It's Just Math Folks; Or Is It?

My bad. I missed the RCSC board meeting yesterday, just plain ass forgot about it. Realistically it wouldn't have mattered if i was there or not, nothing would have changed. Outcomes these days are carved in stone.

I'll wait to watch the video but from comments i've heard or read, the Mountainview project got the green light to plow ahead. I've written i am ambivalent over everything other than the extraordinarily high cost. Some apparently think money is no object; i disagree.

We don't have unlimited funds where we can just throw money at everything without regard. I want a theater, do we need a state of the art 15 million dollar one? A gymnasium sounds great, i've seen no utilization numbers to justify 8 million dollars for building one. Another indoor walking track 8/10ths of a mile away from the one at Fairway; is it practical or realistic? The swimming pool at Mountainview is much loved and i've always supported building two of them, one just for water sports; do we really need a resort style pool?

They are all fair questions with absolutely no answers. Here's why, at least from a dollars and sense standpoint; Until there are actual architectural blueprints any numbers they show us are just wild ass guesses. We know their argument regarding "place holders," simply plugging in whatever numbers they want. Is this yet another?

The question simply need be asked for those clamoring to just build it: Is there any number too steep, too rich for our blood? Once we invest the 1.5 million for an architect are we all in no matter what? These are reasonable questions that should be answered, by both the membership and the boards (whomever they are) as we move forward.

I will explain the mathematics of this proposal in the next post.

 

Here's the good news; we have close to 30 million dollars in the PIF account. We also will generate about 8 million dollars a year as long as sales stay in the 2000 home sales per year range (for those math challenged, $4000 x 2000 = $8 million). So, over the next 4 years another 32 million dollars. The bad news is, that near on 30 million will be depleted by the $4 million dollar maintenance building at Lake's East/West, 8 million dollars (which will end up being closer to 12 million IMHO) and another million dollars for the softball lighting and building currently on their long range plan.

I will stay with their softer numbers and just deduct the 13 million currently accounted for, which brings us down to 17 million dollars. We'll add that to the 32 million collected through 2026 which is a hefty 49 million dollars (assuming the lake stays at 8 million and sales stay at 2000 sales per year). Still, nice a lot of money. But wait, there's more. Also slotted into the long range plan is 12.5 million dollars for turf reduction on our golf courses (8 million dollars on the South course alone). Now we've blown by the 40 million dollar mark and that' assuming the numbers they've been throwing out are real. Does anyone actually believe they are?

My point here is simple, we have dedicated virtually all of the PIF through 2026 for one rec center and a bunch of turf reduction. Maybe it makes sense, maybe not. Time will tell. Time will tell if spending this much money was right or wrong. Time almost always provides the answer. Till then, i'll still keep asking; is there such a thing as spending too much money on a project or is it just money and who cares?

 

In recent threads a TOSC member 3G mentioned there were going to be issues arising in Sun City that would pose problems going forward. While he and i disagree on any number of topics, i do agree on this one. The changes coming at Sun City are a constant. Brick and mortar buildings will continue to become vacant. Online shopping is the future and those owning the buildings will struggle to fill them, is 16 strip malls too many? Churches too will be facing dropping membership, can all 31 survive? The three private country clubs, all once owned by residents in Sun City via stock options are now privately held, what will happen when the ADWR 5th water management plan due in 2025 hits them square in the face?

Those are the issues on purely the physical side of the discussion. On the other end of the equation is what happens to the organizations so reliant on volunteers. When we moved away from the "City of Volunteers" and became the Original Fun City, we lost our identity. As 3G noted, without volunteers Sun City's cost of living skyrockets. Every organizations depends on those living here to give their time, expertise and money to function.

It gets worse. On the more personal side, we know security and safety in the community is an issue. No single organization, other than the RCSC, has the capacity to lead the way in restoring our security. Every rec center and the areas immediately adjacent to them should have cameras set up to capture what is going on. To do that takes a massive infusion of money to address the 15 years we are behind in our technology. They also could buy safety cameras for the main streets in the community to minimize criminal activity (as they had proposed). In addition, data collection sounds great for making those critical decisions on what to build where, but the reality is we are no closer now to having them than we were 10 years ago. They too are a given as we move forward, or at the very least, should be.

