Recently there was an article in the Arizona Republic where they were critical of Sun City's efforts to reduce water usage on our golf courses. When i read it, i scratched my head because clearly Sun City has taken steps to cut down on the water they are putting on golf courses. There was lots of data in the article and as always, percentages can be misleading. The Arizona Republic offered general manager Bill Cook an opportunity to respond. His analysis was loaded with more facts and figures that showed we have cut water utilization. In my opinion, this is one of those instances where both arguments are true. But, there's more to the discussion. First however is the GM's closing statement: "RCSC is doing its part to be a leader in water conservation to ensure the viability of the oldest active adult community and our great state, and to suggest otherwise, as in the recent Arizona Republic article, “Golf courses claim to conserve water. But they don’t,” is simply mistaken." You can read the whole piece here: My bigger problem is an argument that we often fail to grasp: Sun City is so much more than just the RCSC. I've written often, Sun City is a sum total of our parts. When outsiders say Sun City, they aren't talking about the RCSC, they are talking about the community as a whole. I know the RCSC likes to unbundle us and simply talk about the amenities they provide, sadly it doesn't work that way. Sun City is roughly 7 miles long and 3 miles wide. Within those 14.6 square miles are 11 golf courses, two man-made lakes and God-only-knows how many total ponds and streams acting as feeder systems for those golf courses. Before anyone gets sideways, i know 3 of the courses are private country clubs and aren't the RCSC's problem. They are however Sun City's problem and in the next 10 years, watch what happens with them. It's all just about scale. The article in the AZ Republic was pointing out how over-populated the community is with golf courses. It almost doesn't matter how much water the RCSC cuts back on. It doesn't matter because no matter what they do, the amount of water they need to feed the 11 golf courses, 2 man-made lakes and countless streams and ponds will be more than what outsiders would consider necessary. Perhaps more importantly, is what the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR) deems necessary. They will ultimately be the ones to determine how much water we get. It's pretty clear the general manager is convinced the community is willing to spend whatever it takes on turf reduction. We know they have slated 8 million dollars on the South course alone to convert to desert landscaping. If you read the article, you will see how he has easily stated we (the RCSC) will be spending enormous amounts of money to meet the mandated water reductions. So we are clear, i'm not arguing for or against 15 to 20 million dollars to get rid of watering roughs, if that's the price we have to pay, then perhaps it is just a throwaway. We also know from the article, they are working on different forms of turf, better water distribution systems and spending that 8 million dollars to reline Viewpoint lake. It's hard to argue we shouldn't be spending the money when golf is so important an amenity. All of which adds up to this point being made very, very clear: if the general manager and if the board of directors is asking us (the membership) to invest in these water conservation measures (another 25 million plus dollars from PIF) and if they are telling us we (the membership) need to keep subsidizing golf to the tune of a million or two million dollars per year from the annual budgets, then they better open their eyes and ears to what the membership is saying. They have been told loudly and clearly, outside full play non-residents passes are not acceptable. Giving away our amenities to people who have contributed nothing to pay for the infrastructure we have all paid for is illogical and nonsensical. Letting them play on our courses for less money than we are paying is foolishness. The next several years in Sun City will be challenging when it comes to golf. No one will feel it more than those Sun City residents who own homes on the 3 private country clubs. None of those country clubs have a pot of money to spend 3 or 4 million dollars on converting to desert landscaping. The RCSC made their plight even more difficult by taking their potential golfers and selling them half price golf deals (which is basically what those full play passes do). It's easy for the RCSC to justify that when they don't care about the impact on the Sun City golfing community nor the 800 plus home owners living on or around the 3 private country clubs. It's what happens when you look only within and not see Sun City and the community as a whole.
You're right Bill. Allowing outside play at a cost cheaper than that of residents is just the tip of the iceberg. There are many other situations that are all connected to golf. Just to name a few in no particular order are the following: We are already subsidizing golf at roughly 2 million a year. (Over 24 million over the last 12 years) We have the upcoming expense of converting the greenspace to desert landscaping on all 8 courses...because of the water situation. What happens if any of the privately owned courses decide to shut their doors...because of the water situation? What happens to the property values of the homes on those privately owned courses if they shut-down those private courses...because of the water situation? We are currently fixing the leaky lake at a budgeted amount of 8 million dollars because it was loosing twice its volume every year. Water used to irrigates those golf courses. We know that the price of water is only going to continue too increase for everybody... mostly living on fixed income. Seems to me there are some very definite and expensive situations on the horizon, with the potential of some being unexpected. And you know who's going to get stuck paying a lot of those bills? The good news may be that perhaps Jan Ek and Bill Cook will end-up looking like hero's for stockpiling all that cash over the last several years and the hit on the Member's pocketbooks might not be so bad? We can only hope, and only time will tell!
