Integrity, what does it mean and how does it apply to RCSC? The internet provides the following definition among others: The quality of being honest and having strong moral principles; moral uprightness. Is a fiduciary required to have “integrity”? Probably. I have heard many state that the RCSC Boards (not just this one) lack integrity. But what does that mean and how does that relate to Transparency? To me transparency (i.e. open and honest dealings) and integrity go hand in hand. A person of integrity has nothing to hide so they tell it like it is; good, bad or indifferent. This applies to almost everything RCSC handles with the exception of confidential matters such as HR, legal matters and certain contractual matters. Trust flows naturally to those with integrity. Politics is another matter. Colliers defines politics the noun as follows: Your politics are your beliefs about how a country (society) ought to be governed. Like it or not we all have beliefs about how RCSC should be governed. This includes Board Members. I will suggest that most politicians believe that power flows from popularity with the majority that is the most vocal or active. So why do many members feel boards lack integrity? IMHO this is a consequence of the Board trying to direct the membership into accepting the Board's political belief(s) as that of the majority with no real proof or data to support it. Moreover, members easily recognize that no real effort has been made to find out what the will of the majority is and that the board is being driven by individual board members agendas. So how can a board, any board, gain or maintain integrity with its constituents (members)? Make a real effort to understand the communities current and desired demographics. Develop relevant reliable data and distribute it widely. This includes condition, usage and trends for all current and prospective facilities and the amenities they provide. Hire an expert to analyze the data and form independent conclusions. Use logic and reason to make decisions and stand up to those that are asking for a disproportionate share of resources for their preferred amenities when the data does not support the request. This is not rocket science.
