Fair Warning...Pay Attention Please...

Discussion in 'Sun City General Discussions' started by BPearson, Mar 15, 2021.

  1. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    No one from the RCSC or anywhere in AZ has asked me about forming or joining a union SW. I am far removed from that lifestyle and have no contacts in the state. Hell, the gm would get frustrated when i was on the board and employees would ask me questions about how they were being treated and what they could or should do.

    Hopefully later today i will get a chance to talk about the early days of Sun City and the question regarding guests/visitors.
     
  2. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    A quick aside; one of the things that need happen quickly is the board has to educate board members when the chair recognizes a board member to speak, the others shut up and listen. Doesn't matter if they love or hate what is being said, butting in when not recognized is beyond tacky and rude. If you have a rebuttal, wait your turn, get recognized by the chair and then state your case. During board member McAdam's speech, she had the floor and at least one board member kept trying to speak over her.

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with disagreements within the board and speaking out at meetings. In fact, several members (not card-holders) stepped to the mic and complimented the board for being willing to tackle tough issues with the members in the room. Hopefully they understand the value of dissent. I can tell you that has not always been the case.

    To my larger point, the past year has been ugly. The board took whatever actions based on managements best input. I suspect those in the room taking exception to how this has unfolded well understood both Sun City West and Sun City Grand had acted more quickly to open up. The head scratchier for me was how they clung to the governor's orders when it benefited them and then tried used the CDC guidelines to get out from under his (the gov's) opening. Having it both ways seems problematic.

    There is a bigger issue, and to amplify, let me direct you to one of the worlds first infomercial (i have no idea if that is true, but it sounds good). Many of you have seen the movie we show at the museum called "The Beginning." It was made in 1962 by the Webb Corporation and is simply brilliant. It's been seen by countless millions as it played across the USA through most of the 60's and 70's. I suspect it helped convince any number of seniors to pickup and move from wherever they called home and move to the valley of the sun. It was that darned good.

    I will put the link to both parts 1 and 2 at the bottom of this post and if you haven't seen it, it is well worth the 22 minutes of your life to watch it. In short it is about a guy who gets his 30 years in and retirees. He lives in Iowa and life is perfect as he settles in to doing odd jobs around the house and catching up on the life he missed while working. And then winter comes with a vengeance. He finds himself miserable and wondering if he "pulled the plug too soon."

    His wife convinces him to take a winter vacation (at 3:30 am no less). They visit the Neilands in Sun City Arizona and the first night there he asks about this "new active way of life" on the signs entering the community. The answer is simple, "let me show you, rather than telling you". For the next two weeks, they do and see everything they can. The ending is cute and the movie is a stitch. While clearly a sales tool, the story has been told and retold by virtually everyone of us living here.

    Sun City residents love their community. They love to show it off. They love when family and friends visit and they can take them around and tour the amenities (and use them). They know all too often visitors become neighbors. It was how and why Sun City was so successful. We took ownership and DEVCO called us his largest and best sales force. It worked back in the early days and it works yet today. Well at least up until we stopped letting visitors see the amenities and grounds. Which is exactly why, after watching the board meeting, i have no idea exactly what is open to visitors, what isn't or even when and if it will be open. It would be nice to get that clarified ASAP seeing as our closest competition is already letting visitors do it.

    BTW, here are the links: The Beginning Part 1. The Beginning Part 2.
     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2021
  3. Say What

    Say What Active Member

    Thanks Bill that's what Sun City is all about. We watched it twice. Love the cars and golf carts. I wish they still had croquet. Looks like lawn bowling was a major thing back then.
     
  4. Riggo

    Riggo Member

    Bill:

    Thank you for posting those videos. It was hard for me not to be philosophical about life, retirement, Sun City, and America. I must admit to strong feelings of nostalgia, melancholy, and even sadness...in a healthy reflective way. The videos certainly brought us back to a simpler time. A time where you worked 30 years with the same company and came out in your 50's with a pension that would last a lifetime. When one income was more than sufficient. When kids didn't come home from school to an empty house and the family ate meals together. When work appreciated your efforts and gave you a party on the way out. When life was a lot simpler and slower paced. When we weren't always in a hurry. When the highways weren't so crowded and going 50 mph was fine. When people had time for community and fellowship. When penicillin pretty much cured everything that we could catch from living out our life. Have we progressed as a society, as a country, as a Sun City? Do the hunter-gatherers have it right and us all wrong? Those require answers for another time.