Good job connecting the dots Tom. Most folks don't understand the ramifications unless it is explained to them. This one is easy to see once you look a little closer at it. In the last year, there's been countless articles about Sun City losing their age restriction status because of a family letting a youngster move in and watch the grandmother. They applied for a waiver the county ultimately denied. Most folks have no idea what they were talking about, because the age overlay is just not that well understood. I would argue, there is a bigger concern for Sun City than that. Anyone who has traced our history knows in the early years there was an ugly battle with the IRS. They wanted to tax the community as if it was a private country club. The ruling jeopardized Sun City's growth as the higher tax rate on everything the company was building and giving back to us (the amenities) would have crippled home sales and drove pricing off the charts. The DEVCO attorneys were tireless in pursuing a wholly new tax structure. One of the ways they accomplished that was through the Articles of Incorporation. They wrote them explicitly to say the role of the RCSC was for the benefit of the membership. I've written this before and i suspect most readers don't pay much attention to it. Our unique tax status allows us to enjoy a way of life that would be far more expensive than if we were treated as a for profit corporation. The perfect examples are the private country club golf courses. The folks that bought them in the past 15 years, paid a fraction of what the cost would have been if it had just been raw land that could be developed. Golf courses enjoy a tax advantage on their property taxes, but the business (selling tee times) is taxed as a for-profit business. That's one of the reasons their cost for a round of golf is so much higher than what the RCSC sells a round for. That coupled with the subsidy we all pay to prop golf up, they (RCSC golf courses) have a built in advantage. Even when they sell the high season rate of $44 or $46, they are cheaper than the 3 private country clubs. Imagine what happens when the RCSC suddenly offers this pool of avid golfers a half price full play pass. Rumor has it, the latest influx of non-member full play passes came from outsiders who had been members of Union Hills Country Club. Why wouldn't hey leave, they could play 7 courses rather than 1 and at half the price they were paying. The 3 private country clubs simply can't compete with the RCSC. Our unique tax status, coupled with our massive subsidy pushes them (the country clubs) closer to extinction. Which ultimately (as you pointed out above) will result in the RCSC home owners on those three country clubs to face the realities of the courses ultimately being sold to land developers. They won't be buying them as golf courses, but to put up high end town houses and/or apartment buildings. A handful of you may remember when the general manager and the board issued an edict to the Bell metal shop and/or wood shops they weren't allowed to build/fix things as a commercial enterprise. The argument was two-fold; there was a liability question but there was also the concern, because of our tax status, would there be issues if we were under-cutting for profit companies? As long as what the clubs were doing was for the benefit of the membership it was okay. I've long maintained the private country clubs were going to be challenged to stay afloat anyway. Until the pandemic, golf's numbers have been trending down. When it was the only game in town, they enjoyed a rebirth. It was an opportunity for all courses to reap the benefit of more play. It was at that exact moment when the management team saw an opportunity to "cash-in" and sell off to non-members what all of the RCSC membership was and had been paying for for years. My position has always been when people have asked me about buying a home on a private country club in Sun City to be cautious. Some have listened, some not. It's pretty safe to assume RCSC courses are untouchable. Clearly not the 3 private clubs, simply because the land they sit on is worth 10 or 20 fold what the buyers paid for them. If i was a RCSC member and home owner living on one of those three private country clubs, i would be really angry the RCSC was selling those cheap passes and taking away the potential golfers from outside the community and pushing the courses they live on to be gone. More importantly, what are they doing to threaten our tax status by giving away golf to non-members is problematic on any number of levels.
Bill, you've hit on a major issue; the tax status. Pushing outside players raises the big red flag. Management better be getting some top notch advice from the best non profit tax accountants/attorneys that they can. There is a threshold, but pushing golf and bowling to outside play is walking a dangerous line IMO. It could have even more serious ramifications than the unfairness of the whole situation to SC residents/owners. We need assurance that the powers that be are paying attention.
