Exchange Sept. 8, 2025 Highlights & RCSC VIDEO with NEW WEBSITE & MOUNTAIN VIEW PRESENTATIONS

Did you go, or live stream?
Rusty Bradshaw, Sun City resident was there!
“September 8, 2025 Exchange Highlights
“Details on Mountain View project, non-payment of PIF and CIF by homebuyers and new website addressed, Board president answers accusations by former board member.”
~ Rusty Bradshaw, Sun City resident

Watch his video report
➡️ HERE

RCSC EXCHANGE MEETING VIDEO AND MOUNTAIN VIEW PRESENTATION IN POSTS BELOW.

 

RCSC VIDEO Exchange Meeting - Monday, September 8, 2025

Business announcements and a few member comments, followed by a break waiting for website presenter to arrive.

❗️THEN Advance to 1:19 for the NEW website presentation❗️

➡️ View Video HERE

 

Mountain View Center Update
• FULL September Update presented at the Exchange on Monday, 9/8/2025
➡️ https://suncityaz.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/RCSC-Mountain-View-September-Update.pdf
❗️Plan to attend the Mountain View Town Hall Meeting - Tuesday, Sept 16 from 5:30-9:00 pm at Sundial Auditorium.

 

For those of you in the room, or who watched it live stream, or now have watched the video play back, there was one uncomfortable moment that stood out. A former board member who had quit leveled some fairly nasty remarks against the board president. I won't bore anyone with the details, but one of President Foster's answered stunned me.

I had to go back and watch/listen to make sure i heard it correctly. The Former board member suggested the treasurer wasn't being given all of the financial data she wanted or needed. I had heard rumors that was the case and i simply refused to believe it as being true.

In that i am not a numbers guy, i will turn to our own Dave W (G d V) and ask him for an answer to the comment that made absolutely no sense to me, none. The board president indicated Treasurer Borski had been putting her requests for financial records in writing and after conferring with the director of finance, "they felt they had supplied her with a fair amount of the information she had requested."

His answer took my breath away. Really? Freaking really? Why in God's name would the treasurer have to request any of the financial information in writing to the president? And, why would the board president have to check with the director of finance regarding what information they should share with her?

I guess i am easily confused, because when a board member is named the treasurer, all of that financial data should be available; not just what the the board president and director of finance deems her worthy of receiving.

Help me out here Dave, something seems amiss.

 

And if I'm not mistaken, I believe that board member, who quit, also accused the President of making decisions on his own?

So much for Board Training, or even having a Board!

 

Trouble right here in Sun City!

 

President Foster, “you got some 'splanin' to do!”

 

Unfortunately, lots of 'splaining to do'. A few things in the rumor-mill raising concern. Please be on the lookout for the following (not specific as these are not confirmed, and I pray, are misconstrued intentions). Important enough to ensure home owners are paying attention.

By-law modification plans (a hand-selected "working-group" that was closed to all members):

Recreation Card Issuance: The rumored information will change Sun City from what it is today. It's also against the Articles of Incorporation. Reason: we need the revenue.

Removing the 75-mile rule: This is being raised again, hopefully, it will go nowhere, again! ​

A hand-selected and small by-law "working group" that was closed to the membership, and the 9 Board members (some voted in by less than 900 of the total Sun City population) will decide our fate here. NO! Please pay attention to the changes being proposed. This is OUR community, stay involved, please, and vote in the elections, as well.


Mt. View Designs and Master Plan Consultant Input on Trends

Many have indicated the need for a multi-use facility that will support the "theatre" needs so that it remains relevant into the future and we can maximize the use of the space. This was indicated in the ASU survey.

There is very comfortable, theatre style, ADA compliant retractable and other seating that would serve such a venue. Word is there are 5 design options to be presented by TriArc. It would be prudent to include one design option that shows this type of solution, so that ALL members could make an informed decision. Let’s see if they provide an option that accommodates what has been clearly communicated by many.

Master Plan consultants opinion on theatre construction: Caveat to saying it's a good feature was "it MUST be MULTI-USE (not permanent graded seating, while confirming comfortable retractable seating) or you will not get enough use for the spend. That's the trend.

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one" – Spock, Star Trek II (Lori, you are wearing off on me )

Please pay attention to decisions coming down the line – we need ALL input as a self-governed community, not just a few or the 9 making the decisions or a small vocal group. Let’s all ensure Sun City stays relevant for the future, not focused on the past and that we spend OUR money wisely.

 

Yeah, I don't necessarily like that the Articles of Incorporation gives the Board the exclusive right to totally "revise" the Bylaws without participation from the Members. I get it, amending a Bylaw during the year is one thing, but when it comes down to a complete "revision" I think the entire Membership should have a say, and not just with Member comments during a board meeting. There should be a Special Session that allows the Membership to debate and vote on their passage.