    I can't thank you enough for your efforts to preserve and memorialize Sun City history. We have much to learn from it and what it meant to retire in the 60's and 70's. I feel your pain as Sun City continues to get further from its essential fabric and roots. As I read your writings, I am reminded of the central character of the movie "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington," who said:

    "I guess this is just another lost cause, Mr. Paine. All you people don't know about lost causes. Mr. Paine does. He said once they were the only causes worth fighting for, and he fought for them once, for the only reason any man ever fights for them: Because of one plain simple rule: Love thy neighbor. And in this world today, full of hatred, a man who knows that one rule has a great trust. You know that rule, Mr. Paine. And I loved you for it just as my father did, and you know that you fight for the lost causes harder than for any others."

    Keep up the history and keep up the fight, Bill, for even lost causes require a champion.
     
    BPearson and CMartinez like this.
  5. Enquirer

    Enquirer Member

    So, pray tell, what do we do now to save our community?

    How do we use the past to save the future?
     
  6. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    Thanks R, exceptional take on both past and present. As i sat last summer creating the Freeman room story, i found myself longing to return to those days when the word social wasn't connected to the term media. It involved neighbors and friends working towards a better tomorrow. Which is exactly the point to the question E was asking. I learned long ago you can't eat an apple other than by taking a bite at a time. Education isn't done with a wave of the wand, but by a continuing effort to increase and enhance one's knowledge base.

    If i have learned nothing over the past months the museum has given personalized tours, people are hungry to know more. They want to understand how we came to be and why it worked. When you tie it to the idea we now live in a community where members (yup, that is what we are called in the Articles of Incorporation) are looked at as cardholders. The light bulb suddenly comes on. Think not? If you watched the last board meeting you saw a good crowd looking for answers. The 3 board members who haven't become bobbing-head dogs you see in cars back windows caused a fair amount of a shitstorm as members rose in opposition to support them. Self-governance should be way more than a slogan and as we watch what happens in the coming year with a new GM, either they will work to grow community involvement or they will not.

    If we suddenly see massive amounts of money being drained into golf again and the rest of the community projects shuffled off to simply being placed on the long range plan, people should and will become angry and frustrated. That is exactly where the past intersects with the future.
     
    George F likes this.
  7. FYI

    FYI Well-Known Member

    The motion to Table was, as usual, incorrectly used. The proper motion is to Postpone to a Certain time or Indefinitely. The motion to Table is intended to be used when the business needs to be temporarily interrupted, for example, if a guest speaker shows up early and has to leave at a certain time, the current business would be Tabled until the speaker was finished and the business would then be Taken from the Table and business would resume as usual. The Tabled motion must be Taken from the Table, with a motion, before the end of the next meeting or session or else it dies. The Tabled motion in not required or typically posted in an Agenda where as a Postponed motion is required to be in the general orders of the day of next meeting where it can be Postponed further.
     
  8. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    Nicely stated FYI. Just curious: What grade would you give the RCSC following the last board meeting? It has been suggested to me that any number of the amendments were out of order in the way they were handled. What say ye?
     
  9. FYI

    FYI Well-Known Member

    I would give Chair Wilson a failing grade. As I assume you probably already know, Robert's Rules allows for only a limited number of amendments to a Main Motion to be active at one time. Once the Main Motion is made and the Chair states the question/motion it becomes the property of the assembly at which time any other member can make a Primary Amendment to amend the Main Motion and any other member can also make a Secondary Amendment which would amend the Primary Amendment. The Secondary Amendment needs to be voted on and disposed of before anybody can make another amendment to the motion or else it gets to confusing and hard to process all the alternatives which is exactly what happened at the board meeting!

    With that said; Director Lehrer made the Main Motion, Director McAdams made the Primary Amendment, then Director Collins made a Secondary Amendment. When Director Collins amended his amendment Chair Wilson should have called it "out of order" and called for an immediate vote on Director Collins Secondary Amendment.

    It seems that it ended well. Once the motion got back down to Director Lehrer's Main Motion, Director Hoffer made a Primary Amendment to amend the Main Motion which was to amend Director Lehrer's "no date" and replace it with a date of "April 5th" at which time I believe Director Lehrer, unceremoniously, made the request to withdraw her previous motion. The whole episode was very confusing and hard to follow! Once Director Hoffer's Primary Amendment passed, it then became the new wording for Director Lehrer's Main Motion, which typically would have been voted on again even though the wording of her now amended Main Motion would essentially be the same wording as Director Hoffer's Primary Amendment. (I hope that makes sense to you.)

