Lawsuit Update - Urgent Appeal filed

If given the opportunity I may suggest accepting some friendly amendments to my motions but there has to be an unbreakable commitment to make the master planning process successful. This nonsense the board is giving the membership about we will definitely pursue serious long-term planning if funds (that the Board controls) are available. And BTW there are several other conditions the board attached that essentially makes the master plan process completely optional. Come on people! Wake up! I like Bill's example about 75% of the spending was committed to one activity when he was on the board. We are back to the good old days eh Bill! Same play different actors.

So, let me address the elephant in the room - should members have the inalienable right to vote on the big stuff? i.e., Which version of master plan to pursue. Yes, IMHO there needs to be master plan options, and each option needs to be supported by solid objective data that is shared in an understandable fashion with the members. If the master plan process is done correctly there is not an annual vote of the members unless the Board or management decides to go off the rails. The plan should be flexible enough to address some unforeseen contingencies that might impact timing but allow the members to vote if what is being proposed has material financial consequences to them.

The master plan process necessarily takes on the tough stuff in an objective fashion. For example, I seem to recall the very last page of the SCW plan dared to ask the question: Can we afford to have eight golf courses??? No comment from Bill required.

So, while many present this as a black and white issue I see shades of gray. I also hear folks casting a cloud of doubtfulness that our organization is not capable of accomplishing such things. On that vein I agree and would let the professionals handle it. IMHO - It is money well spent.

John

 

I agree. There are far to few Members who understand the in's and outs of the RCSC to allow them to make such important decisions. Heck, I still have people who ask me where certain rec centers are located!!#

 

I couldn’t agree more Bill. The first step to getting the community right is to return to the mentality that members matter. Until the RCSC holds the members as a valuable asset, there is going to be a great deal of uncertainty and animosity towards the board. Next, I feel a clear commitment to open and honest dialogue needs to happen between members of the board and the RCSC members. We need to have town hall meetings, open discussion, about how we can and should proceed. Remember the meetings held for the dog park? They invited open and honest discussion about the issues. The other board members, especially the president, were adamant against them, but we prevailed. It allowed everyone to explore the options and even created a new dog park club to help with the various activities and challenges. Those meetings were so valuable to the community and I appreciate all of those who came out. Those same types of meetings are needed for Sun City. No limits as to a time to speak, just stay on whatever topic of the day is. Those meetings help build a sense of community that we need to return to.
Next, we need to say what we truly mean, and back it up. This most recent turn of events with absolutely no commentary from the board is truly a disaster. If their intent is to alienate the members, they have succeeded. There has got to be a commitment made to the membership to be open and transparent, and really do it. Lip service isn’t going to work, the members expect honesty and integrity moving forward, not say one thing and then do another.
In order to attempt to recapture the spirit of the organization and move forward is going to take time. But if the board members make it a priority, it can happen.

 

John, is the suggested replacement verbiage written somewhere for viewing? I would love to be able to read what alternative was written and offered. It would also be helpful as we have, courtesy of your posts, what was written in the amendment, to have the suggested rewrite.
If not available, I understand.
Thank you John for your time and consideration during this time.

 

Carole, I am sorry but the suggestions were given to me by someone else that said they would make the friendly amendments. John

 

Thank you for the clarification John, much appreciated.