Taxation without Representation Sun City Style

Is this what we have come to? Members have the obligation to pay $5,000 to buy a house in Sun City and the obligation to pay $650 per year per household in Sun City and our government (the Board) says we will not let the members vote or make motions at the required Annual Members Meeting even though the corporate documents guarantee that right to the members if a quorum is present. Don’t Tread on Me!

And further, our government (the Board) states they will not allow the Long-Range Planning Committee to review the justification for spending $35,500,000 of the member’s money on projects the Board rushed to approve before the requirement to present a detailed business case analysis for PIF projects went into effect.

Then the members come to find out that committee volunteers on the Long-Range Planning committee found a $3M less expensive alternative for a golf course maintenance facility and our Director of Building projects objected to it? And yes, the less expensive option has air conditioning in the mechanics work area even though management has told the Vintage Vehicle Club they have budgeted to replace swamp coolers that don’t work with other swamp coolers that are even less effective but quieter. Club volunteers found highly qualified contractors that can put in air conditioning for significantly less money but it is doubtful they will be allowed to proceed.

And the icing on the cake is the Board used members’ money to get an opinion from a high-priced attorney that the Board could block the members from voting at their annual meeting.

I ask you simply, do you feel that you are being subjected to taxation without effective representation?

 

You have got to be kidding me. I'll just add this to my list of growing reasons why NOT to purchase in Sun City.

I have been thinking about this and it's just not sitting well with me. I think it's time to bring this information to the members. There are ways to get information, and I have the software tools necessary.

I don't care if I have to do this alone. All I know is I am so very tired of the crap on TOSC, tired of the crap the board has pulled, tired of no one being able to fix anything for 15 years, tired of my money being wasted, and the straw that broke the camel's back is that no one cares about the crime. I care that my neighbor 5 doors down got stabbed and was taken by ambulance and another neighbor was assaulted. It's time to talk about crime, not a 14 million dollar PAC.

 

And why is it that WE pay for the corporate attorney, (who's decisions always seem to go in the favor of the board) but we don't get any legal representation of our own?

 

Josie, the RCSC is not responsible for your safety complaints, the SCHOA and the county are. Have you talked to anybody at SCHOA or for fake friend Sgt. Schultz at the MC police and what are they going to do about it? My guess is no. You talk a lot but you don’t do shit as far can tell. You part of the solution or you are part of the landscape. Which side are you really.

 

Sure you do, go out and hire an attorney and start by asking them their hourly charges and for who, attorney, paralegal, clerical. Knock yourself out on this.

 

This is how the HOA helped me Dave. I can post the email chain for you.

As far as reporting violations I really don't give a rats ass what happens here. I reported a class 3 rapist (class 3 meaning he used date rape drugs first) contractor recommended by SCHOA who skipped out on his trial in CA, was wanted by CA FBI, ruined my roof, I still have the email chain with the admin, Rodney and Rick. I went through 10 months of pure hell with the company and the HOA folks all said "but people like them". I even sent the FBI wanted sheet along with all communication.

So Carole I guess I will be part of the problem. I will not report violations. After my welcome from Bill here and the lovely letter from you, and all the crap from Dave I am pretty much done with Sun City. All I can do from now on is tell people anywhere I happen to be if they are thinking of purchasing here don't. The nurse at my docs office just purchased in Youngtown. People I know who live there love it. I asked about crime and was told it a slice of peace sandwiched between El Mirage and Sun City. I still don't know if my neighbor who was stabbed died. I am assuming so as the house was closed up for a while.

Bottom line is at my age if I find another place to live wonderful, if not I will live out my life right here warning others.

Last edited: Thursday at 2:53 PM
Josie P, Thursday at 2:37 PM

 

There you go again, you miss the whole point.

The point is, we pay for the RCSC's corporate attorney but we have no access to law opinions of our own, and as you say, they are not cheap!

Granted, we can't use the same law firm due to a conflict of interest, but we have no representation and have to take the word of the board when they say, "the corporate attorney recommended this...."

Just seems as if the deck is stacked against us right from the start.

I think we both can agree on that.

 

Tom, The attorney that the Board hires is OUR attorney. He should be representing the best interests in RCSC which is us.

 

Janet,
As you recall from your bylaw committee days the board does not hire the attorney, the General Manager does. The Board has delegated the responsibility to engage the attorney to the General Manager and has approved a budget for him to do so with. The Board has NO authority to spend any moneys and is limited to approving budgets.

John

 

Janet - I'm sorry that you believe that because IMHO, that is so far from the truth! The attorney represents the BOD, not the Membership of RCSC. We pay for him with our Annual Assessment fees, but I have yet to see him declare anything in our favor.

