I'm not the smartest guy in the room and i freely admit it. With that caveat out of the way, let's talk about a comment that was made the other day to me by a guy i like and consider a friend. We were arguing about the fact we haven't had a membership meeting since the quorum was changed back in Sept of 2009. Back when it was 100, we at least occasionally got there (they were held quarterly back then). I've always said the difference with Sun City and virtually every other age restricted community is we are "self-governed." For most, that means little, for me, it was one of the reasons we moved here. I loved the idea as a community when we bought we became owners in the process of insuring our success. Historically, DEVCO and the pioneers that founded and shaped us, worked tirelessly to insure they get it right. They hammered out articles of incorporation and by-laws that were carefully crafted to insure our rights. They changed and evolved several times to create working documents that made us unique. It wasn't an accident, they were thoughtful and inclusive. They dragged owners in, they didn't push them away. They quickly came to understand the more buy-in from the community, the better the opportunity for success. It was an amazing process, and one as i read about it, am fascinated how well it worked. As usual, i've strayed from the topic at hand. The argument/discussion we had the other day suggested that when there was a quorum of 100, it became mob rule. Say what? Given our political climate, i guess i should expect nothing less. Seems when you have a president who says "he alone" is our salvation, we become zombie-like in our adoration. It doesn't matter about the scale. In the country, state, locally or simply at the community level, the more all of us take ownership, the more effective the outcome. I know, i'm way to simplistic for some, but i learned long ago, answers aren't limited to one right and one wrong. They cover the gamut of potential outcomes. The problem is when you reduce or limit them you immediately put yourself in a position of limiting the options of making better choices. Organizations by their very nature are slow moving. The documents that govern them matter. When you begin changing them, reshaping them to fit your needs rather than our needs, you change the dynamic. All of this is leading to a point, but for the time being, i'm heading out to the pool, soaking up some sunshine and jumping in the cool clear water.
There were a couple of things i suggested while serving on the board. The first was all potential candidates should have to read Jubilee; Sun City's 25th anniversary book. I know, it is a lot to ask that someone should have to read a book, but it's an easy read and gives the reader a feel for how and why we succeeded. If that was too much to ask, i suggested they at the very least Meeker's 30 page A Look Back. It was and still is the easiest way to grasp just how Sun City came to be. Both were met with little or no interest. The second pitch i made was while the board was looking at eliminating committee's. Somewhere on this site is the two or three page diatribe i wrote on the subject. I believe if we are open minded, we can argue either side of any issue. So when those on the board suggested committee's were outdated, i took to heart their concerns and proposed an alternative. It was simple; we should consider holding a couple of town hall type meetings per year where we solicited input from the community at large about relevant topics of interest. Eyes glazed over as my comments were relegated to the trash heap of dumb ideas. The idea that people living here take a more active role in the self-governance isn't something i created. I'm simply stealing it from the remarkable history of those who have come before us. And for all those years where thousands were involved, it was never considered "mob rule." It was the purest form of democracy available. It was what those living here believed in. Somehow we got away from it. We decided rule by the minority was far more beneficial than hearing multiple positions and arguments. I've said this before, i will say it again: If your position regarding any action is defensible, then you should be able to argue/state it and create buy-in from the assembled masses. If it's not, then you just do it because you can. We'll explore that theory after my workout at Bell.
It's an interesting theory these days when people get involved and their activism is seen as "mob rule." Throughout the 80's, it was impressive to see how involved people got in the running of the community. Begs the question; did they care more? Our move away from community involvement is troubling. Decisions are being made that affect us all for years to come. One would think the more input discussion there is, the better the chance for success I always revert back to the opportunity to consider buying the Lakes Club. We were told to keep it quiet. I often speculate had we had an open town hall meeting over it, would the outcome have been different? Years after, i now understand we were locked and loaded on all golf, all the time and there was never a chance to do anything different. It is the classic example of why those in control don't want to have open forum discussions. It gets in the way of their agenda. To be fair, the argument goes we needed to spend millions on golf to not have to fix the lake. There's some truth in that, but only some. In a public venue setting, those kinds of facts would have been aired and people could make their voices heard. Novel approach eh? Instead of potentially owning a 38,000 square foot building on the lake (with a theater), we have now pumped 40 million into golf (rounds are down by the way), we are looking at dumping 8 million (it will be way more when it is finally done) into the Grand Ave project and the Mountainview remodel has been put on the back burner till who knows when. There's so many issues with how all of this has been handled i could scream. The good news is, with my new found serenity, i'm not even remotely interested in doing that.
