Nov. 11 Special Session

I am not a lawn bowler, but am against what would be just another big building taking over our signature life enhancing beautiful location. I am being told that because of it's physical beauty is the main criteria for them putting it there. Of course it is, but by them chopping it up, we will FOREVER lose the wonderful original and unique charm and enjoyment for all of us who bought and live so we can have at least some nice park like setting for us to forever enjoy.
These guys can place it at another spot ( like the maintenance yard ), or south east end of Bell Rec parking lot.
I am against them taking away our pretty serene Lakeview. You will never convince me that a large building will enhance that location.
It only enhances the architects and maybe this smug GM. Sorry, but needs to be said.

 

I also stand with the lawn bowlers!

 

️ ❗️NEXT OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK❗️
Access Fee and PAC Lakeview recommended location motions

Thursday, November 21, 2024 9am, board meeting. 9am Sundial
️
Board votes second reading on two motions.
$12,000 Access Fee and PAC Lakeview recommended location after hearing member comments.
✍️ Signup to speak, 3 minute limit, before meeting begins.

 

I tend to think that it would make more sense to petition a referendum that simply states the PAC will be built at Lake View but not until Lake View comes up to be renovated with a full comprehensive plan for the entire location.

 

The comment was made today that Bell didn't fit the criteria/perimeters and why Tri-arc disqualified them. I just watched the video and heard no mention of Bell. Where can i find that information?

 

Access fee and PAC decisions
Special Session 11/11/2024 Video by Rusty Bradshaw, Sun City Resident

RCSC board passes access fee at $12,000 and PAC Lakeview center recommended location, both on first reads.
Second reads at next board meeting 9 a.m. Nov. 21 at Sundial center.

 

Planning Session Presentation
https://suncityaz.org/2024/11/01/performing-arts-center-concept-unveiled/

 

I've looked at both and i see nothing telling us why Bell wouldn't work. It is also clear the Lakes West site requirement was for it to have lake access/view rather than placing it back against 105 behind the bowling alley. So, is it safe to assume the RCSC criteria was for it to be on the water?

 

I am of the opinion that any member action is a very serious matter but is warranted where the board appears to represent their own special interests and not the interests of the entire recreational community. That may be the case here. Our sister community faced the same thing.

If members feel strongly enough about the matter, they should be careful to follow the rules as the hurdles are high and highly technical.

I list the some of the pertinent rules here:

Articles of Incorporation

B. The Members may remove any elected or appointed Director in the following manner, and any vacancy so created may be filled in the following manner:

1. A petition for a removal election of one or more Directors, specifying by name or names the occupants of the seats whose removal is desired, signed by not less than ten percent (10%) of the voting Members of the Corporation as of the preceding July 1st, may be filed with the Secretary of the Corporation not less than ten (10) days preceding a regularly scheduled meeting of the Board of Directors. At such meeting, the Board shall then schedule an election for the purpose of voting on the removal and replacement of any Directors whose removal is sought, said election to be held not later than forty-five (45) days and not less than thirty-five (35) days after such aforesaid meeting, and said election shall be conducted in accordance with the Bylaws of the Corporation regarding election of Directors. Appropriate announcement thereof shall be made by the Board of Directors on the bulletin boards of the Corporation.

Corporate Bylaws

ARTICLE IX – INITIATIVE, REFERENDUM AND RECALL PETITIONS
Per the Articles, any initiative, referendum, or recall petition must have a total number of signers not less than ten percent (10%) of the voting Members of the Corporation as of the preceding July 1. All signers must have signed in person, and they must provide their Property address, Member Card number and the expiration date thereof. The completed petition will be filed with the Secretary of the Corporation.

A recall petition will set forth the name of the Board of Director whose removal is desired and the reasons for the recall.

A referendum petition must set forth the existing policy or regulation that is being challenged in clear and precise language that will allow the challenge to be determined by a “YES” OR “NO” vote. Any proposition will be subject to the requirements and limitations of the Corporate Documents.

Before an initiative petition is filed, the party or parties intending to circulate and file such a petition will submit to the Board the proposal in the exact language that the initiative will contain. The Board will have sixty (60) days from the date of submission to accept or reject the proposal. If the proposal is accepted, the petition will be assigned a petition control number by the Secretary of the Corporation.

If issues can be resolved without the petition process, the Board and the Members will achieve savings in terms of cost and time while avoiding disharmony and divisiveness in Sun City, Arizona.

