Integrity, Loyalty and what?

I read a lot and i truly enjoy story tellers, authors who can invoke emotion. I love when they use words with substance, impact and attachment. That often translates to the spoken word, when people can articulate their feelings in a way that i can get my head around and understand exactly what they are trying to say.

This past week has been both a high point and a low point for me. We forced the RCSC to hold an annual meeting they didn't want to have. People asked how? Simple, state law (Title 10) says they have to hold it. They made crap up about proxies (gold seals and all) and then backed off. They never expected us to get enough interest from members to sign proxies and members to attend to reach a quorum. We overcame every hurdle.

The meeting itself was nothing short of stunning. We submitted motions (they called them recommendations) timely and were read at the meeting. Those in attendance clamored for a vote, the board refused, even bringing in their attorney to tell us what we were reading in both the Articles of Incorporation and the By-Laws didn't mean what they say. It was laughable, but the power of the chair, even though it was OUR meeting, ruled we had no standing.

Speaker after speaker stepped to the mic and cajoled, spewed and in some cases ranted about the injustice of it all. The crowd was hungry for their opportunity to be heard. Those of us who helped build the turnout knew the footage from the video would be crushing to the RCSC and help grow the movement. That those watching it would see why we were doing what we were doing.

An incredible turnout and more importantly a marketing tool to help those living in Sun City understand why what we were doing mattered. And then it all came crashing down. As we sat patiently waiting for the video to be posted, two days in we got an email blast telling us the video card had been corrupted and there was nothing anywhere to be watched. Sorry.

At the board meeting three days later, Bill Cook started the meeting by explaining what happened and how bad they felt about it. Many in the crowd found it hard to comprehend. The most significant meeting in perhaps all of Sun City's history was lost forevermore. When a board member asked about recovery, Bill Cook shot back "are you questioning my integrity?"

I personally love the word integrity; it's one of those words with substance, meaning. It embodies a belief that whatever they are selling has to be true. Who am i to judge? I find it almost beyond comprehension this could happen. I absolutely believe the board had zero interest in letting the community see what happened. Especially when one of the board members stood during the meeting and called one of the members a liar. Don't tell me about the apology, it's like trying to put tooth paste back into the tube. Doesn't work.

I will tell you this: I have no reason to believe the 2021 board saw the error of their ways. I have every reason to believe they think we are wrong and they are right. That losing the video was just an unfortunate accident. That the shitstorm we witnessed most of the year was all our fault.

For now, let's focus on that integrity issue. Here's a test for the general manager and the 2021 board; Mike Wendell talked about the potential ability to recover corrupted SD cards. It would seem to me the right thing to do is turn to an outside company to try and recover what they say was lost. The longer we delay, the less likely we will be able to recover anything. Simply telling us it will never happen again is meaningless.

Words matter. Which is why i started this thread. Next up we will take a long hard look at "loyalty" and what that actually means compared to what they have been shoveling down new members throats for years.

 

And so does perception. Regardless of what the truth may be there are many who believe the whole incident was very convenient. No tears shed by the board, that's for sure!

That's for sure! Time to hold those new Board members feet to the fire. We will shortly see where there loyalties lie!

 

Words are the bedrock of communication amongst all who wish to share ideas and impart wisdom. To hear someone from the RCSC Management structure actually imply anyone should question their "integrity" is laughable.
What is integrity in personal ethics? Acting with integrity means understanding, accepting, and choosing to live in accordance with one's principles, which will include honesty, fairness, and decency. A person of integrity will consistently demonstrate good character by being free of corruption and hypocrisy. It is impossible to beleive nor trust the current RCSC management structure, as it is today, operates within an integrous or virtuous intent.

I am sorry to interject into the thread these opinions, but I also don't feel I am the only one who feels we, the members, have been scammed and shammed for so long, there is no trust or loyalty to the management team, the BOD and most certainly not the hand picked GM. Actions speak volumes to back up ones words, and up to this point, the words are hollow and have no value to the members who have been demoralized and dengerated for the last number of years.

I trust the new board members to be aware and cognizant of the members needs, and will address them with expediency and aplumb to assure items needing to be rewritten and undone will be done so in a careful yet meticullous manner. This is a huge turning point for the RCSC and its members, and I feel the board will take all of the needed cautions and actions to make amends for the former actions done to undermine member benefits.

Thank You BP for writing such an excellent article, very timely and needed.

 

Two good quotes although I'm not sure who originated them:

1. "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize." ....... Could that be the RCSC?