We were told to keep the Lakes Club quiet because the GM had the inside scoop to the "right" person on the Sun Health Board. Every time we would ask for an update at to how the contact was going with this individual, it was another story about not having the time, or he not being available, or just not able to get him on the phone. This went on for months. Until it was announced Grand Canyon had leased a large portion of the building for a nursing school. The reaction from the GM, a shoulder shrug and an "Oh well". She already knew she was going to disband the LRPC as she went through the motions of having surveys and questionnaires for us to fill out. Then it was majority rule, and the golfers had already discussed the all golf now plan, so the rest of us sat their with a stunned look on our faces as each puzzle piece she laid out fell into place. There wasn't even any discussion, just count the answers to the surveys. It breaks my heart to know I spent those years on the board, and couldn't be an effective advocate for the community. No community meetings, no second dog park, as it was Jan who didn't want it to happen. No advocacy for the members, as there were too many against open and fair meetings to get one pulled together. Lamenting over the past serves no one, but it does reflect the history of how we got to where we are today. So glad you have your serenity Bill, it can offer you solace and comfort in the maddening series of events which has come to undermine all that was good about self rule in Sun City. There is no democracy now, just autocracy by one person. And when she leaves she has named her her heir to the throne, so there is little chance of bringing change to the community. We need a strong board and we need one now! Not one that takes the pablum and agrees with everything mommy says.
It's too bad Carole, because in a real open governance setting, we would have held a town hall meeting and discussed the long range impact of the RCSC owning the Lakes Club. We could have analyzed the costs, considered the theater being located there and the potential of the RCSC offices having a single location for its operation. Then when they finally went to renovate Lakeview, there wouldn't a massive void for the clubs. Shortsighted, so very shortsighted. The good new is, we got the golf courses renovated. See, there is some positive eh?
Ah, yes, I am being so remiss. We spent $50M on a dying sport, which is trending downward in the whole of the country. Think of what half of that amount could have accomplished for the benefit of the entire community? And it was done because of a GM's decision to eliminate opportunities for open and fair discussion of the issues. Even now, the choreographed "open meetings" with the predictable outcomes, are just one more way it is demonstrated to those who attend, who is really ruling the roost. Yep, those golf courses, the solar savings (?), and the GAP, pay homage to one person. Perhaps it is time to look at renaming one or all of the rec centers to benchmark her rule in Sun City eh?
I was out of town but was one of the 200+ to watch the 6/10 RCSC "Workshop" Meeting online. When they say that there is time available to discuss the motions and items on the agenda, there seems to be a one way street of communication. I was very dismayed at the lack of an answer to the direct question asked by Bruce Alleman regarding who was being paid the service charge on the tickets. Why was there no Board Member asking this question or some discussion during that period before the vote? All of the BOD seem to have had discussions prior to the vote as there is no information exchanged between members or management except in very rare occasions. It wasn't until Bill asked at the end of the meeting that we got an answer. I still hold out hope that there will be more of an explanation of actions before voting, a more relaxed way of members asking questions without having to sign up for specific motions because information arises during the meeting which begs for more transparency and the Board Members re-start the reports from their liaison assignments so they are included in the YouTube videos.
Carole: I’m less caustic about Jan. She filled a leadership vacuum, not unusual for someone with her talents. I struggle to understand why boards would become so flaccid in assuming a leadership role. I’ve watched very talented individuals refuse to question or challenge her decisions or authority. It made no sense to me. Aggie. Clearly still a work in progress on the open meetings. I never understood the formality of the way they did it. Simply allowing people to sit in work sessions would have been an easier transition. Hopefully by years end they will have found a better rhythm to how it works. It is infinitely better than closed work sessions. That said, as i told them at the meeting, don’t assume people know what you are talking about. Simple explanations and clear and concise wording go a lon way. And, answering questions rather than ignoring them at least gives the impression they care what we are saying or asking.
