The bastards did it!

Discussion in 'Sun City General Discussions' started by FYI, Jun 27, 2021.

  1. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    I know a lot about Sun City PI but you've got me on this one. Like FYI said, probably several answers, but the one true test is does she have a member card? Can't have a privilege card, heck, they can't even speak at a board meeting. Clearly they have to have a membership card and number and that would be all checked when a person runs for the board. Of course things change in a persons life so entirely possible someone moves like DG and then they would have to leave. I just don't see the board doing something as dumb as letting anyone run and serve if they are not a member.

    Then when i stop and think about it, i would have argued two months ago they weren't dumb enough to fire a board member just because she didn't agree with them. I have a friend following this from afar who pointed out in the past they have just steam-rolled others and they've never paid a price for it so why think this would be any different? And the answer is because this time you screwed with someone who knows the game far better than any of you. Plus, i suspect there's more than enough people in the community who will resent this abuse of power. Freaking dumb...she was simply one vote. DUMB!
     
  2. aggie

    aggie Well-Known Member

    Darla does hold title in a trust and that's why you can't simply search her name on the MC Assessors site. Vetting to be a BOD candidate would have verified this information.
     
  3. IndependentCynic

    IndependentCynic Active Member

    Since the RCSC is exempt from adherence to the open meeting laws of AZ we have no public evidence of the specifics of the incident(s) the Board believes gave them the right to dismiss her. So, while the outward appearance seems unfounded, we truly have little insight into whether there was something specifically said/done that "legally" gave the board the right to oust her. The AIs says: "... is unwilling or incapable of performing his or her share of the duties and responsibilities of a Director" -- it might not take much more than an "I won't do that" statement to be considered "unwilling" and become the victim of a vengeful board. The details will eventually leak over time, but the Board holds most of the cards here. Historically RCSC Boards (led/aided by the GM) are known to lie to the membership/public to garner the support of the lemmings who believe their every word. I expect the same this time in response to our criticism.
     
  4. FYI

    FYI Well-Known Member

    Maybe you're right? And maybe that's when somebody dropped the "F"-bomb? They told her to shut the "F"-up about Mountain View and pickleball and she said "no"!?!?!? So now she had to go! But I still believe she deserved her due process and had an opportunity to defend herself.
     
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2021
  5. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    Just for shits and giggles let's review the entire reason for the RCSC's existence from the Articles of Incorporation:
    Article III
    The general nature of the business in which the Corporation is engaged is as follows:


    To do anything and everything lawfully necessary in the interest of the Members of the Corporation, including, without limitation, the following:


    1. To establish and conduct a general social, cultural, recreational and amusement enterprise for the benefit of its Members and do anything lawfully necessary or convenient to accomplish such purpose, including, but not by way of limitation, to purchase, acquire, develop, sell, lease, own, operate, and manage theaters, playhouses, agricultural projects, riding stables and corrals, libraries, opera houses, golf courses, baseball and football games, tennis courts, dancing facilities, lawn bowling rinks, horseshoe pits, croquet courts, travel clubs, card games, shuffleboard, swimming pools, skating rinks, lecture and conference rooms, and facilities and equipment for such arts and crafts as ceramic work, sewing, woodworking, leathercraft, lapidary, photography, fine arts, jewelry, shellcraft, mosaics, etc., and any and all facilities necessary or incidental to accomplish the general purposes of the Corporation.

    Obviously there's way more to the Articles but this sums it up in a nutshell. I know along they way they created all this allegiance to the corporation crap but the corporation exists to serve us. End stop...to serve us. Karen standing up and speaking out for the importance of pickleball having a presence in Phase 1 is simply fulfilling her duties as a director. They can disagree, but her position is easily defended. If they are dumb enough to argue she is unwilling or incapable of doing her duties, then perhaps they should reread the Articles of Incorporation (and that's making the dangerous assumption they ever did read them).
     
  6. 3GenSCAZ

    3GenSCAZ Member

    I asked earlier if a board member has to own property in Sun City to be a member of the board. Well, when searching Maricopa Assessors Office website (https://www.mcassessor.maricopa.gov/) all members show up as a property owner except Akins. Interesting.... do we have an board member sitting on the board that is not a property owner?[/QUOTE]

    I think it's Director Age that may not live in SC. He is the third person on a deed with his parents in SC but over the years he sold his SC and SCW properties, possibly due to his financial difficulties.
     