SECTION 1: STEPS TO TAKE BEFORE CIRCULATING A PETITION

1. Consider alternatives before beginning the petition process:
   1. Bring the issue to the attention of the Board at Board meetings or in other direct communication with the Board.
   2. The Board will consider the issue and provide in writing their consensus regarding such. If the Board approves, action will be taken accordingly. If the Board disapproves, proponents may initiate the petition process.
2. File request to circulate your petition with the Secretary of the Corporation.
3. Submit:
   1. The names, addresses, and telephone numbers of the petition organizers.
   2. The organization, if any, supporting the petition.
   3. The text of the proposed petition on the official petition form as required.
4. The Secretary of the Corporation shall provide:
5. Written notice of receipt of petition as submitted shall be within fifteen (15) business days.
6. Official petition with control number for use by all Circulators within fifteen (15) business days.
7. Petition regulations.
8. Petition start and completion dates.
9. Copy official, numbered petitions.
10. Copy as many copies of the official, numbered petition, as needed to circulate your petition. No other petition form is acceptable. Number each page. Each page should have:
    1. The exact wording of the petition as approved by the Board.
    2. The control number as assigned by the Corporation.
    3. The Certification on the back of each page.
11. Select and orient Circulators to the regulations and procedures to follow in circulating petitions.

SECTION 2: ACCEPTABLE PRACTICES DURING THE PETITION’S CIRCULATION

1. All Circulators:
2. Must be Members in good standing.
3. May not use intimidation, misleading statements or payments in securing signatures.
4. Obtain signatures of current Members only. Privilege Cardholders are not eligible to vote or sign a petition.
5. Must certify, as their legal obligation requires, that he/she witnessed the signatures of each individual signing.
6. Petitions regarding RCSC matters may be circulated within or at all RCSC facilities/properties while not disrupting or interfering with RCSC Member activities or blocking ingress or egress at any facility.
7. Signers of the petition, in addition to being current Members, must:
   1. Be the actual person, a wife may not sign for husband or vice versa.
   2. Legibly sign in ink. A printed “signature” is not acceptable, unless that is the usual way the person signs.
   3. Indicate date on which they signed; otherwise signature is voided.
   4. Write legibly their Property address, Member Card number and expiration date thereof.
   5. Legibly print their name below their signature.
8. Signers of the petition may withdraw their signatures at any time during the validation process.

SECTION 3: POST-PETITION CIRCULATION PROCEDURES
When petition circulation is complete:

1. File completed petitions with the Secretary of the Corporation in book form, including:
   1. A cover page specifying the quantity of individual official petition forms filed, the total number of signatures claimed, and the date submitted.
   2. Number each signed official petition submitted.
   3. A cover page to verify each group of petitions submitted and certified by each Circulator.
2. The Corporation will:
   1. Provide a dated receipt for submitted petitions.
   2. Initiate the petition verification process.
3. The petition verification process will include, but is not limited to, the following:
   1. Investigation of Circulators:
      1. Circulator must be a current Member in good standing.
      2. Circulator must witness every signature.
      3. Circulator must sign the affidavit of Circulator on the reverse side of the last official petition form submitted in a group.
      4. Irregularities, including false or misleading statements by the Circulator, in obtaining, verifying and certifying signatures will result in rejection of all petitions of the Circulator.
   2. Inspection of signatures for:
      1. Printing instead of signing.
      2. Absence of dated signature, Property address, and Member Card number.
      3. 1. Time required for petition verification:
      4. Once the completed petition is filed with the Corporation, the Corporation will have thirty (30) days from the filing to determine and announce whether or not the required number of signers has been obtained.
         1. Upon completion of the verification process:
      5. If the number of verified signers is insufficient, the petition is declared invalid.
      6. If the number of verified signers is sufficient, the Board will set the date to present the petition to the Members for their vote which will be conducted by the Election Committee within sixty (60) days of the validation announcement.

As it pertains to removal of directors, I am not sure the Bylaw requirements do not interfere with the intent of the Articles and could be deemed in whole or part invalid.

In any event, if I were undertaking this serious endeavor, I would file for an injunction to prevent the current board who allegedly is not truthfully representing the interests of the membership from taking any further actions on items for which the members filing the petition believe are not in the best interest of the membership. I would then time the filing of the petition after the swearing in of the new (old) directors so as to avoid confusion. Any such action will be costly, and it will be divisive. Sometimes when dealing with an unreasonable and uncompromising party this is inevitable. When possible, I always prefer dialogue.

Best regards and God Bless,

John

 

After today I kinda wonder who puts on a better performance, the Players or the Board?

Seems to me this was a performance by the Board to make us believe they really care what we think, but was in fact a performance with a predetermined outcome?

Why do I say that? Because I didn't hear one person who was in favor of placing the PAC at the location of the Lawn Bowling and Shuffleboard Courts.

There were other attempts to amend the motion but all failed miserably. Some motions didn't even receive a second!

Then the Board went into an executive session without making a motion to do so, only to come out and stick to the script and vote to approve the original motion!

What I don't understand is, how can so many Members be so opposed to ram-rodding the location, and the Board still overwhelmingly voted to approve it?

Why couldn't they at least agree to place the PAC at Lake View so that they could go ahead with the Mountain View project, and determine the exact location when the time comes to renovate Lake View?

So now, what's going to happen to the building at Mountain View? Do we really need to keep it anymore or should we just plow it under and build more pickleball courts! Maintaining that large building simply for a seasonal dog training facility certainly isn't worth keeping it for!

Big disappointment today! 5 hours of my life I can never get back!

And so the curtain drops. The next performance is scheduled for November 21st, but of course we already know how this movie ends!