2. "Your reputation is who people think you are, your character is who you really are"....... The board's reputation has turned out to be their true character.

 

It's fairly easy to understand how we (the RCSC) got to where they are. Let's start with a basic assumption that when elected, you have what is known as fiduciary obligations. It's an interesting logic to sort through because we all know that a board member is elected by the members. Seems reasonable they should be there to serve in our best interests. Especially given that is what the Articles Of Incorporation say.

This past year, after the Karen McAdam firing. the term "conflict of interest" was thrown about. As more members questioned we saw one board member spout the By-Laws and they had no choice because at the heart of the matter was the fact board members serve to be "loyal" to the corporation. For most of us, loyalty is best recognized when talking about your vows of marriage.

This definition is closer to how i suspect most of us feel when we hear the term: the state or quality of being loyal; "faithfulness to commitments or obligations. faithful adherence to a sovereign, government, leader, cause, etc. an example or instance of faithfulness, adherence, or the like: a man with fierce loyalties." It's almost consuming by nature and leaves no doubt who they owe their purpose to.

To further enhance that position, during the past 15 years, the reference regarding loyalty to the corporation was moved from the Board Policies and placed in a prominent place in the By-Laws. It was also cited often for new board members to insure they would be good little board members. Yes there is an intended bit of snark involved in that comment. There was clearly overreach with its use as well as moving it to a more prominent position in our documents.

The reality is, with every election, board members are obligated to certain duties that come as a result of being a fiduciary for the organization. The RCSC would have been better served by simply showing newly elected board members what was included. For example, here is what one dictionary stated regarding "loyalty: "Duty of loyalty in corporation law to describe a fiduciary's "conflicts of interest and requires fiduciaries to put the corporation's interests ahead of their own."

Loyalty really was intended for board members to make decisions in the best interest of the corporation, not for personal gain. It should never have meant total fealty to the general manager. Sadly over the years, it became that sense of obligation to more than the corporation but also to those working for it. It transcended having the capacity of speaking out and questioning all decisions and left no room for questioning or disagreeing.

Think i am wrong; simply look to both Barbara Brehm and Karen McAdam. They both questioned and challenged the strict adherence to loyalty and their reward was to be fired. It's how and why we are where we are today. The organization became monolithic in structure where every choice was made by a select few and resulted in a community run without participation by the masses. It's why our history is so impressive, we were successful because the inclusive nature of our governance. Those running it were never afraid to ask what members thought was best.

I don't hide it; i ran a fairly good sized local union for a living. When i ran against the seated president and won, i thought i had to have every answer. It took me about 45 seconds to recognize that wasn't what members expected. I quickly came to understand my success was dependent on being willing and able to listen to them and then try and get done what they wanted. Life became much more manageable once i understood my role.

When we bought in Sun City in 1999, moved here permanently in 2003, that was how the community was run. As i became immersed in our history i came to appreciate how hard those who came before us had battled over building a community where the members mattered; where they wanted ownership and participation. It's exactly why for all these years i have watched in abject horror as it was intentionally dismantled and the power and control was put in the hands of a few.

I get avoiding "conflicts of interest." What i don't believe was ever intended is loyalty that borders on a mania where it/they can do no wrong.

 

This is what Robert's Rules says about "conflict of interest"

"No member should vote on a question in which he has a direct personal or pecuniary interest not common to other members of the organization...." (RONR 45:4)

Did you catch the part that said " not common to other members"?

Seems to me that EVERY board member has some sort of interest that relates back to the recreation center's facilities and the provisions they supply? Just so happens Karen was interested in Pickleball...a venue that would lose several courts for several years during the reconstruction of Mountain View! How many board members do you think would protest a closure of golf for several years?

 

Of course they do FYI, but the McAdam firing was never about that. She had the audacity to question the gm, to challenge board members and their willingness to blindly follow every choice she made. When you strip the community from the process you create a vacuum from within where there are no independent thinkers, no willingness to be anything other than a follower of the person you hired/trusted to make all of the decisions. From shortly after the first year, the dynamic changed. No one is right all the time and when the buffers and guard rails are gone, the primary focus is just doing things. The measuring stick always became, are we the cheapest?