  7. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    Let's try and put this to bed once and for all; here are the requirements from the By-laws:
    SECTION 4: CANDIDATE REQUIREMENTS
    An eligible candidate for election to the Board shall satisfy all the following requirements and a candidate for appointment to the Board shall satisfy all except Section G. below:

    1. Must be at least fifty-five (55) years of age;
    2. Must be Member in good standing;
    3. Must not reside with or be related by marriage or birth to any other Board of Director, Board candidate, or Senior Management;
    4. Must reside in Sun City, Arizona and be available at least ten (10) months of the year;
    5. Must meet the requirement to hold an Arizona liquor license;
    6. Must be eligible and available to serve a three (3) year term; and
    7. Must attend Board Candidate Orientation(s)
    As aggie noted above, all of these are closely vetted when an employee packet is submitted or perhaps even before it is given out. That said, it is possible for conditions to change on a board member at which point the RCSC has an obligation to act quickly rather than not. There's no upside to letting someone stay on who shouldn't be there. We know they just replace them with a retread rather than risking offering the position to a candidate who ran but didn't win. Virtually everything that has been done under the current gm has been about maintaining the majority position of board member who will simply support whatever she wants. It's always been about control.

    I just don't want to get sidetracked by minutia when there are real and serious issues of overreach by the current board and their actions against another board member because she didn't think they way they do. That's not how it is supposed to work.
     
  8. FYI

    FYI Well-Known Member

    I'd really like to call the attorney General's office, tell them what went on and find out whether or not the RCSC violated Title 10.

    Does anybody have any experience in doing that?

    Like I said, I have no doubt the board can remove another board member, I just don't believe they can do it without going thru a proper procedure to give the accused their due process.

    Can they really terminate you in absentia?
     
  9. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    There's an old adage here that i think fits: "don't get too far over the front of your ski's." I think it is appropriate and here is why; the RCSC showed a complete and utter lack of class by trying to hold this kangaroo court literally as Karen was heading off to a once in a lifetime vacation. I have heard any number of things, some from Karen, most not. My advice to her was simple, forget all of this and enjoy your vacation. It will all still be here when you get back."

    There is a terrific following of people who are incensed by what happened. Obviously the pickleball players are paying attention but i know others living in the community who have never touched a pickleball paddle are pissed. This just isn't how the RCSC is supposed to function. We elected Karen, they fired her. That is a straight-up pile of crap. I guess because they could flush Barbara without a stink last year, they felt empowered to just do as they please.

    With all of that out of the way, let's get back to the point. This is Karen's decision to make. Should she fight it? Should she sue? Should she just walk away? Should she just pick up a packet and run again? Would the board be stupid enough to try and pass a motion to try and prevent her from doing so? All good questions and all that are up to Karen; other than the board's dumbness. I know there are several of us who will do whatever we can to support whatever her decisions are...but it has to be hers. The one she is comfortable with. The one that makes the most sense to her.

    Yup, what the board did is an affront to the entire community, including those who are fighting for the theater at Mountainview. If you followed her comments at any of the meetings, she was never against a theater there, she wanted answers to the questions regarding the closing of the pickleball courts and for how long? Would they commit to finding another location in Phase 1? These were simple questions and there should have been a third reading in September at which time these question may have been answered. Instead they shoved it though after the second reading which was nothing more than an abuse of authority...but that now seems to be their newest strategy in building a sense of community.

    In the coming weeks and months we may ask for your help; until that time, continue to speak your mind about how foolish this was but ultimately it will be up to Karen to decide.

    PS. I do think letters to the editor at the Independent are helpful.
     
  10. FYI

    FYI Well-Known Member

    Oh, I 100% agree. I had no intentions of actually filing a complaint but was simply searching for some advise and opinion.

    My biggest hope is that she continues to aggressively push-back. If she simply let's this roll off her back and runs again for office in the Fall it will have no affect on the way the board currently runs things. The board needs to understand that they can't simply do what they want, when they want. There needs to be consequences, or else if Karen runs again and wins, you know they will continue to be gunning for her.

    If they continue to get away with removing a director and suffering no consequences, it will continue to happen again, and each time the excuse will be even more frivolous!

    You're also correct that perhaps the bylaws need to be amended so that when an opening exists, the next highest vote getter of the election gets the spot and not some rusty retread! I think that alone would discourage further removals because they wouldn't be able to select another ass-kisser. It's the old concept, "Better the devil that you know."
     
  11. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    I agree 100% FYI and that's why i hope those living in the community will support whatever her decision is. Just sent my letter off to Rusty and i must say even i was stunned by the historical comparison to earlier times. It's why i always say; history matters. In this case it will flat out floor you.
     
  12. FYI

    FYI Well-Known Member

    I was pleasantly surprised to see so many opinion pieces in the Independent and none supported her termination.
    My letter is also in the queue.
     
  13. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    Actually FYI there was a very short one supporting their decision because she was defending a sport she played. One can only guess but perhaps a Sun City Player who just wants the theater, everything else be damned. That's why i point out she has never opposed the theater, only the idea that pickleball south of Grand Ave could go away for 3, 4, 5 or more years.
     
