1 Step Foward, 2 Steps Back...

Discussion in 'Sun City General Discussions' started by BPearson, Nov 16, 2021.

  1. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    Anyone paying attention for the past 6 months knows, Sun City has been slightly turbulent. It started before Karen McAdam was fired as the RCSC board tinkered with the Mountain View project that would close lawn bowling, pickleball, tennis and mini-golf for at least the next 5 years; if not permanently. Residents wanted answers. By the way, that's not unreasonable.

    Then the stuff hit the fan when they fired McAdam for offenses unknown (big, big secret that everyone on the board has to take to their grave with them). They hoped over the summer everything would die down and they could go back to the good old days with 30 people in the massive Sun Dial Auditorium; half of them staff, board members and employees. Life was way easier when no one paid attention, no one cared what they did.

    I won't bore with our illustrious history where attendance at board meetings was substantial. I will however touch on how we got to where we are in the past 18 years. As far back as i have been attending RCSC sessions, 2003, we always had board/member exchanges. In fact, we most often had two per month with 1 board meeting. To make it even more challenging, we also, every three months had a membership meeting if there were more than 100 members in attendance (following a board meeting). Yikes: almost like they cared what people living here had to say.

    Then the new general manager was hired and we had what could only be called a seismic shift. Looking inward, she focused on building working relationships with the board and particularly the officers. Reducing their workload by providing the information she wanted them to have it became a process of condensing. Two member exchanges a month became one. By-laws got rewritten and membership meetings required 1250 in attendance. Then the idea was floated to go from 4 membership meetings that never met the quorum, to one big one per year (that still never met the threshold to actually hold a meeting).

    With each passing year, attendance dropped. The only time a crowd would be on hand was when someone in the community wanted something from the board and 50 or 100 people would show up. They would make noise for a month or two, then fall off. Most often the board would tell them they would put whatever they were asking for on the long range plan. It was laughable.

    The BIG change came when the ARS lawsuit was finally headed to trial. The RCSC hedged their bets by getting two local politicians to try and pass a bill protecting the RCSC from being covered under Title 33, The Planned Communities Act. Sun City was built before it became law and they wanted to be grandfathered under Title 10. There's arguments both ways and won't bore you with them.

    At that same time, the board decided it would look way better if they lost the mantle of secrecy and do everything in the open light of day. I remember clearly one board member telling me i was going to love, LOVE what they were going to do. If you go back in the archives, you will see at least a couple of threads where i talked about it.

    The board told us point blank, there would be no closed door meetings. Every shred of business, other than executive sessions, would be done in front of the maddening crowd. I was skeptical, but if they were going to try and run the community like Sun City West does (under Title 33), who am i to be a doubter?

    Sadly it didn't take long to see they weren't being as transparent as they said they would. Board members would show up and start talking about an issue and only the biggest dolt would think there weren't private discussions about what was happening. This is how we ended up with two board meetings a month and three readings of motions, unless of course they wanted to jam something through, and that got reduced to fit their wants.

    Sorry for the long set up, but the real meat on the bone comes in my next post. The important thing to understand is over the years the move away from membership involvement has been a constant and steady evolution to the point we are at today.

    Stay tuned the next one is where we need be focused for Thursday's board meeting.
     
  2. FYI

    FYI Well-Known Member

    And is it coincidental that all the changes occurred when they hired a new GM?
     
  3. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    Nope.
     
  4. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    In the famous words of old what's-his-name; "here's the rest of the story." Along with those two board/member exchanges each month, we would have two closed-door work sessions following them (usually). While Carole and i were on the board, the golfers would go nuts because we would/could/did drag meetings out for hours. It used to piss them off because on those mornings they were tied up they would book pm tee times.

    If memory serves me, there was a time when those work sessions were open. Seems to me when the change occurred the reporter for the Independent was fairly upset because he was no longer allowed access. The argument went with non-board people in attendance the dynamic would change and nothing would ever get done. I always laughed at the notion because in Sun City West, every meeting is open as required under Title 33 (with the exception of executive sessions which are narrow in scope). Hmmmmmmmmmmm, why would it work there and not here? Odd.

    At the last candidate forum i suggested we hold simultaneous board/member exchanges with an open door workshop following it. No one objected (even a little) other than Stella who jokingly said she would have to be more careful about the names she used towards others at the table. She said it with a smile. Their responses were of no surprise, every candidate always talks about better transparency and better communication. It's once they are elected it all goes the crapper.

    Holding open work sessions would provide total transparency. Ir would also do several other things: there would be far more accountability for both the board and management, there would be a less toxic setting because any crazy behavior (yes, there has been some) and it would be a window into the problems facing the community. I don't know about you, but all of those appear to me to be an upside. And one more cherry on top would be all of us would be able to witness the behavior of those board members who they needed to fire. Kind of like a body camera for the police; proof one way or the other.

    In fact, the only people who would be opposed are those who think the community has no right to know what is going and why the board is making the decisions they are making. Being perfectly blunt, there are those who have been elected who 100% buy into that mindset. Sorry, i just don't get it. When you think of the community as "ours" not "theirs" you kind of scratch your head and go duh.

    Ultimately what we need to hear come Thursday is why open work session won't work?
     

Share This Page