I've written it a hundred times, maybe more: Sun City is unique. It's easy to say we are/were the first active retirement community in the country, it is much harder to quantify exactly how different we are. The most obvious is when we tell people Sun City is not a city (at all). In fact, we know those early community leaders were convinced one day we would become a city with a mayor, city council and all the trapping; those living here refused to let it happen. Oddly, there was only 1 real vote by the membership. In 1964 the motion to incorporate was rejected by a 2/1 margin. The drumbeat was constant for years with the next big push in 1971. The leaders were more cautious, this time taking a straw poll vote by 12,000 plus members of SCHOA. That measure went down by a 95% margin and all the wranglings by the powers that be never resulted in anything other than noise. At today's board meeting, we heard some strange comments from board member's about Del Webb's intentions when he built the community. The reality is Webb had little hands-on impact, he left that to his employees. Even with that, most of their energy and efforts were focused on empowering the residents to take ownership. The company knew one day they would be gone and it would be up to those living here to make it work. The most remarkable aspect of their efforts were our documents authorized a unique style of governance. We call it self-governance and we know historically the boards tried to allow members voices to be heard. I know some have argued they have stopped listening to members; my view is as fewer members are involved, the board has an argument that the voices heard aren't driven by the majority. Fair enough, but what is the alternative? 1). Let the 9 member board make every decision based on what they feel is right. 2). Hold open meetings and allow those attending to have comments (and influence). 3). Vote the entire membership on big ticket items (not much will pass). 4). Let the general manager decide what we need/want. I can tell you, #2 is how we were built and i would argue, why we were as successful as we were/are. We trusted the membership to show up and speak out. At today's meeting, when Steve Collins made a motion to kill the PAC at Lakeview, the motion he proposed 10 days earlier, the room went silent. Board members were stunned and the crowd grew quickly restless as they discussed what that action would do if it was sustained? After much debate, the vote was taken 6 yes (to kill) and 3 no to keep the PAC on the Lakeview greens. That quickly it was over. The hundred plus members who signed up to speak, didn't need to. The 300-400 members in the room were elated the meeting wouldn't go on for hours (and in today's case, days as we would never have finished by the 1 pm ending time). There was some gnashing of teeth and anger directed at lawn bowlers by a disappointed board members. Here's my take for anyone in the crowd, or perhaps reading this summary: Sun City worked exactly how Sun City was set up to work. The board attempted to solve some long standing problems, the community members showed up and spoke out and the board listened to them. While a couple of the board lamented about those who didn't come and ultimately their voices weren't heard, the only alternative is to allow mail ballots on agenda items like this. My best guess is should we do that, nothing would ever pass. The better solution is we need to work harder to create buy-in from members when it comes to taking ownership in our community. Until then, the only voices being heard are from those who bother to come; which by the way has always been the case. Kudos to the board for listening and reacting to what they were hearing.
Makes me wonder if the petitioners will continue to try and recall the Board or did killing the motion also kill their desire? Time will tell.
The recall motions continue for the board members who voted no on the motion to indefinitely postpone the original motion.
I think it would be best if the petitioners let things go at this point. Why beat a dead horse? It sounds like it was very difficult for the individual Directors to make a decision on this matter whether they voted "Yes" or "No".
I don't understand why how difficult a decision was for them should make a difference. Like everything else recently there is no transparency, and it appears residents don't matter unless we come out en masse and protest. It should not be this difficult. How can a person enjoy retirement if you have to keep fighting the BOD who is supposed to be listening to us anyway. Retirement is supposed to be fun, not an RCSC nightmare.
I too am glad the BOD was listening. I also don't buy some BOD comments that someone will always be upset. On this one concerning putting a large building on the lake, I feel it was obvious not to be doing that. I think residents do want improvements and some modern updates but not at the cost of taking away the only truly natural setting that we have. I do think Mountain View should still get a modern fitness center. I do think we can look at a PAC, but just not at that site. I like ideas that maybe reworking SunDial, or looking at Bell location would work well. I think we can be fiscally conservative but still add some modern amenities without bankrupting the system. I think sweeping tear downs and changes should be made slowly. You know 6 months out of the year, it is just plain hot here and building more buildings to sit empty and take out natural settings just isn't a good idea over here. Sun City is unique and I just feel that keeping any and all natural settings we have is sacrosanct here. Maybe board needs to always be thinking of quality of life issues, our natural beauty, and not building for the sake of building. I also think we need more solid evidence that we need to keep adding more buildings. Again, 6 months of the year many buildings are empty tombs. We have so much natural beauty here, it would be tragic to see that taken away forever. Blessings for a good day!