    What bothered me was the constant interruptions I heard coming from Director Atkin's, especially when Director McAdams had the floor and was speaking. Somebody needs to reprimand Director Atkin's and explain that when another member has the floor she needs to keep her comments to herself. She has equal opportunity and time to voice here comments when the previous speaker is finished. Robert's Rules is about decorum so that everybody gets an equal opportunity to voice their concerns and opinions in a civil manner. Director Atkin's was just down-right rude!

    Robert's Rules does have a set of slightly different and more lenient set of rules for small boards (about a dozen members) which the RCSC board apparently isn't aware of and probably is a good thing. Not many board members seem to know anything about proper parliamentary procedure.

    As I read in one of your previous posts, you're right. The Board needs a Parliamentarian on the stage and not somebody who sits off to the side. The Parliamentarian should be seated slightly behind the Chair so that he/she can softly converse when the situation so warrants. A Parliamentarian can often see problems before they happen and can warn the Chair. But ultimately, the Parliamentarian can only explain or suggest the proper procedure and it's up to the Chair to make the final decision.
     
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2021
  10. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    Thanks FYI, that explanation is way above my pay grade. And lest anyone think we are picking on Sue in her capacity as president, Roberts Rules of Order is a beast unto itself. It is exactly why the RCSC had for years and years a parliamentarian on stage and helping the elected officials follow procedure. Some may see it as cumbersome but it is actually just the opposite. It allows the flow of the meeting to be procedural right and to keep board members on task and focused on the issue at hand.

    The meeting the other day was the classic example of why a parliamentarian is important. The meeting got out of control and motions, amendments to motions and subsequent votes left members in the audience and board members alike confused. Motions need be clearly stated and when there is a vote there should be clarity so those voting know exactly what they are voting for. I'm still not sure exactly what they passed last Thursday and i wonder if the board members do? Seems to me some things were voted through they had no intention of passing.

    The president does need to do a better job of giving one board member the floor and the others waiting their turn to speak to the motion. The wailing and gnashing of teeth in the background is simply out of line and out of place. I'm still confused FYI as to what happened to the motion regarding the by-law change that would have allowed them to return to "closed door work sessions." Was that the one they tabled incorrectly?
     
  11. FYI

    FYI Well-Known Member

    Actually, I need to make a correction. Because the Chair had already stated Director Lehrer's motion, the motion no longer belonged to Director Lehrer, it belonged to the entire assembly which means there needed to be a vote as to whether she could withdraw her motion.

    Actually, according to Robert's Rules, once Director Lehrer "withdrew" her motion, the whole motion disappeared as if it was never offered. Therefore, Director Hoffer's motion to change the date to April 5th never really happened. Someone needed to restate the motion using the Director Hoffer's amended motion. Once THAT was voted on, the RCSC was officially approved to set the new date at April 5th.

    As far as the Tabled motion goes, nobody made a motion to Take it from the Table within the proper time limits, which was before the end of the next meeting/session and because of that, the motion died.
     
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2021
  12. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    Again, FYI, thanks for the clarification. Hopefully the powers that be are reading this and are in the process of securing a parliamentarian for their next meeting and all that follow. Don't anyone hold their breath.

    Rumor has it, there was some fallout from the last board meeting. Not sure what will come of it and i suspect we will never hear about it. The funny thing is, members really did appreciate the back and forth give and take as there were clearly differing opinions. That of unto itself is reason not to fall into the trap of closed door work sessions. Way too easy to control the minority members on the board who have to keep eating the shit-sandwiches they are being served. Control freaks love the cover of being behind closed doors.

    We'll see what happens. Still three months before the break and what we know from past practice is, they love to shove things down our throats once members begin to leave for the summer.
     
  13. FYI

    FYI Well-Known Member

    It will be interesting to see what happens at the next meeting. Technically and officially it's my opinion that the motion that supposedly authorized the opening of some RCSC facilities on April 5th never happened and was not approved by the Board because the Chair allowed the motion to be withdrawn.

    One of things I don't understand is why did they even pick April 5th, the day after Easter? Wasn't that long dissertation by Director McAdams about opening up facilities to guests who would be visiting on Easter weekend so that the kids and grandkids could use them?

    It's my understanding that Robert's Rules was only made the parliamentary authority only a few years ago. Do you happen to know when it became part of the Bylaws?