On an even more human aspect, what about that 10 % living below the poverty level? What about those who have outlived their resources? As the support organizations struggle to survive, will we find ways to help them stay solvent? Or, will they simply close their doors and we will do without?

Therein is the biggest problem; when we put all of our (PIF) eggs in one basket, we jeopardize having the ability to adjust to address the needs of the membership and the community at large. The really, really great news is, the RCSC has amassed an enormous surplus of money. Apparently Bill Cook claimed it was a "rainy day fund." Sorry, not really. That was what the 5 million dollar set aside was for, cases of emergencies. The dues collected and not spent over the years was so the various clubs could be updated and the members at large would be served for the exact reason stated in the Articles of Incorporation: "To do anything and everything lawfully necessary in the interest of the Members of the Corporation."

We've lived in the shadows of the previous gm's perspective on what Sun City should be, what it should look like. It's time to move on and address the many issues facing us as a community. Clearly the board has decided the PIF is all about Mountainview and golf courses, it's time to start spending the money they have been rat-holing so someone could sleep good at night. Hardly the reason the RCSC collects yearly assessments.

 

I watched the meeting in it's entirety and thought there were lots of good comments for and against. The theater has never been the issue, the gym was an add-on at best. It would seem to me there is data out there and we should be trying to get our hands on it. I'm fine with a multi-purpose building, as long as we know it will get used a lot. Here's the hard data; roughly 1/3rd of the housing is in phase 1, 9000 rooftops. There are 4 rec centers in phase 1 with the addition of the Grand Ave Center. There are roughly 18,000 homes in phase 2 and 3, that represents the other 2/3rds. We also have 4 centers in phase 2 and 3, all-be-it much larger.

Like i said, i am less concerned about it being built and way more concerned by the cost. Did anyone else cringe when the board president announced they use "BOGUS" numbers? Are you freaking kidding me? She uttered those very words as we were talking about the 27 million dollars slated for phase 1 and 2 at Mountainview. Then the building guy said those numbers should be in the ballpark. Stop and think about this; the maintenance building (shed) at Lakes East/West came in at 3 million dollars (not counting the nearly million dollar site prep). Now translate that to the massive complex at Mountainview and tell me if that math works out in your head (and that is after nearly a year of stifling inflation). Hell, my best guess on MV is the "bogus" terminology is spot on. Like i said, is there any number that makes people go, wow way too much?

And to be clear after watching, someone best explain to Bill Cook, he works for the board. He's not their boss. Any takers on the purchase of the exercise equipment is voting down the next go-around? What the hell, 100k here and 100k there and the next thing you know you've blown through 200k, not 11 or 12 million dollars. This BS that the carry forward is for"rainy days" should be shoved where the sun doesn't shine. And, if that was/is the case, when it comes to our IT, we've just witnessed the hundred year flood.

I watch these meetings and ask myself, how did we get here? They are worried about a 100k trial on exercise equipment but no one said a word about subsidizing golf to the tune of 25 million dollars over the last 12 years. Think about that for a minute or two,

 

One of the more disturbing discussions from the meeting was the way the general manager wanted to dismiss the recommendations from the long range planning committee and kick the can down the road. Move it to the budgeting process was the cry from Mr. Cook which would have taken it to 2023. That would have then allowed him to argue that the Mountainview fitness center was just around the corner so why not wait till then when we have better IT availability.

Let me be very blunt here; that was the exact same argument we got from the previous gm. It's why our technology is 15 years behind; the argument was always, "next year." It's also why we have stored up very large accumulations of cash. We pay our annual fees so they can update equipment and keep abreast of other age restricted communities. The report given by the long range planning committee tells us otherwise.

To be clear, the general manager works for the nine member board. He is the only employee they have any say over or with. Everyone else in the organization works for him. Over the past years i have been shocked by the role reversal. Our documents tell us exactly how it should work, the question simply is, do they?

 

And if I understood what he said at the last meeting, it seems like he has more than just 1, and possibly 3 different baskets of money to draw from in case of an "emergency"?