Spot on Linda. This is one of the reasons knowing and understanding our community's history is so important. Sadly, over the years those who have been hired and or elected to run the RCSC have intentionally ignored how we got here and why we were so successful. On several occasions, a couple of us have offered to run sessions to help those living here understand the importance of our history and they (RCSC's leadership) wanted no part of it. One would think with the hatred and animosity so pervasive across our country, we would be lusting after a more calm and interactive relationship within the community. I was talking to a good friend yesterday and mentioned how DEVCO sold Sun City. It was on the basis of having a small town feel, even though it was just outside the Phoenix area. I told him i long for those days, when people could disagree and still find solutions and resolutions without the hatred and vitriol that comes along with everything we say and do. The decisions made regarding outsiders buying full play passes are wrong on so many levels. If you watch the video from the June board meeting, you will see board members worrying about all the wrong things; rather than doing the right thing. Every time i think about it, every time i write about it, i am stunned. Historically, this has never happened. One board member was concerned about the precedent regarding board members over-ruling the general manager. OMG; how about the freaking precedent of the board allowing the general manager giving away our amenities? BTW, board members routinely made those decisions; that is until the recently departed gm wanted to do it all. Go figure.
Just a thought...The job of the professional manager/management team, is to make sure RCSC stays within all the legal rules and regulations of the IRS, DOR, and every other entity that has a say in how the organization is governed. Major decisions can have disastrous consequences if people are not properly informed. Volunteer board members are often not experts in finance, tax laws, legal jargon, governance rules, etc. The GM needs to make sure that the Board AND staff all get appropriate training. I would venture to guess that most board members may not even know what's available to them. Do they even require annual Board planning/retreat style meetings with an outside professional board development specialist? Does the Board require the management team to have any type of annual professional development? Do the auditors meet annually with the Board to review the audit? Is there a public presentation? Just curious. Board members can't make good decisions if they don't have information. Information is power. If they are kept in the dark or are misinformed or misled, this often leads to disastrous outcomes. Just a bit more to think about.
Knowledge is power Linda, and what is so frustrating is how little interest those elected and those living in the community know. There is guidance from the feds relative to staying under a set percentage for outside sales. But let me be blunt, there's more to it than that. Satisfying the government is perhaps the least of the membership's concerns, unless of course we lose our tax status and then all hell should break loose. I/we should be more focused on whatever the management team is doing being a "benefit" to the membership. Selling cheap golf to non-members is so far removed from an arguable benefit, i'm not sure where they would even begin to justify it? In fact, i would love to see the statistics (data for Dale's sake) on just how many of those non-resident full play passes have joined small groups (30 or more) and pay the $2 or $3 charge to get their desired tee times and avoid the lottery the members have to use? I would love to see how many of those non golf car full play passes are just jumping in with golfers who are buying the full play pass with golf car included. All of that data is there; is anyone asking for it? Does anyone even care? I find having to even ask the questions, totally bizarre. These are OUR courses and the RCSC membership should have first access and tee times should never be sold cheaper than what members are asked to pay. NEVER. We know Sun City West sells a large amount of outside golf, but never at reduced rates and certainly not allowing those outsiders to take tee times ahead of members. They get to buy open tee times and they pay a higher rate than residents. Now that we know every member in Sun City is subsidizing golf, this lame argument we need the revenue is shameful. Obviously they haven't cared about golf being self-sustaining for the past 15 years, why now does the $250-$300 k coming in from outside full play passes even matter? There need be an immediate and comprehensive study on golf in Sun City. I am perfectly happy to see the board trust the golf advisory committee to get into the trenches and show them every speck of information the RCSC has. Let them decide what the right thing to do is. We already know, most of them are disgusted by the management and boards actions. We've listened to the board president tell us the importance of data over and over again. Let's actually start using that data to make Sun City all it should be.
That's interesting Linda; nada, nothing, zero from her. It's really curious because at the question and answer session earlier in the year for potential candidates for the board, we heard her tell us she was working an extraordinary number of hours each and every week. This question has been asked by potential candidates and i almost always smile at the answers. Most say, 10-20 hours a month (depending on committee assignments), while others tell us it's a full time job. Knowing the information you requested (utilization numbers), is already being shared with board members, it wasn't as if she had to do a bunch of work. It was simply a matter of forwarding said data to your email address. Last time i looked, that was a cut and paste that might take 30 seconds (if you are really freaking slow). That leads me to believe she just didn't feel you should have that information. In which case, she should have just told you so (or to bugger off). Accountability has always been one of the tenets of Sun City's success. It appears as if it's another that has been flushed down the toilet.
Funny isn't it...I could have even half respected a "bugger off," but being ignored doesn't set well with me.