  14. FYI

    FYI Well-Known Member

    Well, if you're referring to the article "Reason for removal not accurate", I don't necessarily agree with your assessment. The way I read that article was that the writer was simply disagreeing with how Rusty wrote the article and the reason he stated for her termination was not a conflict of interest but rather her advocacy for one sport. I didn't read it that he necessarily agreed with the decision to terminate, but I might be wrong!?!?!

    Besides, the fact is,... the reason for her termination was not due to a conflict of interest as everybody states or believes. Yes, it's true that that's what they accused her of at the Thursday meeting but there are no provisions within Article V, Section 2, Conflict of Interest that allows for termination as a remedy. The bylaw only requires that a potential conflict of interest must be reported. The board used the excuse that she was unwilling or incapable of performing her share of her duties and responsibilities as a director, which we all know is BS!
     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2021
  15. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    You may be right FYI. I was reacting more to the grumbling about the focus on the "one sport." That one sport is incredibly important to the future and the continued growth and success of Sun City.
     
  16. FYI

    FYI Well-Known Member

    Like I said, I was pleased to see so many articles in the Independent. I'm just speculating but perhaps there were so many submittals that the paper is trying to print as many as they can per issue?

    When I submitted my last article Rusty told me that they only allow one submittal a month per person. My article is apparently still waiting in the wings as is any you may have written.

    I hope the volume of articles continues for several weeks.
     
  17. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    Coming up on 3100 reads and i suspect the interest will continue to grow. The whole point of firing her as she was leaving was to give everything time to die down. It won't. In fact, come September it may well be worse. Those leaving for the summer will be trickling back, those who will be losing their venue at Mountainview will no doubt have heard about the game played as they cancelled the third reading so as to avoid those affected standing up in protest. Those who have paid little or no attention will become aware of the overreach by the board when they fired a person they elected...and for no reason other than they didn't like what she was saying. It truly is the perfect storm.

    The article i wrote for the Independent is from a historical perspective and covers a two year period (1980 and 1981) that is easily the most contentious time in the RCSC's history. Here are a couple of headlines from the newspapers of the day: IMG_0765.jpg
     
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2021
  18. FYI

    FYI Well-Known Member

    Seems like we're falling right back into that mentality! Nothing to see here folks, and shut-up!

    Meanwhile, not a word out of the Board regarding the termination of director McAdam. If it weren't for this blog and the articles published in the Independent by other members, nobody would know anything about this until the September meeting when there's suddenly another retread sitting in director McAdam's seat!

    And come September the cardholder's will once again be silenced by limiting the amount of time they can speak! It wouldn't surprise me if the board reduced the time limit to 2 minutes!! I'm sure that if the bylaws didn't specifically allow for member comments they would try to eliminate that portion of the meeting as well!

    When was it that the meetings were once again opened to the membership? How many years did they get away with it?
     
  19. Poison_Ivy

    Poison_Ivy Member

    Seems like 15 cardholders could get together have one long sheet of how the board abused their power, quote from AIs & bylaws, as well as other other comments. Those 15 people sign up to speak and continue reading from the same sheet when the speaker before him/her 3 minutes are up. That way the entire list of stuff gets read. LOL, they wouldn't know what hit them.
     
  20. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    Let me quickly respond to both points. The closed door meeting in 1981 to anyone who hadn't secured an invitation was quickly stopped. The warring factions were at each other's throats for the better part of 1980 and 1981. I detail in my Letter to the Editor some of the hostilities that included recall petitions for both the president and vice-president. The resentments were real, heated and steeped in venom. Of course that was back when you could gather petitions for recall on RCSC property and 100 members at the quarterly membership meeting could introduce motions from the floor with a majority of those present. Guess what? As ugly as this got, no one from either side got fired. NO ONE!

    Come September, that first meeting will be a wild affair. Just remember, even with the 3 minute rule the chair (president) has by document the authority to cut speakers off. There is no defined protocol so it becomes pretty much at her discretion. That said, there will be ample opportunity to voice concerns regarding the boards actions. There's too many contentious issues looming to ignore or shut down comments. No doubt the Theater people (Players Club) will be there in force trying to keep plan 2 moving forward. The lawn bowlers will be there as well as tennis players and pickleball players. It will be a shit show.

    I started fantasizing more about the candidate forums that will be coming. I can picture it now when the question will be asked: "would you have supported Karen's firing if you were on the board?" Hoffer (or whomever chairs the meeting) will quickly shut it off with the question being "out of order." Next question: "If you are elected to the board, would it be okay with you if your fellow board members throw you off because you aren't compliant enough?" At which point everything breaks down and the board does what? Shuts down the video taped meeting? Fires members for asking legitimate questions? My goodness, it could be the making of another shit show.

    I guess my point is simple, no matter how quiet it gets during the dog days of summer, this fall is going to become a...say it in unison...one big shit show.
     

Share This Page