 

When the SunDial roof over the pool collapsed around 2006, the RCSC had no reserve funds to fix it. It was insured but like all expensive claims, the carrier tried to find a way out of paying for it. It dragged on for better than a year and with the PIF money tied up in the Fairway project, waiting it out was their only answer. The RCSC cut back on some of the programs (like Life Long Learning from Osher at ASU) and finally got enough to start the renovations and then finally they got a settlement.

This inspired the board and the GM not to find themselves in that position again. They set a goal of accumulating a 5 million dollar reserve account for emergencies (a rainy day fund if you will). At some point they added a 2 plus million dollar balance reserve. Both strategically sound should anything happen.

Then a funny thing happened (not really funny). Every year clubs request improvements they want or need. It's a mixed bag in that many clubs buy equipment and make improvements on their own. In accordance with the documents, the minute they buy or add anything, it becomes the property of the RCSC. For at least the past ten years, the past and now present general manager, have decided those capital improvements requested by the clubs from excess revenues collected each year produced what they call, "a carry forward."

Essentially it is a yearly slush fund, unspent and just saved. Virtually no one paid any attention. Most of us thought the money they collected in yearly lot assessments was being spent on items they needed or the clubs had requested. I'm not even sure who decides who gets how much and who doesn't. I know they keep a yearly log of requests and what capital improvements are made. Go see if you can find it on their website (sad with a smirk). The question still is, WHO DECIDES?

Then there's the next question, why have we added a million plus dollars every year rather than investing in Sun City's future? They now have 19 million dollars in cash reserves plus the $5.5 million dollar in the original rainy day fund. How much is too much? Which clubs went without and who made that arbitrary decision to save it rather than spend it?

So many questions, so few answers.

 

I was told by one of the directors that they divide the money up evenly. If I remember correctly, he said there were 3 locations with pool tables and even though one location was used much more than the others, and needed much more tender loving care and repair, it would receive no more than than any other! Go figure!

 

To further explain FYI's comments above, what he is referring to is the fact there are 3 pool rooms in Sun City; a small one at Fairway, a larger one at Lakeview bowling alley and the largest at the Bell bowling lanes. Utilization numbers are by far larger at Bell than the other two combined. For some reason, as the board clamors for data driven actions, they have not elected to make improvements based on those utilization numbers. Go figure.

I think, it would be really, really interesting to publish/post the clubs requests for improvements they submit every year. I know they keep it, what i don't know is how or who decides on what gets done? There should be total transparency and even better would be an explanation as to how those decisions are made. Sadly, most members living in Sun City know little and understand even less how things work when it comes to all things RCSC.

Think of it in these terms; the million dollars plus carry forward from year to year (straight from lot assessments) could have, arguably should have been spent on those items requested by clubs. I know of clubs who have been asking for improvements for years and have finally given up.

 

The Men's Club has their own pool tables as well! Who repairs those tables when it's needed?

 

My limited experience with the Men's Club is they pay for virtually anything they need or want. I know after the roof collapsed and their kitchen was ruined they paid for replacing it. One would have expected it be covered under the insurance policy.

 

Yeah, and what's up with that? The RCSC Board Policy 12 states:

"All tools, equipment, fixtures and furniture are property of RCSC whether it is original equipment, replacement equipment or additional equipment purchased by or donated to the club..."

So if everything at every Club belongs to the RCSC then why aren't they paying the bills to maintain their assets?

Our Club, at our own expense, and I know several other Clubs have done the same as well, have spent hundreds of dollars purchasing software, hand-held scanners and other special items just so we can print out our Club Membership Cards with a barcode, as well as generate our attendance and participation monthly reports for the RCSC.

Why should we, as a Club, have to spend our Club dollars when this was a mandate by the RCSC? Not to mention, now all that specialized equipment and software belongs to the RCSC?

They've got everybody bullshitted. They tell you you need to inventory all of your equipment in case there's a fire so the insurance will replace it. Question is, if you brought your own computer or other special piece of equipment to your Club, can you take it with you if you leave the Club once its been inventoried and filed with the RCSC?

