My Bylaw Amendments for the Members Meeting

All I'm saying is you don't know what you don't know and perhaps a professional Master Planner has a process and knows where to look that the committee hasn't thought of looking.

 

Dave,
I don't think you answered Tom's question. The members have not seen the detailed plans you refer to and I am not aware of anyone on RCSC staff that works exclusively on plans. Can you please tell us where we can examine these detail plans?

 

Dave, I worked with Kevin on early financial forecasting models. I am sure he appreciated the "help". What I have seen come out of the BF&A is incomplete but maybe some of it is confidential. For example, the BF&A committee approved a five-year operating forecast and the construction of a PAC and Dog Training facility. However, there was no attempt to estimate the extra costs associated with operating either of these facilities and no attempt was made to estimate the costs to construct these facilities. I get it. You are all volunteers and very few of the folks on the FB&A committee are trained in finance and accounting. The point is an expert would never have made such a major mistake as this. If an indoor dog training is not a pet project, I don't know what you would consider a pet project. (pun not intended). Could you please tell us where to find these detailed plans you refer to?

 

Gee, perhaps a motion should be made at the annual membership meeting to forget about allocating the 1.5 million dollars for a dog training facility. Seems that using the MV building has been quite sufficient and will be available for several years to come while the RCSC tries to figure out what they're going to do with the building.

 

No problem.

 

My bylaw amendments are getting into final draft form and will be submitted to RCSC corporate on Monday. I will also release them here and on Everything You Need to Know about Sun City. I have asked the Board to endorse the member's right to vote on the big stuff but have not heard anything back. Perhaps when they see the bylaw amendments, they will make their position known. Proxies for the meeting are due Marh 5th. If you want the bylaws to guarantee you the right to vote on the big stuff but cannot attend the March 11, 5:00 PM Annual Members Meeting in the Sun Dial auditorium, please consider giving your proxy to someone who will be able to attend. Thanks!

 

Very interesting. It's nice to see some with a positive attitude. You 5 folks obviously don't get out much. Ask about the pools. Ask the Urologists about the pools. There have been many opinions in the Independent about the pools. Same in SCW. Cheap taxes, even Bill put in his own pool. My mom became septic due to the pools. Almost died. Yes SCG and Dave I still have her medical records. This place is not being taken care of.

 

I'm curious John: How do you define "big stuff?" Individually? Or, collectively as a master plan? Even more curious, as Dave mentioned, how does this fit/format as a bylaw?

 

Bill, I am staying away from the Master Plan thing because I have a strong opinion on it.
As for the “The Big Stuff” I would probably say projects that match the PIF requirements. I say this requirement because anything underneath this figure would be an exercise in delay of performance. Case in point would be the huge A/C units on the roofs of the rec centers. This things cost in the range of $400,000 to 600,000 as well as dehumifers at the pools. For the purpose of efficiency, management could take this directly to the Board for approval as why would oppose these items as they finally conk out. As a matter of fact I would like to raise the amount of a repair by management that doesn’t need Board approval from $25k to about $250,000 as the current figure is chump change in the current markets and was put in place over ten years ago. This could speed necessary work without red tape. The bid requirements would still apply.

 

Good question Bill: I define the big stuff as being big enough to make it into a master plan. I will be submitting the motion tomorrow morning and posting it right here on TOSC for all to judge and absorb. Unlike others, I firmly believe RCSC needs expert guidance and members must be heavily involved in the big stuff - our future. When Del Webb started Sun City he had teams of experts to reach out to prospective members to finely hone a community offering that they would find attractive. As a result of all this outreach he was able to filter out the noise (how lousy life is for seniors) and develop data that showed his team how to develop a community that was attractive to the masses. The concept has been copied many times over but never duplicated (my opinion). So, let's fast forward from 1960 to 2024. Not surprisingly once Devco left so did the experts. Since then, Sun City has been trying to get its groove back while other 55+ communities were being developed by experts who had learned a thing or three from Sun City. Sun City started the inevitable infighting that comes from unlimited wants and limited resources. In fact, I maintain Sun City would not exist today had it not been for the imposition of the PIF. Even with the PIF we still have unlimited wants and limited resources and the infighting continues. Every group wants to build their own Barbie Dream House. Indoor air-conditioned dog training facilities, grand theaters with an orchestra pit on a lake, indoor pickleball courts, upscale dining, walking paths, manicured golf courses, Willow BOP golf, and the list goes on and on ad infinitum. And many groups have figured out the way to get what you want with our governance process is to have a board member "in your pocket". You can already see that the cost of fulfilling everyone's wish list is simply not affordable. And that touches on another hot topic - raising fees for supporting the recreational facilities by $.20 per day causes our financially strained members extreme consternation and they break out the pitchforks. One outlier even wants to sell the Recreation Centers. I invite you to get involved in the solution and read the motions to understand them and not just to respond to them

 

Hi John,
The thing to add also is that Del Webb was a large corporation with very deep pockets. Del Webb was doing large construction projects all over the U.S. when he first envisioned this place. Back then, Del Webb Corp. had the money to build the initial 'dream' here as we can still see it. That is why it was initially so special.
The difficult thing now is that we are not a corporation with deep pockets. We are dependent of living on our PIF and CIF monies and we for the good or bad of it, have to make the tough decisions of what the most real need is for the majority in here as we are now. For the past 3 or 4 years since I have listened to all monthly meetings online. What has struck me is exactly what you 've said which is some of the unrealistic wants and wishes of some of the members. In the long run and at the end of the day, the Board, the members have to realize we only have so much money here to spend and we have to spend it the right way and to try to get the most milage we can for our money into the future as it stands today. I like where you are going with this John, as long as even large scale planners know what kind of dollars we have to spend.

