The Long Range Planning Committee is hard at work. Check out a few excerpts from their last meeting summary. LRP Committee Meeting Summary June 4, 2024 • Develop 2 Member Surveys: The LRP Survey Sub Committee will start developing Member Surveys to get input on EV Charging Stations and utilization of space now occupied by the indoor spa at the Bell center. • Bell Spa Renovation – It has been decided not to renovate the indoor spa at Bell cost consideration and usage were determining factors. It was suggested by the LRP Committee to poll the membership as to what they would like to see in that space. The LRP Survey Sub Committee will develop a second survey to gather input from the members. • 5-Year Plan: Support/Finance Sr. Leader Kevin McCurdy reported that the 5-Year Plan was ready to be distributed to the 5-Year Plan Team. A meeting will be coordinated with the Team and General Manager Matthew D’Luzansky. • 2021 PIF vs 2024 PIF: It was brought up that the committee was looking at an outdated 2021 PIF schedule. Support/Finance Sr. Leader Kevin McCurdy commented that there really is not that much difference between the 2021 PIF and the current plan. • Purchase of Property at 111th and Thunderbird: The property value has been assessed and an estimate of what the renovation costs might be. A counteroffer bid is being considered. There is not enough parking available. Approximately 20% of the property would have to be allocated for parking spaces to bring it to code. A cost evaluation will be done to compare the cost of Corporate Office space renovation at the Lakeview Center vs cost of renovation at the 111th Avenue property. As well as determining what could be done with the space at Lakeview if the Corporate Offices were moved. The concern of “isolating” the Corporate Offices from the membership was discussed. The idea of putting a “Café” on the property with a social gathering atmosphere might invite members to visit the location more frequently. • Next Meeting: June 18, 2024 at 8:30am - Lakeview Board Room RCSC members are welcome to attend. More, read full summary: https://suncityaz.org/wp-content/up...ng-Range-Planning-Committee-Summary-final.pdf
My Spidey senses tell me the members will be informed of the decisions made (e.g., architect firm selected) as opposed to being involved in the decision-making process. It appears to me the five-year plan will reflect the estimated cost of the decisions made. In my opinion, the process is being manipulated by the board leadership to get a desired result. Kat and Karen each have a vision of what should be but do not want to explain their vision so it can't be critiqued by the membership in a timely manner. Clearly, Karen has her measuring tape and calculator hard at work formulating the rationale. Option 2 Deja vu. Jean Totten said it best: the Board is not being open and transparent and has taken actions that are contradictory to their statements. We should be used to this by now...
If Kat and Karen aren't running, then they may not be able to see their plans develop to fruition. A new Board could reverse course. I know Karen is passionate about pickle ball. What is Kat's vision? Facilities for the dog clubs or something else?
We definitely need EV charging stations in Sun City. Someone on the LRP Committee must own an EV. Never voted for Kat. Karen essentially is running the board. Kat is a mouth piece.
Janet, My understanding based on the very limited amount she says is Kat is one of two pushing for a 'beautiful lakefront theater' in a park like setting (In addition to the indoor dog space for the BFDC which her wife is past president of.) The problem is the data clearly does not support building a theater. I will never fault someone for having a vision but I definitely object to someone manipulating the process to keep that vision hidden from the members which is what I believe is happening. John
If we need EV charging stations we have an equal need for gas stations. Your EV can be charged at home but there is no gas supply between Bell and Grand.
I believe Steve Oaks owns one and, as a member of the LRPC, has taken on the task of doing some research. There's a meeting next week where we might learn something...if you attend!
FYI, good suggestion. Long Range June 4th summary listed Next Meeting: June 18, 2024 (Tues) at 8:30am - Lakeview Board Room
If we have excess electricity to sell due to our solar panels this may be a good way to capitalize upon it. I have never heard this as a rationale. Otherwise, I am concerned we are drifting away from our MVV statement and corporate purpose.
If RCSC plans to replace aged facility gas vehicles with electric, then EV chargers are needed. Residents should rely on home or commercial sources. There’s a Volta charging station at Safeway Bell & Del Webb. It’s a part of the growing Shell network.
PIF - If I understood EO correctly there is not that much difference between PIF schedule and 5-year plan. That would indicate 5-year plan is about as follows: 2025 - Mountainview replacement & ADWR Quail Run 2026 - Mountainview replacement & ADWR 2027 - ADWR 2028 - ADWR & North Maintenance facility 2029 - ADWR The yet to be seen are T Bird property and whether to construct a very expensive theater building.
Let's hope no one thinks we should spend $4M on another Maintenance facility again like at Lakes. A metal building would be just as serviceable. It can be dressed up 3 or 4 foot of brick wall around it.
Based on my reading of the new PIF process, the LRP will be more involved in project recommendations and will require all project requestors for documentation of the justification of the project. I hope this documentation is made public in a timely manner. The elephant in the room is whether nonmandatory projects which were put on the PIF before the new and improved process will be grandfathered out of the new process or will they too have to supply legitimate documentation of justification. My preference is all nonmandatory projects be subject to the new policy before they are funded.
Agree, John! We need to keep track of them and express our opinions on this forum and others if "pet projects" get special treatment.
I agree. As a member, I am of the opinion that we should express views, positive and negative, about the major decisions RCSC is proposing to make. Similarly, our elected "officials" (volunteer board) should feel free to do the same. This can be done productively and civilly on social media if we don't engage in personal attacks and treat others the way we would want to be treated.