 

I don't have a problem with clubs that are well healed buying stuff for their club FYI. Let me be blunt, not all clubs are created equal, nor should they be. The clubs who make stuff and sell it generally have larger treasuries than the sporting, social and dance clubs. Lawn bowling was an oddity because we had a very generous donor who over the years had given money and bought stuff to the tune of nearly a million dollars.

Clubs are the life blood of the RCSC. Tens of thousands of members belong to them and from purely a social standpoint are incredibly important to the Sun City way of life. They get people out of the house and doing things. From the very beginning it was the essence of Sun City. The pandemic hit clubs hard and if anything, there should be a concerted effort to recharge them and restore them to pre-covid19 levels.

The question that should be asked, and i suspect it will at the MEMBER/board exchange is; how do clubs request improvements and who then grants (decides) on who gets what? It's really a simple question. I would also like to think the board members have the ability to ask and receive the yearly summary of those requests. Seeing as the board president is so analytically focused, club membership numbers should be provided/published for all to see.

While i was on the board, i had hoped we (the RCSC) would do a better job in assisting clubs in promotion. There was a time when the SunViews published club member articles as a regular feature. I know the video thing they are doing is good for exposure. The RCSC also allows each club one free event per year as a fund raiser. That's a good thing. The more we can do to help clubs grow, the better off Sun City is.

I don't know why it would be a problem in posting club's yearly requests for improvements and then publishing a year-end summary of who gets what. Transparency isn't a dirty word, at least not to me.

One final footnote; Sun City West went through some significant changes over the last year and a half. The new general manager started looking closely at numbers and realized they had some problems. Outside utilization was an issue. They also found some members who were making things through their club had become almost a business proposition. Most folks don't understand, Sun City and Sun City West receive special tax status because of the nature and makeup of the organization. Both communities are limited in the amount of outside play/involvement. The bottom line is, the organizations are there to serve the membership first and foremost.

 

Carol, don't be sorry; your thoughts are always welcome here. You have captured many of my feelings but in fewer words than I do. We can only hope that after 12-18 months - between new Board members who are listening to the membership and a report from the contractors saying the plans for Mountain View can't be put on that parcel of land - well, a joyous day indeed. Wish we didn't have to wait so long for some to see the light.

 

The question I have, and alluded to in another thread is; why build a performing arts theater that only seats 400-450 when the paid concerts at Sun Dial accommodates 907 seats?

Sundial provides uncomfortable seating and an acoustically challenging venue!

The argument you hear the most is, they need to provide facilities that will and can provide the most utilization. I certainly hope they have more planned for the proposed theater than just the Players? How about moving those paid-for concerts from Sun Dial? How about a lecture series? There are many options available for the properly thought-out plan!

If I were King I would forget about a basketball gym and even go as far as eliminating the lawn bowling green which is expensive to maintain, not to mention there would still be 4 other locations to play! Utilize that space for parking!

 

Somebody should do some digging into the past. Back around 2010 those discussions for a theater was with seating in the neighborhood of 900-1000. Not sure but it seems to me the problem was finding the space to accommodate that many seats with the county code required parking. Moving out of the Sundial auditorium would be an interesting prospect. Does that open it up to become a basketball court? Volleyball court? Indoor pickleball? I doubt it, but who knows?

The pandemic changed our thinking. The Weds night shows used to have both wings open and would seat somewhere around 1500. Now i hear they have closed the wings (better though less seating), but have added an afternoon performance which still allows for about the same total number of ticket sales. That's been a standard practice in communities with smaller seating arrangements. Two shows probably is a little more expensive, but ultimately a better experience for those attending.

My good friend Ben Roloff who has been studying local newspapers at the State Archives told me when they were building the Bell Center, they spent two years with all of the potential users talking about shared space. I forget the name but it was something like Performing Arts Theater group. Their goal was input from all of the potential users. Sadly, when push came to shove, Meeker had blown about 2 million dollars over budget and the theater was scrapped.

Not sure where or how the decision was made to cut the number by better than half. 400 seats, if that is what there is going to be, clearly limits the use. One of the reasons this has been so frustrating is because we know so little in the way of details. Knowing there were space allocation studies done in the past, but accessing none of them is illogical to me. At this point, we can only guess if the board members (past and present) were privy to that information.