 

Nice to know that records from 15-20 years ago are germane today. Did Mom ever contract cholera while living in Sun City?

 

Fellow members - I am trying to post the amendments dealing with a master plan for the annual members meeting on March 11, 2025 at the Sun Dial Auditorium, with registration beginning at 5:00 PM. These amendments guarantee the members have the right to vote on the big stuff and require a transparent process be used to develop what big stuff will be voted upon. The computer won'tlet me upload the document so I may have to post them one by one.

For those that feel strongly about this issue please consider getting proxies from your friends and neighbors who may not be able to attend the meeting.

 

So, an amendment to address the Big Stuff? What is the "Big Stuff?" Will this amendment lead to the changing of the current wording of the RCSC documents? is this in relationship to expenditures or overall free reign by the members? Will members be able to undo board actions? Will members be able to vote on the ability to cede from their signed facilities agreement? Are members made aware of the additional costs to be borne, by the members themselves, for the mail, printing, and postage associated with these votes? The additional costs associated with advertising, emailing, and maintaining vote tallies and recount costs?
Will this amendment fundamentally change the Corporate Documents as written? If so, can this place the age overlay at risk? Will any current documents become null?
Every change to the wording or its original intent can have a ripple effect. Just trying to understand the underlying liabilities of changing the intent of what "big stuff" means.

 

In light of what is NEEDED to be addressed by the RCSC, it would make absolute sense to forgo a $1.5 million dollar dog facility. there are so many other items that have fallen by the wayside that $1.5 million could be better spent on, in my opinion,

 

SCG - The motions are posted on EYNTKASC. Your questions are well taken. The amendments require RCSC to use an outside expert (i.e., urban planner) to provide a master plan that covers things like large capital spending. These experts are used by substantially all Parks and Recreation departments to develop master plans and the costs associated with the plans. The process they use is data based, is grounded in our mission, vision and values and involves real member involvement much like Del Webb did when he designed Sun City. The plan and its options would go through committee and board reviews and recommendations. The process used to develop the plan is transparent in that all meetings are video recorded. The members are given the opportunity to review the recommendations/options and the rationale and cost for each option. Please remember that any such plan is subject to available funds. We simply cannot spend what we don't have! Please feel free to ping me with additional questions you have after you read the motions.

 

John advises, “The motions are posted on EYNTKASC.”
What the heck is that, you ask?

Everything You Need To Know About (the) RCSC In Del Webb’s Original Sun City is a Facebook page for members only. You must belong to, or join, Facebook and request to join the group to access its content.

Here’s the group link: https://m.facebook.com/groups/263576482020843/

 

Okay, so I did not read the motions, as I still have general questions and concerns about this voting process.
Right now, there are great concerns about how to get the members more involved with the community they live in. There is a sense, on my part, there exists a certain amount of apathy about the community within the ranks of the members. I could be wrong, but how many butts are in chairs at monthly meetings? Why is there an active campaign to get 500 proxies to have the annual meeting? There are how many members of the RCSC? Yet, from what I read, these same members would be tasked with voting on projects needed to be completed within the community? I truly am not trying to be contrary, I am trying to understand the process being suggested based upon what is known right now.
Also, would this be one vote per member? Are the investors, about 25% of the membership, also allowed to vote on these projects?
Does this mean adding another layer of management to the RCSC? Who will direct the work of the new position? How will process and project management proceed and are they answerable to the board? How is the membership to interact witht the new layer of oversirght?
I fear there could be a project a particular group wants put through, and get together a voting bloc. While the general membership is not aware, a vote occurs allowing a pet project to make it through becuase of the timing or the general malaise of the members.
I truly beleive before asking the members to vote on items of such importance, first thng is to get the the members involved. Lack of involvement is very real today. We do not make any attempts to engage our memberahip in a meaningful way, now they are asked to make multi-million dollar decisios?
Until such time as the members feel they are valued and their opinon matters, putting items out for a vote is moot. In today's environment, members do not feel engaged, valued, or that they matter except for the yearly fee. What happened to the community events desigend to engage members?
Right now, I am not in favor of having the membership decide the future of high stakes projects until I see a concerted effort to engage and involve the membership to where they feel they are a valuable part of the RCSC. That is not the case now. I do not want votes cast, deciding the future of the this community, in the current envrionment that is Sun City today. I also have great concerns about the investors voting as members. There are some that own 4-6 properties and they are considered members, how is that fair for the membership at large?
I see this as a potential for lawsuits as this is not your typical one vote per member and the majority rules. The stakes are starting lopsided.
The membership is more than just your local neighbors. There are investors, corporations, multiple family owners, all of which can sway a vote in a particular direction, not n favor to the members at large. This pretty much changes the makeup of Sun City governance, and in my opinion, not necessarily for the better.

 

I don’t do Facebook, post these by law changes here so everybody can read them instead of some stealth site.
Thanks John.

 

Dave, I tried to upload the file and it kept giving me an error message. I will try again tomorrow. John