 

I have been asking why SCW works for a long time. Why are they so far advanced in their technology than SC? Why are the residents so much more involved? I just get ignored, which is fine. Has anyone ever thought of contacting SCW and just talking to find out what they are doing better than us or is there some kind of rivalry I am not aware of. It's not a weakness to ask for advice/help. Tom or John would be perfect for that with their legal backgrounds.

 

Spot on! I have been saying a lot of the same for a long time...years albeit not as eloquently as you. But for some reason I get kicked out of chat rooms because I don't think Sun City is perfect, and I believe it is getting worse. Today appeared to be a perfect example of that.

 

My message to our BOD. You guys are wrong on this location, please tell Tri-Arc to keep looking. They can

Bill,
The southeast end of Bell Rec parking lot could work for PAC I feel. Parking lot could sustain cars. Better exits for getting cars out.
Or, put PAC behind bowling alley, put the maintenance yard near Sun City Posse property.
Architects will eviscerate the lake park.

 

Why do we need a giant PAC? SCW has two smaller ones in their rec centers used for movies and plays. They tore down the big PAC as it was not utilized. How many seats are being installed, I heard 300 or 600. Are they planning on similar draws as Vegas, or even the local casino's? Will our players club/actors/musicians fill the PAC? I am sure they are very talented, however with years of successful community theaters so close to SC what is the point. Update the current PAC.

 

For the love of God the #1 wanted item was a cyber cafe. Put one by the lake with wifi where folks could meet and enjoy a beautiful view with coffee or wine. God forbid we do what the residents want. I am realizing I made a mistake in 2010.

 

Spot on Eileen, this is beginning to sound like another grandiose plan for their own self-gratification. Wine bar and board walk indeed.

We heard today that Bell was disqualified but no reasons were given. I asked the GM following the meeting and he told me to watch the video and the Tri-Arc folks had explained it. I was curious and watched it only to find they showed the Bell location with 4 potential sites on the property but no reasoning given why it had been booted. Bell is easily the largest tract of land 27 acres and easily the most visible if placed on 99th and Hutton.. The ingress/egress is about 100% better but of course there is no view of the lake.

As i looked over the rest of the presentation it became obvious the criteria the board gave Tri-Arc for either of the Lakeview sites was it had to be on the lake. The reality is the furthest west location (abutting 105th) where the two old buildings are would work just fine...except we wouldn't have the magnificent views. The ingress/egress would be better with the stop light on 105th and Thunderbird.

What was really infuriating was the argument they had to get it done right now; the members at Mountain View have been waiting too long. The reality is what has been holding up the process has been the board. The fact is taking those two greens has been in place since the end of Oct and now they are trying to jam it through over a three week period.

Get Mountain View done and agree to create a master plan for the entirety of the Lakeview site.

 

OMG Bill!!! Are you saying I had a good suggestion or possibly have been right??? You see folks Bill is wonderful at research and repeating it. His SC Museum is awesome. His ability to understand the wants of the majority is sorely lacking. Our board is just inept. He admitted that in a previous post. One of the committee members thinks we are "obtuse". Enough.

 

It should be put out to vote (like the Sunbowl $2 fee) where people want this stand-alone theatre we don't need. Don't tell me that can't be done. I'm all for adding it to a multi-function facility on the lake without obstucting the view and only in an all-inclusive Lakeview design, but stand-alone 2-3 story theater . . . no.

But it clearly doesn't matter . . . when they asked who was in the audience after their "pow wow", and then commented where are the Players - that told me all I need to know. Apparently, because you're a shuffleboard or lawn bowling player, live on the lake, or just plain care about a longer-term plan (raised by many!) you don't get a voice.

And the ruin Lakeview project will likely go over $14M.

 

Well, Matthew likes to redirect a lot of questions . . . he could have politely told the lady that asked about the number of seats where it could be found and then provided her the answer 325-350. But his attitude towards home owners is NOT what we should expect in the least.

In your case Bill - he most likely knows that he directed the architect to focus on Lakeview and there was slim to no explanation on the Bell location. Again, go watch 1:46 into the Feb 29, 2024 video - it's clearly stated after the question of 'shouldn't we rely on the architect to tell us where to put the MV pool based on best use of space, cost and the design as whole while keeping our overall desire" . . . . Board member response - "we tell the architect what we want". Easily transferrable to this project.

 

Think about how a theater sits empty all day long, totally changing the lovely topography of our lake front. You will have evening events, but all day, everyday, we will have to look at a large structure just sitting there taking up all our beauty for residents to enjoy, and yes recreate, like talking a stroll, enjoying the lake, and yes playing lawn bowl or shuffleboard. The theater will offer nothing except taking over that entire section. I am appealing to residents to have a theater in a spot where people would simply go to see an event and leave. Even if they put a cafe or boardwalk there, that offers nothing for people wanting to come to Lakeview for daily recreation. You come to be outside not to order a drink and have a large empty building around you. Think about it, please, once gone, will will never have this open charming spot again. They can build elsewhere.