. We've become so internet ingrained that if you can't make the point in 100 words or less, you are going to lose them. I've grown to hate that mentality, as you can tell by how much i write. To me, if there is a subject worth discussing, there is more value in knowing too much than too little. With that caveat out of the way, Doug's primary point is spectacular. Will Paradise be lost? Obviously, Sun City survived in spite of itself and the harsh rhetoric and criticism. There's little question it came at a cost. Those involved gave of their time, expertise and commitment to do what they thought was right for Sun City. Some of the fights got personal, something that should not happen. We can take sides over whether those supporting a less democratic system or a more open configuration is better or worse; but even those lines blur. Think in these terms; if you truly believe governance should belong to everyone living here, why are mail ballots a bad thing? However, if you use the mail ballot, the way it is worded or the vehicle you cloak it in to simply "win," was it for the greater good, or your own. Little in life is perfectly fair or equal. As mere humans our goal should be to try and be as reasonable as possible. Civility should be our benchmark in how we treat others...whether we agree or disagree. As i write that, it's almost laughable given what we are living through today in this country. The most outstanding point i came away with was the CRM believed they were fighting to maintain the rights of the members, as did the RCSC board. When the board proposed doing away with quarterly meetings the outcry was so great, they backed off immediately. Fast forward that to what happened when the board stripped members of the quorum of 100 and went to an annual membership meeting where we actually never reach a quorum and consequently never have any membership meetings and those who fought so hard to preserve our rights would be doing cartwheels in their graves. We have moved so far afield from those days when people living here actually cared about what happened it is frightening. I know, it's called evolving, but is it i our best interest? Are we better off letting a handful of board members and management make all the decisions and then let them pretend we have a voice after they have decided? I think not. I know and have written for years we can grow the circle of the committed. It doesn't happen by accident. It has to be a primary goal with a strategic plan, otherwise it's just lip-service. In my humble opinion, without it, Sun City will continue to evolve. We will move further away from the most basic of tenets we were founded and built under. Ironically, that to me is our biggest threat to the fear we will someday lose this Paradise; our place in the sun so many of us love and care about.
Bill, I deleted my post. The story you wrote painted a great picture of strife and infighting, all in the name of the members. What a fantastic story. I also love the Doug Morriss Piece on paradise lost. What ever happened to the group called the CRM? Did they disband out of frustration? I so loved the articles, they were most entertaining and shows no one group is immune from the strife of trying to protect the members.
Good question Carole. Len Haynes was the "leader" of the CRM and yesterday i stopped by the board room where the pictures of old boards are hung. I was especially interested in 1982. Prominently featured was Len Haynes. I always wondered why he wasted the time and energy for a recall petition and not just run for a board position. Guess he figured it out and in 82 ran and won. Now i have to wait for Ben to dig out 1982 and 1983. This scrapbook that must have belonged to Harold Kraft and ended after the recall vote.
BP, these essays present priceless insight and history. It's obvious it takes some digging and knowledge of sources to ferret out the details. Your depth and understanding is irreplaceable. I urge you and your knowledgeable sources to commit as much of this as practicable to a book before memories and oral histories fade. It's a worthy cause; it would protect the nuances, information and materials that certainly will eventually be lost to a catastrophe. It's a daunting task, but I'm sure many of us would assist and support you where we can. You can self-publish to recoup tangible costs.
Couldn't agree more IC. The stuff Ben is digging up is pure gold. We've been mulling over the best way to format at so it's not lost. Still a ways off, but definitely on our radar screen.