Words do matter and the more we pushed people away, the more comfortable everyone became. Attendance at board meetings was laughable; and they loved it. The mantra was simple; "everyone must be happy." For the first time in our history we had an entertainment director who provided free or low cost entertainment and "card holders" loved it. The golfing community had the best deal in the country if they bought the full play golf pass, and they really, really loved it. The couples living in Sun City enjoyed the "least expensive dues with the most amenities," and they loved the bargain. The singles moving here not so much and when they showed up to complain, they were told "that's the way it is, without it we can't budget"

And every step along the way, we moved away from "a sense of community," and "a sense of ownership." To be clear, those are powerful words, words with meaning, with teeth. They are steeped in a rich, incredible history. I sat watching and understanding what was going on. Hell, i ran for the board and tried to stop it, make a difference. Clearly a fool's game on my part. I had expected my fellow board members to embrace the bigger picture, but alas, there was virtually no interest in any of that. We had hired a general manager and she had built a team who must know what they were doing.

But, did they? Now as we face massive challenges of water issues and golf rates that have quietly been supported well beyond anyone's knowledge, technology 20 years behind the times, a massively expensive Mountainview project and more unrest in the community than any time in our recent past...how well off are we? I know, the pat answer, i said it wrote it a thousand times: "The most amenities at the least cost?" It's a great soundbite, but at some point you have to peel back the skin of the onion and look closely at what is really in front of you.

Was losing that "sense of community and that sense of ownership a good thing or a bad thing? Really tough questions, especially when no one from management is willing to ask it.

 

“The singles moving here not so much and when they showed up to complain, they were told "that's the way it is, without it we can't budget" BP

How can anyone justify charging $496 RCSC Annual Assessment Fee without providing the EXACT same benefits to whomever pays it?
As a single owner, my annual payment allows me ONE RCSC membership card to access all the great RCSC activities and amenities provided in Sun City. I have no qualms with that.

If a Sun City property is occupied with a deed naming TWO owners, the Annual Assessment Fee is the same $496 with the benefit of TWO RCSC memberships! Two people have full access to ALL cardholder activities and amenities.

Basically $248 per person for what a single pays $496. Factor in the added unfunded expense of that additional person using the facilities…utilities, maintenance, staffing, etc. because that two owner property only paid ONE $496 Annual Assessment, the other membership access card was FREE!!!

EQUITABLE?? DISCRIMINATION?

 

I have been contacted by more than one member about this very same issue. I already started a Wish List for next year; perhaps we now need to start a "To-Do" list to see if we can't start making inroads on topics such as these. It doesn't cost a thing to try and get something changed; just because "it's always been this way" just won't cut it anymore!!

 

Just so we are clear odaat, it's not "always been this way." Single payment versus lot assessment has bounced back and forth several times. I tried to raise the topic as a board member and suggested we have a town hall meeting every six months to address these kinds of issues. The argument was "only angry people would show up." Which if you think about it; the obvious question is, "why are they angry?"

Sun City West used to have up (maybe it still is) their 5 year plan. In it they broke down data to be easily consumed. One of the most amazing stats was they still allowed single payment by single owners. When you looked further, you saw the information as to why; 40% of the home owners were singles. Most of us learned years ago, information is power. The watered down crap we get tells us nothing other than what they want us to know.

The new Gm, Bill Cook, is a numbers guy. If he truly wants to make a difference, start showing us the data that drives the decisions. That would be a marvelous and simple start to restoring trust.

 

If and until our technology is brought into the 21st century you will never see the real data.
Technology probably will not advance in Sun City as there is no reasonable budget for IT. Kat’s agenda is technology, but keep in mind that miss Dale has been on the LRPC technology band wagon for years and technology has stood still. As the new IT mentioned in his notes, the average SC home owner has more and better technology than the RCSC. Without a budget technology will languish and we will never get real data for anything.
Let’s see how far technology advances in the first year of a board with 4 new members and a new GM.

 

This isn't rocket science -- some of the IT things we desire were being done in commercial companies 40 years ago. Both Alexa and my car knows more about me than the RCSC and represent a higher degree of automation. Technology is a moving target -- it constantly evolves. There needs to be a plan, which is revised yearly, to accommodate that evolution, and we need to understand dependencies so the foundation infrastructure is ready when needed by future features and capabilities. Budget is a problem? So set priorities to attack the parts that provide data/capabilities we seek first!! We can't continue to pretend "it can't be done" or "it isn't needed", nor should we continue to allow those that want to consume a disproportionate share of the budget to continually push IT aside as lower priority. Golf will never open doors with a badge, count member visits, provide state of the art internet access, state of the are audio/visual equipment, etc., etc., ad nauseam.

 

Well said guys and as we move into 2022, we know the past 15 years the priority for Sun City was set by the general manager and a handful of board members. It's what happens when you strip the community of their voice and then decide committees are in the way of accomplishing what they thought mattered(rather than the community at large). I cannot begin to tell you how badly they gutted committees because their vision for Sun City was different.

