I could have placed this in the ethics thread where we discussed all of the curious things that have been allowed to go on. In the normal course of an election cycle, the RCSC used to be pretty careful regarding management saying things and the board at least trying to be impartial. I've been attending candidate forums for a long time. Participated in one in 2011, which was anything but impartial, but it mattered not. Most of my work career was been centered on being in the middle of a shitstorm. I enjoy chaos, confrontation and crazy. They just didn't realize it when they attacked me. That was then, this is now. Over the years since i left the board, the chair person of the election committee is the person running the program. I will state publicly, they've done a pretty good job of being fair. Sure there's the built in advantage of being an incumbent, but beyond that, no real issues. Today, while watching (and not saying a word), i was stunned. The chair allowed a question that would never been allowed in years past. NEVER. There's always been a ruling by the chair to deem a question inappropriate. The criteria has always been if a question was asked regarding a potential board action currently in play, it was shut down. The candidates were told they could not answer it. Today, as i watched and listened i could not believe my eyes and ears. One of the members asked the questions: Do you support the current Mountain View remodel and if elected would you vote to change it? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why these kinds of question shouldn't be allowed. Of course the chair allowed it and two of the candidates pandered to the crowd. "Yes i will vote for it and no new board members shouldn't be allowed to change it." The rest of the candidates said they support a performing arts theater being built but it would depend on what the cost of it comes in at. That is the right answer given a board member is sworn to uphold their fiduciary responsibilities. The second aspect is even more egregious; they are telling the potential candidates they have no right as board members to change something placed on the PIF budget once they are elected. Once again, board members are elected and they have the absolute authority to add to or delete from any previous board actions. It's foolishness on it's face and the board president should have never allowed the question asked. She knows it, and you know it now as well.
That behavior is so far outside the boundaries, it's painfully obvious what's going on. I was holding out a little bit of hope that "maybe" there could be an ounce of fairness in this election, especially after last year's meeting debacle. They haven't learned a thing, but as you continue to say Bill - they don't care!
I am going to chime in again. "RCSC needs to buy Union Hills Country Club". Go drive by it. Everybody, go look at what could be. Plenty of parking. This could be a top notch entertainment center for many events. Again, get in your car and drive by it and see before you spout your BS in regards to this property. With this location, the value in unsurpassed!!!
Hardly the place for this comment sw, but i'll bite...and do what with the golf course? BTW. how much do you think the current owners want for the property? The real "value" is in the land and building homes on it. It could be worth as much as 25 million dollars (or more) for those purposes every one of the home owners would have to be paid off for the value of the lot their home sits on (roughly 300 homes at 50k per lot). Unless of course you are suggesting the RCSC keep it as their 9th golf course and fitting a theater on the site of the buildings that are currently there. Curious to hear your response.
I'll chime in also. I hope it's not for another golf course. Considering the number of courses we already have, and the number of golfers, we are saturated IMO. Plus, I think there are already issues with managing what we have, together with the amount we are already subsidizing is significant (and it's likely higher than we know). I have NOTHING against golf. I'm a former occasional golfer and organized 14 36-team tournaments as part of my job in a former life. I understand the passion for golf, but....
Thanks Linda. Hopefully say what will log in. There's absolutely nothing wrong with the RCSC buying more land; the questions always are at what price and then what for? All three private country clubs have sold in the past 15 years. The first was Sun City Country Club. Of the 8 buyers, only one was willing to make the commitment to try and make it as a golf course. The other 7 were land speculators. I don't know either of the groups that purchased Palm Brook and Union Hills, i do know they bought them at a fraction of their price, if it had just been raw land. Both golf courses have deed restrictions with them. When, not if, they are sold there will be an ugly and protracted court battle. It has happened a hundred, maybe a thousand times or more across the country. The standard operating procedure is to fence them, let them grow wild and have the land owners adjacent to them looking for a resolution. The real test will come in 2025 when the 5th water management plan is put in place. To my knowledge all three of the private country clubs still have the roughs with no conversion to desert landscaping. In most cases, the conversion will be millions more than they paid for the courses. Their only real hope is for the ADWR to give them a break and i don't see that being a long term solution. More likely a short reprieve to get it done.