On top of that, look what they've done to us regarding those 14 amendments that the Members submitted for the Annual Membership meeting. Instead of allowing those 1,767 Members, who were represented at the meeting to decide, they will be approved or disapproved by only 9 members of the board rather than the Membership.

And if any of those 14 Amendments are being ignored in the revised bylaws, what ever happened to them? And is it right that 9 members of the board can deny a Member from submitting a motion to amend the bylaws? If it's legitimate, I think not!

 

Special session 10/20/25, 10-12 Sundial by law’s presentation. Special session 1/22/25, 5-9PM Sundial by laws presentation, Special session 10/29/25, 6-9PM First Reading of by laws sundial, Special session, 11/10/25 9-3 one hour break, Second reading of bylaws. If you are not talked out after nearly 12 hours over 4 sessions, I don’t know what to say.

As to your other points, they will be addressed to even your satisfaction, so you can stop the paranoia routine and I guess is some off the wall conspiracy theory. You don’t know what the committee did, you know you don’t know and evidently you don’t care you don’t know hence your rant.

I also know that no matter how hard the committee worked, you will not like the finished production because you will never be satisfied.. My advice for between now and the release of the bylaws would be to read the entire ARS Title 10 and see what it says. You will know the relevant parts when you see them. Then do read Title 33, see the difference and why we do not want to be covered by an ex post facto law.

Have fun storming the castle and Nobody is ready for the Spanish Inquistion.

 

I just hope you're not wasting and adding pages duplicating the ARS's within the Bylaws. That's not advisable.

What I'll be looking for is; will the revised bylaws be granting the Members more freedoms or giving them more restrictions?

 

FYI,
If the revisions follow the ARS as described, it’s probably going to feel like there are less member input. The current bylaws have not been updated to match current law. When visiting Arizona Revised Statutes versus current bylaws, there were several exceptions to the law. If the new bylaws match current law, the bylaws will be updated to reflect what the current law says. Unfortunately, current state law is much more restrictive than the current bylaws, especially in the area of budgetary matters and adherents to state laws versus corporate regulations. What we have now with the current bylaws are corporate definitions that suggest the regulation of the corporate code. If the bylaws are redefined to match the state statutes, I believe they will be more restrictive. Just my opinion based upon some of the research performed over the past few years.

 

And that's why you don't duplicate rules that are already stated in the statutes.

Statutes change or the bylaw gets amended and no longer represent the same meaning causing a conflict.

And many state statutes start out with a statement yielding their authority to the organization's Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws.

I'd be interested in receiving an email from you identifying existing conflicts.

You have my email address.

 

The bylaws reviews/town hall sessions for member review will be telling. Either the board believes the Articles of Incorporation that provided members oversight rights are real, or they think they aren't. It's really that simple. I hate to be a downer, but this isn't rocket science. For some odd reason we've created a mindset the bylaws ranked right up there with drafting the Magna Carta. Or perhaps in this case, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Sun City's community founders intentionally bestowed rights to the membership. Rights that included overriding the board when it came to the bylaws. While the board got hysterical regarding John Fast's legal action about members having the right to vote, he was indeed correct. It was the board's lawyer who wrote some smarmy tripe about why those in attendance had no right to vote.

And so we are clear, whatever the board/working group has drafted, those bylaws have to confirm/conform to the Articles of Incorporation. If they don't, i suspect there will be more angst. Hopefully those working on them used the A of I for whatever they have put together. Those Articles can only be revised by a vote of the membership.

We'll see eh?

 

Nothing against your email idea FYI, I just know that whatever I send you will be a discussion item on this board. So, this is some of the current ARS that could have an interpretation that could have an effect on the bylaws. THIS IS STRICTLY A GUESS AND MY OPIONION. I CHOSE THESE PARTICULAR STATUTUES BECAUSE THEY WERE A TOPIC IN PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS.

10-3302. General powers


3. Make and amend bylaws, not inconsistent with its articles of incorporation or with the laws of this state, for regulating and managing the affairs of the corporation.

19. Transact any lawful activity that will aid governmental policy.

20. Do any other act not inconsistent with law that furthers the activities and affairs of the corporation.

On article 3 the key word is OR not AND, legally making it a choice, not mandated. This simple word gives the corproation the popwer to amend as they wish to meet the needs of the corporation, which is not clearly defined. This simple statement gives me pause to wonder if the bylaws were redone to offer greater power to the board, in the name of managing the affairs. MY OPINION ONLY

Article 10 refers to the aid of governmental policy. This would be the statutes as written, which clearly favor the corporation over the members MY OPINION ONLY

Article 20, in my opinon, gives the board unfettered control do whatever they deem an affair of the corporation. As long as its not against the law, they can do it, IN MY OPINION ONLY


10-3722. Quorum requirements

Unless chapters 24 through 40 of this title or the articles of incorporation provide for a higher or lower quorum the bylaws may provide the number or percentage of members entitled to vote, present or represented by proxy, or the number or percentage of votes entitled to be cast by members present or represented by proxy, that shall constitute a quorum at a meeting of members. In the absence of that provision, members, present or represented by proxy, holding one-tenth of the votes entitled to be cast, shall constitute a quorum.

