UPCOMING BOARD MEETING

I hope everyone realizes that the Board has adopted new practices which strongly favor transparency. How long it will last is anyone's guess. As I reviewed the board agenda there were questions I had about whether the budget is authorizing spending on PIF projects. Based on the town hall and several other board meetings I am legitimately confused but hopeful. I believe the Board has agreed to separate the badly needed Mountainview renovation from the contentious debate about whether to build a $14M theater and the $1.5M indoor pooch park. In my opinion, these two items should be the subject of analytical data based public debate. The town halls wisely presented the PIF as a forecast which cannot be voted upon. Again, I was a stern advocate for adopting new board practices despite stiff opposition and the sanctions that were levied upon me. I hope those things I sacrificed my time for take hold.

 

From RCSC Email Blast: A Planning Session will be held after the Board Meeting. Architects and Engineers firm TriArc will give a brief presentation with an overview of the Performing Arts Center (PAC) location selection process, followed by their final recommendation for the PAC, with supporting rationale.

I hope everyone saw that there is going to be a PLANNING SESSION after the Board meeting regarding the findings of the firm deciding the fate of the PAC. I sent an inquiry to RCSC to ask if the Planning Session was going to be taped; they answered YES.

It will be interesting to see if the Board agrees with the findings of the firm. From what I heard, there is going to be one deceased member kicking, screaming and saying some unkind things from her grave.
Jean Totten as One Day at a Time

 

It'll be more interesting to see what the Members think about the location choice!

 

Yes, where are they going to put this $14,000,000 white elephant?

 

My money thinks they will want to place it at Lake View by the lake? Location, location, location!

 

I agree Tom, Lakeview makes the most sense. I also believe whatever will be built there and whenever it finally gets built will not be viewed as just a theater for the players. That doesn't mean they won't use it. It means it will be multi-purpose and functional well beyond seeing three plays a year at.

The Sundial auditorium was the one flat space getting the largest utilization of all the other venues. It also was the one where events were often bumped as RCSC functions took priority over club events. I think the RCSC was on the right path as they looked at utilization across their centers; i don't think it went far enough. I was impressed when Sun City West created a utilization review committee years ago. We need follow suit and anything we build need fit with better using available space.

I suspect whatever is happening at Lakeview is 5 years down the road. Hopefully when they do get to it, they don't piecemeal it without the best conceptual design and layout available. There is some 17 acres of land, so the possibilities are almost endless. In the meantime they can renovate the Mountain Rec Center so that it finally is done for members to enjoy. The price tag should be easily manageable and given the PIF monies available it shouldn't be some crazy number that breaks the bank.

I guess we'll see this week eh?

 

I have already talked to several folks who like the renewed focus on transparency. On the PAC I think everyone knows my position; show me realistic projected member usage data for such a facility. Everything we engage in here in Sun City is a hobby. We are not professionals nor do we aspire to be (as far as I know). Some members perform, others compete and still others create. Hopefully, the vast majority of members and privilege card holder find fulfillment and joy in pursuing their hobby. Our community does not have unlimited resources and difficult choices on how to allocate those resources need to be made. As a member all I ask is that the board show me my choices and the data supporting the choice they recommend BASED ON THE DATA. Is that too much to ask?

 

Data should be the foundation of all decisions...............if their is reliable data. It will be interesting to see what the architects are recommending for a site for a PAC. I hope it will include some idea of cost before making any decisions to move forward. As I have said in the past, I think having a performing venue is essential to be a well rounded community. My dream of one would likely be cost prohibitive for RCSC. Compromise will be essential. Not having somewhere for performances where viewers are comfortable and performers have needed space would be a travesty in my opinion. FYI: I am not a member of any performing group or club, so this is not something I will not personally benefit from except as an occasional audience member.

 

Sorry folks we can data the crap out of things and still not know what to do. Be there, done that.

 

Data is a starting point, but it should not be the only consideration. Sorry, Dave, to ignore data would be foolish in my opinion.

 

Yes indeed. Cost vrs Income on one or two pages for at least 10 years. Let all members see how much money is actually needed. Still waiting for this data. And yes, I realize this would all be an estimate.