 

Depends on what you know and how to use that knowledge. You seem to not like Democrats when if we want to be helpful. You should do a deep read on CM’s posts, you might learn something. That said, you posted that I don’t understand the MAGA mind. O.K, I am willing to listen to you explain it since you consider me an idiot.

 

Never said you were an idiot. I said you are a legend in your own mind, however, that mind suffers from TDS.

 

The attorney is hired by the BOD who represents the RCSC Members because we elect them. They may give the GM permission to contact the attorney about RCSC matters because much of that would be included in the day to day operations of the organizations. I don't know why this is so hard to understand. The Members elect the BOD, the BOD hires the GM and assign him/her to run the day to day operations which may include consulting the attorney. If the BOD wants legal opinion, they may ask the GM to contact the attorney about the issue. The BOD would expect the attorney to give them a legal opinion which may or may not be through the GM. Members do not have the right to contact the attorney themselves because there will be costs involved. Just like a Member can't tell any other employee or consultant what to do. RCSC Members, the BOD, and management all benefit from the advice of attorneys. We are really all the same!

Let me give you an example. When I was on the school board, I was elected by the citizens (ie taxpayers). I had no right to contact the school attorney on my own but the BOD, as a whole, did. Frequently the superintendent contacted the attorney in the day to day operations. Most of the time we were informed. The citizens/taxpayers had no right to contact the attorney, and incur costs for the school district. However they could request the BOD to get an attorney's opinion. The BOD would decide whether to do that or not. If a citizen/taxpayer or group of citizens want a legal opinion that is different than the one given by the school attorney, they would need to hire their own attorney at their own expense. Then they can decide whether to file a lawsuit or not but they would need to pay the expenses of their attorney. It happens now and then. That is the way nearly all organizations are run.

 

I disagree, the BOD does hire the attorney. However they may give the GM permission to seek legal advice in the day to day operations of the organization. No individual board member has the authority to spend money but collectively they can request legal counsel for matters where they want an opinion. I don't recall it being delineated any other way in the bylaws. Please correct me if I am wrong. Dave, perhaps you can shed additional light on this.

 

Tom, I am sure that you understand that the Members elect the BOD who hire the GM. Legal opinion can be sought by the Board or the GM if it is part of the day to day operations of the organization. So the legal counsel's opinion if for all of us - the Members, the BOD and the GM. No organization is going to allow, and pay for, legal fees for any individual Member or group of Members that demand it or disagree with the legal opinion. Anyone can retain a lawyer to represent their views, get clarity or a second opinion.

 

All I know is that BP-32, GENERAL MANAGER , Item O does say the following as one of the GM's responsibilities:

• O. Manage legal matters for the corporation.

But I also know that when I proposed questions regarding the bylaws to Director Rough, he would often come back with a reply from a corporate attorney. So I doubt that Director Rough would pass the question onto the GM so that the GM could consult the attorney, who in turn would respond to the GM who likewise would relay the answer back to Director Rough?

I know there was direct contact between Director Rough and an attorney, and that attorney was not from the law firm in Phoenix who is currently listed in our Articles of Incorporation. Was that attorney selected by the GM or Director Rough?

All I'm saying is, I have no idea how the system works or where the money comes from to hire an attorney, but I must also assume that Director Rough received permission from the board to have direct contact with an attorney.

As usual, lots of unanswered questions on how things are done with the RCSC!!!!

 

I do not know who the attorney was that Jim Rough consulted with on the bylaws. Sometimes lawyers specialize in certain areas. Like you, I assume Director Rough had permission from the Board to have contact with the attorney. I would never do that on my own.

 

James Hienton is the attorney that has worked for the RCSC for years. The way it used to work is the GM makes the contact with the attorney on behalf of the board. Board members were not allowed to speak directly with the attorney without the GM’s consent.
The time spent by the attorney on behalf of the RCSC is billed back to the corporation. It could be possible another law firm has been contacted and could be working on behalf of the RCSC. The GM has always been the primary contact for the attorney to represent the corporation.
The directors are not usually allowed to contact the attorney directly. The GM is the liaison.
Hope this answers some of the questions.

 

The attorney listed in the Articles is what’s know as a person responsible for receipt of service. That means that attorney is the official attorney to receive legal papers served on the RCSC, such as lawsuits, motions, etc. The service attorney must then immediately contact the GM of the receipt of the papers and request where to direct them. For years I was responsible for qualifying annually our outside Counsel as Service Attorneys.

Right John?

 

"Manage" and "hire" do not have different meanings. The GM does not have the authority to "hire" the corporate attorney. However, in handling the day to day operations, he/she may manage using the opinions from the attorney.