I got to thinking about the yearly assessment amount and the board meeting time available for which members can speak, and and it works out to be $24.07 per minute for a member to try to convey an idea, thought or suggestion. This calculation is based upon 9 meetings a year and the ability to speak for three minutes, once your number is called to speak. That is quite an expensive per minute cost, and then if you dont finish your complete idea, you have to return to the end of the line, and wait your turn to continue your thoughts. We are the members, we are the purpose for the community of Sun City. No members, no RCSC, no community. So, why does it feel as if the members are treated like second class citizens of their own community? Limits on member comments, returning to the back of the line, like a child admonished for not completing their assignment? I know, have no time limit and there will be those that will tie up the entire morning, driving their point home. But is a three minute time reasonable? The members need to be heard, from multiple fronts. Three minutes once a month, is in my opinion, unreasonable. How can the RCSC say they are listening and hearing what the members want or need when there are limitations as to what can be presented? I was on the board when the original idea of placing time limits was introduced. We, as board members, were told this was being done until the Anne Randall Stewart controversy blew over. It has been a long time since the lawsuits were settled and folks moved on. Why hasn't this practice been reviewd and revised? Why continue to keep the members at arms length? It seems to me there needs to be efforts put forth to engage the membership in meaningful interactions. It will take the RCSC to step up and provide member outreach opportunities beyond those listed for the next several months. Those meetings have a specific agenda and purpose and suspect going off subject will not be allowed, as the schedule is tight. Face to face time with the members is more that three minutes a month behind a table. It means greeting them and speaking to them in a manner that is welcoming and that members feel listened to. I have made suggestions before as to ways to accommodate this, and am not going to rehash them now. Can the board, at some point, take notice of the members, invite them on a larger scale to engage, and pay attention? For my $24.07 per minute, I have elected not to come and speak for several years. This will change and I am hoping the cost per minute gets reduced and soon. I will be returning when my health is stable enough to afford me the oppoprtunity. By the way, these meetings starting a 9 am is awfully early. Thank you and this is my opinion only.
Just a slight correction, Carole. If the agenda for a Board meeting contains a Motion, Members do have the right to speak on that motion; so add two instances of 3 minutes to your above statement and our dollar amount that our voices are heard. Once again, pointing to our "sister" city down the road.... they have created a list of five items that they want to accomplish this year, and one of them is to "Improve Board Visibility to the Community." For example, their president held a meeting on Sept. 8th open to members to come and chat. Perhaps this might be an avenue to pursue. Jean
Jean, m If I an speaking to a motion, the title and intent has been set. Changing the title would not be tolerated. I am talking about what needs to be addressed about member involvement, what needs to be attempted, and how the board could participate in the regrouping of the community. These comments and ideas with the suggestions need longer that three minutes to explain. being relegated back to the end of the line in demeaning. I think I pay a fair amount for the right to be heard and not be cut off by a timer. Having meetings with the members at various centers by various directors would be a great start, doing these meetings at various times with possible weekends might be good as well. Wrote a long description of things once before, so ideas are out there already.
May I also suggest periodic online surveys to get a sense of how things are going and what the big issues are. They are not perfect in that they do not reach everyone, but I believe they are better than having no data.
I appreciate the advice for an online survey, but the concern is who does it reach and will it be filled out? In today’s quick, easy electronic world, surveys take time. Time to open up, read the questions and decide what choices most reflect your answers. This is going to sound so old fashioned, but there was a time when they’re were actual people with clipboards that would stop people, and be interactive and ask the questions. These survey takers were kind and inviting and asked for nothing in return except a few minutes of your time. It offered an immediate answer with feedback to the survey. The survey worker got a complete story sometimes why a particular answer made sense, but those comments could be noted by the taker and reflected back to whoever generated the survey to begin with. Face to face value in being asked what you care about. Is it possible to recreate that level of interest and still collect data? Again, dreams of outreach to the community and getting data at the same time. Just my opinion.
Carole, I wish your vision was possible as it would build a sense of community in a world of anonymity. John