 

RCSC PROPOSED 2025 BUDGET
TOWN HALL PRESENTATION
Available on the RCSC website, Finance and Budget Information section.
There are 16 additional support slides not shown as a part of the presentation.
View entire deck here: https://suncityaz.org/wp-content/up...-RCSC-2025-Budget-Town-Halls-Presentation.pdf

 

Estimates are better than no data.

 

Not ignoring data, but one can be requesting data ad infinitum without ever making a decision. Been down this corporate overkill before running down the hallway scream8ng and ripping my hair out.

 

Well, obviously there are incompetent people who should never be in that position? Reading the comments from Janet and Linda, it makes me believe that the Sun City Foundation never really had the proper management?

It's kinda sad how all of the RCSC's sub-corporations and Standing Committees have rules that force Directors to serve in lead positions. I get it, it's their responsibility, however, as we have recently learned, there are much more competent Members out there, from within our community, and who have had entire careers in that field.

You have to question the decision as to why Janet and Linda were deemed unqualified to serve? And who made that decision? I say good riddens to those who resigned.

Just my opinion.

 

Most often the problem with non-profit organizational structure is the lack of any sense of dynamic change. They buy into doing the same old, same old. It's easier and quicker to just do what those who came before you did. That's all magnified as board's calcify and new ideas are viewed as extreme. Staying the course is always the easy way out; sadly not the right way when things are going in the wrong direction.

It is the exact reason things at the RCSC look so tumultuous. It isn't just that self-governance is hard, it's that change is even more difficult.

I keep reading things about my time on the board and my involvement over the years. Duh; it was and never will be about me. We know from our history, Sun City was built by those who showed up, spoke out and got involved. It was, has been and always should about the collective process of governance.

I can't give you a better example than when the Lakes Club came up for potential purchase in 2012. Carole Martinez and i were actively trying to convince the board and the general manager to let the membership have a voice, a say in it's purchase. That simple act would have changed this community in ways almost unimaginable. I have no idea if they would have been for or against it, in either case the message would have been clear; your opinion matters.

We know over countless numbers of years, the leadership trusted the membership to help make decisions critical to our future. When it came time to reach out and ask, we were told don't tell anyone about it, they might drive up the purchase price. The reality was the GM wanted no part of it. That should never have been her decision, my decision or even the boards...at least until we found how how the membership felt and what they wanted.

As John Fast pointed out, we are headed in the right direction. The question now is will we stay on track and on task?

 

If only member voices are heard and reasonably acted upon!

Does the decision by the Golf Advisory Committee not only to decline pursuing member top ASU Survey request for walking paths, but may now prohibit ANY non golf walking on the courses during non play hours? We’ve been allowed to do that ever since I moved here years ago.

Seems punitive for even asking!!

RECREATION CENTERS OF SUN CITY, INC. Golf Advisory Committee Summary
September 12, 2024 & September 19, 2024

New Business:
Closing courses for walkers.
Preston set this item up as an action area from the ASU survey last year.

Survey participants identified the need for additional green space areas to walk.

Based on potential liability and inability to control the access, time, and use, the consensus was to drop the idea from further action.”

All of which can be applied as a concern to existing approval for members to walk courses during non play hours, Will this no longer be allowed?

Summary link: Walkers https://suncityaz.org/wp-content/uploads/minutes-agendas-newsletters/Golf_2024-10-10.pdf

 

And everyone thought that was the right thing to do all those years. No one fought back, no one let the residents know what was happening. So they told you not to tell and you acquiesced.

 

Bill P I like the way you put this - change is difficult on many levels and those that advocate for change are often disregarded. My concern with the previous boards was that they had created an adversarial relationship with the members and a cozy relationship with management. I did not believe this was proper. Also, it appeared to me that the board and management lacked a strategic vision and guideposts to help stay the course. With the change at the top of the board I think there has been a great improvement in the adversarial aspect mentioned above. I am hopeful folks will realize that having a well thought out "data informed" strategy will make everyone's life a lot easier. As Bill so wisely pointed out making a lasting major change in self governance is a very difficult thing to accomplish.

 

Actually it was the result of MBA consultants suggestions after interviewing underwriters and still not understanding underwriting our particular lines of business.