    Personally, I would like to see at least some understanding of Robert's Rules a requirement to serve on the Board but of course that's asking way too much! But if they're not going to make it a requirement, or provide a Parliamentarian, then they should, at least, provide some sort training too at least teach the basics?!?!?! Don't just provide the new Board members with some sort of Robert's Rules Cheat Sheet and expect them to understand. Personally, I don't know what the new Board members are provided but judging the way the meetings are conducted I would assume not much.

    I enjoy the back-and-forth and I like Director McAdams because she looks at things from a different perspective and is not afraid to express an opposing position or opinion, unlike most of the Board who seems to go-along-to-get-along! Her comments generate the need for more open debate which is what I would encourage. Too many cardholder/members believe that most of the politicking and choosing sides goes on behind closed doors and outside the meeting format. Decisions are made and the conclusions are determined before the meetings even start, but of course that's just my opinion!
     
  14. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    I go back to the early 2000's FYI and they had a parliamentarian seated at the table to advise the board/president of actions that were out of line. Not sure how far back but some who were here earlier than me claimed they had them in the 90's as well. It just makes sense to do it right. As a friend i had lunch with today stated; "it keeps the meeting moving, on agenda and on task." What a novel idea.

    As far as Director McAdams, she is better versed in how boards should work than all of the others seated on the dais combined. If rumors are to be believed she has had her feet held to the fire on more than one occasion for her compulsion to speak out. If that is true, it is shameful.

    And so we are clear, there is no reference to "cardholders" in the Articles of Incorporation, we are called members. Further, having had my large ass seated in those closed door work sessions for three years, they work wonderfully if your goal is simply getting what you want done by the majority/general manager. Their minds were made up and they had the votes to go where they wanted, our comments were meaningless. The idea they have to air it in a public forum is uncomfortable and gives the minority board members a vehicle to challenge/question. The outcome from the other day was simply because they had a large crowd who were clearly vocal and in support of the minority position.

    I too found the May opening date first proposed preposterous. They moved to April 5 and once again insured Easter visitors would be shut out. Let me be blunt here: They had a freaking year to prepare for the reopening and now they need more time. Excuse me, but what the hell have you been doing with nearly everything shutdown? It is almost as if the folks running the show have become a little too comfortable with providing a fraction of the services they used to...except for getting our payments for lot assessments. We never missed a beat there did we?
     
  15. suncityjack

    suncityjack Active Member

    Amen. Would hope he'd start off with some town hallish mtgs. to hear opinions other than that of the board....
     
  16. FYI

    FYI Well-Known Member

    It's my understanding thru the rumor mill that since this is Rich Hoffer's last year on the Board he will be asked to serve as Parliamentarian.
     
  17. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    That's interesting. A parliamentarian need know Robert's Rules inside and out. Given what i have witnessed over the past couple of months, there's been no one on the stage with the ability to serve in that capacity Doesn't mean someone couldn't learn but it is arduous and exact a task.
     
  18. FYI

    FYI Well-Known Member

    He can perhaps do no worse than what's transpired in the past. The Board IMO does, however, get points for trying!
     
    BPearson likes this.
  19. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    If i am being honest FYI, i've never been a fan of the new format. It's cumbersome at best and confusing all too often to board and members alike. I never understood why they just didn't open up work sessions to the membership. From the outset it put the board members trying to run it in harms way. I try not to be personally critical, stepping up and running is thankless and not always fulfilling. That said, when i see decisions that i don't understand or agree with speaking out is important.

    Yup, kudos for trying but in fairness as you know, being a well versed as a parliamentarian isn't a job any Joe can do.
     
  20. FYI

    FYI Well-Known Member

    I don't know much about the work sessions so I can't really comment but I do agree with your assessment of the open board meetings. Seems to me that the board is fractured into little groups that conspire thru emails and phone calls so that each group knows how they're going to vote on an issue even before its presented at a meeting.

    I don't know about you but I would prefer to hear an open, aggressive debate DURING the board meetings to learn more about the opinions and /or pro's and con's of the issue. Right now most issues are simply rubber-stamped because the decisions were already made prior to the meeting!

    Based on some of the comments from the attending public, I think they too prefer to hear an open debate at the meetings.

    As a side opinion/observation. It seems to me that Karen McAdams and Steve Collins are viewed as the red-headed step child of the group. They seem to be the only ones who voice their opposing opinions in public while the rest of the board goes along to get along!

    As far as a parliamentarian goes; they don't make the call on any decision. Their job is strictly to inform the Chair of what Robert's Rules says and it's up to the Chair to make the call. If the assembly disagrees then they can always "appeal the decision of the Chair".
     
    IndependentCynic likes this.

Share This Page