This is a touchy subject, and when I read it earlier this year, I had some concerns, and it might rear its ugly head in the bylaws. I don't beleive the articles of incorporation state that there shall be provisions for proxy voting. Don't kill the messenger, but without the express direction of the AOI stating the use of proxies, they may not be allowed within the bylaws. If, and this is a BIG IF the bylaws committee reads this the same way I do, proxies could be eliminated as a voting option. IN MY OPINION ONLY.

I am not on the committee and have no information about what the committee has recommended. I am going by what the topics of discussion were here on TOSC and grabbed a few of the ARS Statutes. I tried to explain the reasoning, as I could speculate a possible direction.

THESE ARE MY OPINIONS ONLY EXPRESSED HEREIN. I AM NOT AN ATTORNEY NOR DO I REPRESENT MYSELF TO BE ONE. I am lookng at these articles and see the possibility of modification to meet ARS, grant greater authority to the board, and remove proxy voting. Especially with advent of electronic voting, proxies would be eliminated.

I don't know if I made it clear enough, this is pure speculation on my part. I have not been on TOSC in much fashion due to not feeling well. I did see Tom's comment and have posted some of what I surmise will appear on the review. Frankly, there are too many areas wher there are "or" instead of "and". There are far too many articles that use the word "may" instead of "shall", clearly gving the possible power to the board on several fronts. I am not going to post the bulk of Title 10 on here to prove my concerns. If you want to, you can read those online, same as I did. Watch for the "gotcha" words, they are ever present.

 

Carole, I have come to have great respect for your very intelligent views. In this case, the ARS use of the word "or" is IMHO meant to create independent requirements for bylaws. No bylaw can violate the ARS. I hope this helps. John

 

To much to respond to here, but just a couple of points:

The ARS clearly allow the Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws can set the Quorum and the RCSC Articles clearly allows the Members to vote by proxy.
Article XIII
The Members of the Corporation shall be provided with the opportunity to vote by proxy in:

a. Amending the Articles of Incorporation

b. Members amending the Bylaws of the Corporation

c. The election of Directors*

d. Any other matter requiring an act of the members

*If the Bylaws provide for voting by mail in the election of Directors, the above-stated Proxy vote will not apply to the election of Directors.

I suppose proxies could be eliminated but that would require a vote by the Membership.

And although the RCSC Articles of Incorporation say: "The Bylaws may be amended, modified, revised, or revoked by the Directors or by the Members. In the event of conflict concerning the Bylaws as amended, modified, revised, or revoked by the Directors, the action of the Members shall prevail." There's nothing saying that the Bylaws can't further define that permission to require a fully revised set of bylaws must be approved by the Membership and just not the Board.

We will have to wait to see what the "revised" bylaws say before we can criticize them, but I'm not holding my breath that they will offer the Members more freedoms.

And as far as statutes that refer to the affairs of the corporation, I do believe that the board has already decided that "affairs of the corporation" are Board Policies that the Members currently aren't allowed to amend on their own. They require going back to the Board for study first!

 

Thank you John for your compliment. I truly appreciate you taking the time to write what you did and offer clarification.
The statement about no bylaws can violate current law is what I call, a given. I further interpret any wording that allows de facto decisions can be made by “A choice exists for interpretation as to how it applies to the situation and how the board can choose to interpret the direction”. When I see “gotcha” words like may instead of shall, or instead of and plus others that elude me at this moment. I don’t like the idea that something as simple as a simple word can denote a direction of change, but in today’s world, those words carry weight. The proof will be revealed soon, and I pray I am wrong.

 

FYI,
It does state the members may vote by proxy. My concern is with how many proxies is not specified in the bylaw. They specify a number to attain for a quorum but don’t specify a hard number for the amount of proxies allowed. The formula for proxy voting is muddled, in my opinion.
The voting states the total be one tenth of the total votes entitled to be cast. How many members total are there in Sun City? What is one tenth total population to be? Every member is entitled to vote, so, would the proxy count need to be around 2700 to meet the literal wording of that statute? I will stop now. I don’t want to monopolize the conversation with supposition that may be a fallacy. I could take this discussion and interpret the literal definition of each statute that is written that gives the power of decision to the board. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. Just my opinion only.

 

SECTION 3: MEMBERSHIP QUORUM A quorum for any Membership meeting must consist of not less than five hundred (500) Members in good standing represented at the meeting in person or by proxy. The maximum number of proxies for any one member is twenty-five (25)

ten percent (10%) of the voting Members of the Corporation as of the preceding July 1.
The 10% pertains to Initiatives, Referendums, and Removal of Directors petitions.