Bill, you are so correct. Jan is the best at what she does, hands down. She is in a class by herself as far as her knowledge and capabilities. Her skills an abilities are head and shoulders above anyone else out there. Yet, she seems to have found a way to make herself the only player on the team. It still feels somewhat calculated, and the true fault lies with the boards for giving her such power. It feels to me as being manipulated into a specific line of thought, with the concurrence of some board members. When a member tries to break away with an individual thought, it is not met with warm regard. She is good at what she was hired to do, it just feels as if the boundaries have been blurred, in her favor.
Jan has 15+/- years of OJT on running the RCSC. During her tenure some things worked out well, some missed the mark and some got swept under the rug. By now one thing is sure -- she knows the routine cold. In contrast, the Directors are pretty much a group of ever changing faces. Granted, most come with good intentions, many have past leadership experience, and darn few know much about the detailed inner workings of the RCSC. Their election to the BOD starts a learning curve which matures about the time their term is over. Is there any doubt why our veteran GM drives the ever changing set of Directors? Is there any doubt why these directors are submissive to someone who has been circling the track for 15-years and seemingly knows all the answers? Now, I wasn't here pre-GM, but I suspect back then the community HAD to be involved because they (the members, ex-directors, RCSC employees, etc.) were a significant repository of knowledge of how/what things needed to be done. The directors probably benefited significantly from the now defunct member committees too, for the same reasons -- the members knew what and how. Community involvement made it all work, and the side benefit was it allowed the running of the RCSC to be more closely aligned with what members wanted, and the members more aligned with restrictions the RCSC operates under. To be sure, there were arguments and factions with differing ideas and priorities. Today, the GM seems to decree it all. There is one faction -- the GM. Sadly, during her tenure the RCSC as evolved from a member driven democracy to a full fledged autocracy, not so much because of Jan herself, but IMO because of her long tenure. Many corporations, the military, etc. know the downsides of long tenure in one assignment and have policies requiring periodic reassignment and term limits. Unfortunately those strategies aren't very applicable to the RCSC. So, it's up to the BOD to protect the RCSC from those that gain too much power and build empires, but the BOD apparently can't see the forest for the trees along these lines. Until they see the downside we're doomed to ride the merry-go-round forever.
Exceptional analysis IC. Tenure has a way of creating dynasty's and with it comes the ever growing sense of ownership. We see it in virtually everything around us. Politics, religion, work; as leaders become ingrained they look to preserve and enhance their own positions. It's seldom done for evil reasons, they just believe they have all the answers. Changing community documents cemented that control and eliminated any concerns for push back. We get lots of readers here who are simply looking for the right community for them. When they read these negative comments, it can be a bit of a turnoff. The funny thing is the vast majority living in Sun City love the community. They pay no attention to anything internal until their club room gets too small, the pool they use is down or their lot assessment (rec fees) goes up. Living the good life has very little to do with watching how Sun City is run. That might be the biggest thing that has changed in Sun City over the years. Back in the day, everyone paid attention. The GM had very little power; their job was to run the day to day operations. That was it. The board made every decision; independent of the GM. They passed on the history of the community and stayed involved. I remember a day years back (shortly after the new GM was hired) walking into the restaurant on Grand Ave in the Beal's shopping center where a dozen ex-board members were having their monthly meeting. I said hi and they quickly told me how disappointed they were because no one from the RCSC wanted their input. Hell, that was the point of committee's. They typically had long serving members who knew the history. That understood how we got to where we were. And, it was one of the reasons a couple of those committee's were disbanded. If you have to pay attention to the past, it may affect where you want to try and take people. Sadly, the art of listening is becoming more and more obsolete. It should be the tool used most often to drive the community's direction. Strong leadership think they have all the answers; effective leaders learn to listen. That is why the coming two elections to the board are so important. They will ultimately be the ones that hire the next GM. It should be interesting.