And who, and how, do you suppose they will pay for the additional insurance, maintenance, staff and utilities for those buildings? When you live in a community where there's only a fixed number of rooftops and no room for growth, the only way you increase the dollars coming in, is by raising the assessments!
I debated starting a new thread, but this one works, so let me vent/ponder where we are and where we go from here. Mountain View...whatever it is to become needs to be the priority for 2025. Yes, we can and should begin the long process of building a site plan for the entire Lakeview Center but that will take years to sort out. Mountain View needs to be front and center. Here's the rub and it is the same one we have suffered through and agonized over since Meeker had too pull the plug in 1976 on the Performing Arts venue at the corner of 99th and Bell Road. It was slated to hold 1800 patrons and there were 18 groups participating in it's planning. Bell Center went 5 million dollars over budget and Meeker had to drop it. In later interviews he argued someday a PAC would get built. With that out of the way, the comment that "Webb promised in our documents we would have a PAC was nonsense." Sorry but that simply was never the case. I know folks like to invoke Del's name, but truth be told, he had almost no involvement in the minutia of how Sun City was built. Meeker and cast of hundreds had their hands all over it, not Webb. The reality is this; the Players is one of Sun City's oldest clubs. Their first performance dates back to the very beginning of Sun City where the stage at Community Center (Oakmont) was used. From there they moved to Town Hall (Fairway) with a larger seating capacity and when Mountain View opened in 1968, the even more spacious venue became their home where they still perform to this day. The Players were truly a rich and important aspect of the "new active way of life" used to market Sun City. For as long as i have been around Sun City (buying in 1999), there has been back-ground noise about building a theater for them (and others) to use. There's been numerous proposals and plans and had any of them been adopted we would not be having these discussions today. If only eh...because it could have been done for a tiny fraction of the cost. The reason (in my opinion) has been many of those who held control of the purse strings (from GM to board members) were always reluctant to buy into the idea we needed a theater at all. No one in their right mind says that out loud because it sounds like they are against the arts community. Behind closed doors, it's been obvious to me, it has been part and parcel of the challenge to build them their own venue. At this juncture i would argue two what-ifs? Had we purchased the Lakes Club in 2012/2013, we wouldn't be here. The 36,000 square foot building housed a small theater (Theater Works) for a year or two and would have been an awesome venue for performances. It also would have provided a community center, the one piece of the puzzle we are missing. The other missed opportunity was when the board elected to buy the Grand Ave property and bypass the scheduled Mountain View remodel that was in the process of being started. Both are yesterday's news. and both threw us off course. It's what happens when there is no planning and just board members and general managers flying by the seat of their pants. I can trace much of it back to bad decisions made while i was on the board, but why bother? Suffice to say, we strayed from community member involvement and became one dimensional in our future design and planning. So, here we sit, after a 2023 voluminous SAC/community participation process that failed because of personal agendas? It's a question mark only in that after all of the work done that year, the 2024 board punted the question down the road and allowed a new architect firm to come in and tell us what they thought was best for us. I know that sounds crass, but i am less than convinced their search was all that pure. Looking at the results of sticking it on the Lakeview greens reminds me about the old joke about hiring a CPA. You know, the one where the guy that gets hired is the one who asks "what do you want the numbers to be?" Sorry, but the this looks manufactured to fit an already determined outcome (just my opinion). All of which begs the question...now what? As i just posted on Facebook, Mountain View need be the boards first priority. The challenge still remains; what about the theater? Looking at the not yet disclosed MV "elements" but instead looking at the 10 year PIF budget, it appears as if there are plans for an indoor dog arena (total of 1.5 million dollars) and clearly an investment in additional pickleball courts, new pool and some kind of modest fitness area. We know this summer, they experimented with the dog club using the old auditorium and it sounds like it was well received. The problem of course is those reporting its success are the end users. Of course they loved getting out of the heat and having an air conditioned gathering space. Hell, it is/was the same argument we watched unfold when the pickleball players went from their request for 20 more courts, to an indoor setting. We all want what we want. The bigger question these days is a little more pure...what can we afford? We have the money in the PIF account to get MV done quickly and in doing so, we need to figure out exactly what that means. Who gets what there, includes pball, theater, swimming, fitness and lawn bowling? We know given the size (a little over 6 acres), the more indoor space we have, the more parking spaces the county requires. It was why i liked the way the 2023 architect (Marlene) who created Plan M thought. She worked the stakeholders hard and had narrowed it all down to something both manageable and affordable. The problem was, it didn't fit with what some of the 2024 board wanted as their vision for Sun City. All of which is why this piece fits here. Sun City works when the community's input is as important as the board members we elect. When we negate or ignore it...the shit hits the fan. What did Yogi say? Deja vu all over again.