One of these days i'll dig up the link to a treatise i wrote on flushing committees while serving on the board. I wrote it to and for the board as they were gutting them. My guess is no one from the board bothered to read except Carole. The point was simple; if you wanted to get rid of committees because they were cumbersome to work with, then before you do that, find an adequate and improved replacement for them. That was my segue into regular town hall meetings with substantive topics that would in fact grow the interest and the involvement from the membership.

To the board and general manager, it was ludicrous on its face. The last thing they wanted was members involved. They loved having 20 members at board meetings. The handful of folks complaining were quickly cast aside and their agenda passed with little squabble. The more members were ignored, the more they stayed away. No one will ever convince me it wasn't by design.

Going forward, committees need to become vital to our future. They need to include new voices and focused on real problems. Ultimately the board will make the final decisions but the recommendations they come up with have to be given a fair airing in front of the membership. We had gotten to a point if the gm didn't like it, it was dead on arrival. Those bad old days need be gone.

The bigger problem regarding technology is any budget allocations going forward are going to be bumping up against all of the other issues facing them. Seems to me some of the IT matters could be covered by PIF as long as they meet the 15 year criteria. In conjunction with that, they need to be prepared to spend a reasonable amount from the Capital expenditures to bring the rest along. And to be clear: they need to quit subsidizing cheap golf so it pays its own way. That alone will free up a million or two dollars a year.

 

I love all of the responses. It was the writing of BP which made me realize just how out of touch the Board and the GM were with the members and their needs and wishes. There were multiple attempts to try and arrange for more community involvement and open meetings which would have involved the members of the community to be able to openly share ideas and seek additional information. Any talk about having meetings with members was always nipped in the bud. If one asked what these folks were afraid of, it was always reduced to comments that eluded to the belief that everyone was so happy with the way things were, there was no need to force the directors to have a meeting which would not be attended. I often think back about the arrogance of these people and how the GM supported these comments as well as infused her opinion as to why member meetings were a waste of time.

The need for member involvement as well as board of directors interaction is, to me, the bedrock of the future of the RCSC. Committees do serve an integral part of connecting the board with the community but I also feel there is nothing that can replace real meetings with the members to keep ones eye on the pulse of the community.

True interactive communication between the management team and those who truly need to be heard is in dire need of an overhaul from where it is today. The management team feel they are answerable to no one beyond the GM. The RCSC used to offer bus tours and trips the members and their guests used to be able to sign up for and enjoy. Not anymore because the entertainment director doesn’t like having to arrange the travel and deal with the community. As I recall she found the process of organizing and arranging these tours as just to cumbersome and she felt her time could be spent on other items.

Did you folks know we used to have an entertainment committee that would occasionally preview acts and would help build what shows and groups would perform at the concerts? This commitee was dissolved by the entertainment manager because she didn’t care for having to deal with the input from the committee members or their ideas for entertainers the committee members suggested. The reality is the entertainment manager had a running deal with a promoter which is why there is repeated performers over these last few years.


To me, this is just one more example of the kind of power and control the various management employees lord over the needs and desires of this community.

I have no trust in the current management structure and those who occupy these positions. It has been so driven into these employees they are not answerable to anyone for anything. I also feel the new GM is nothing more than a place holder for the old school of thought to continue to be the dominant method of operating. I have very high hopes for this new board to take the reins of sell governance and steer this ship into new and uncharted waters for the future of the members.

I thank you all for your time and dedication to making Sun City the best of what is to come. It is exciting to ponder the new possibilities coming to our community with so many new ideas and choices to be made available for all of us.

 

This commitee was dissolved by the entertainment manager because she didn’t care for having to deal with the input from the committee members or their ideas for entertainers the committee members suggested. The reality is the entertainment manager had a running deal with a promoter which is why there is repeated performers over these last few years.


Carole, I wondered where the trips went and thanks for letting us know!!!

It's time for Ms to be terminated!!!!!!!!
Controlling our lives because she's lazy.

An example must be set immediately to show that MGMT answers to us not the other way around!!!

Walk her out the door along with the head of golf. There's no excuse for lazy!!!!

 

If I remember rightly, the GM hires his staff; he is supposed to answer to the Board. The Board is supposed to listen to us. Something is off here. Oh yea, it's the part about the Board listening to us. Hopefully, fingers crossed!!!, they will after January 1st. But, I still didn't think we could do anything about the GM's staff. Tell me if I'm wrong. Thanks!

 

The way the GM established the rules, all personnel were her direct property, answerable to no one but her. Caused a very tenuous relationship, as anytime anyone wanted or needed anything which would involve the Entertainment manager to do or perform any task requested by by a member, she would run off to the GM, spout of her reasoning as to why she didn't have to confrom to any requests and then be backed by the GM. This is also how the RV club lost their space at Sundial. The Entertainment manager felt she could only perform her tasks with a new office and location, and the RV club space was then allocated to her and the club was displaced to a much smaller venue. The new space was to allow for more online ticket purchases, as well as other media functions, which were not able to be be accomplished at her old space. How much more productive is the new operations at the new space? I have no personal idea, but I see little to no improvement over the way the members have been shorted on their available tours, trips being offered, improved concerts, or even more importantly, better security at the RCSC venues to assure all that are attending are truly members. What I feel was a power grab abetted by the GM, and a club paid the price for the greed by losing ground and space which had been theirs for over 30 years.

So, the answer to the question is no, there is no input as to the staff of the GM, how they behave, and how they answer and deal with member needs. Currently the GM has the ultimate say as to who and how things get done by management staff, who they report to, and the ability for these employees to run amok over members needs and wants. Just my opinion.

 

Let's slow the roll down just a bit here as we look to the future. From my perspective, over the past 15 years, nothing happened from department heads that wasn't sanctioned, blessed or directly ordered by the gm. They answered to her and loyalty was the first criteria in keeping one's job. If anyone was to blame, it was those of us who served on the board and didn't hold her in check, hold her accountable.

I've long argued the gm's job was to run the day to day operations of the organization. The board's job was to serve the community and set the course for the future. The breakdown came as we saw in the beginning of this thread when the whole "loyalty to the corporation" became a thing. And, it became a thing when the gm moved it from the board policies to the by-laws and when thy dumped the language they used to give to board members in their manuals on how to be a good board member. Which by the way, included the guide on "How To Serve The Membership."

It all fits together and while the history is interesting, we need be realistic. We got to where we are after 15 years of a steady drip of pushing the community away. We won't get back there over night. It too will be a process. The good news is we are growing the circle. Those paying attention and interested are ten-fold what they were. We've elected new board members who appear to get it. We've also got some stuck in the past who still believe everything they did was righteous. It will be a tug of war.

The biggest question mark is the new gm. He either buys into a different management style, or he doesn't. As i have said several times, he has hired what appears to be qualified people who are more than capable. As a footnote, the size of the management team is double what it was 15 years back. I don't know if that is good or bad. I have always used outcomes as the measuring stick. Sadly, too many board members only used yearly lot assessments (and keeping cheap golf) as the criteria for doing a good job. There's way more to it than that.

I know some of you want everything to magically be fixed. We've proposed changes to the by-laws that were steeped in common sense. They could easily change a couple of them, but i suspect what you will see is an effort to rewrite them in their entirety and delay it for months in hopes we all just get tired of it and go away. We shouldn't, we can't and we won't. The actions of the RCSC last year has changed the dynamic and now it's time for the RCSC to change how they function.

The first six months will be a test. Who the board elects as officers will be a test. Whether committees suddenly have a real voice will be a test. Will they suddenly become more transparent and show us the numbers that matter? With every test we will measure their actions. If their actions are positive, we can move forward, if not we look at alternatives. Recalls are an option, large vocal turnouts are an option, electing three more board members next year who are committed to returning to a sense of community would give us total control of the board. All are in our grasp. Patience is our friend and while time in Sun City is often our enemy, in this case it allows us to build for a better tomorrow.

We are on the right path and we won't quit. I've waited for this day for 15 years and we cannot squander it by wanting too much too soon. Nor can we sit meekly by and hope they do better. 2022 is a new beginning, new people on the board and boatload of us watching how they do.

 

Let's hope Mr. Cook is reading this site and is understanding what "we" are looking for in a GM. No more dictatorship. Committees brought back and listened to, golf held accountable. If not..... then the new BOD should start the interview process for a new GM.

 

Start that job description! I don’t recall anyone found one for the RCSC GM position. We need one to guide Mr. Cook…or his replacement search!

Example
General Manager
Confidential
October 23, 2018
Sun City West, Arizona
“…A new General Manager. Reporting to a nine-member elected Governing Board of Directors, the General Manager will oversee the organization’s ability to consistently deliver excellent customer service and responsiveness to support a progressive, engaged, and forward-thinking Board of Directors on addressing community issues.”

https://careers.cacm.org/job/general-manager-sun-city-west-arizona-19637