VIDEO: RCSC Town Hall Meeting - Budget Presentation - PM Tuesday, October 14, 2025

Same presentations but some thought provoking comments by this small group of in-person viewers.

Link

 

You had asked about my thoughts regarding the budget meetings. I watched the presentation the first day in its entirety and the questions the second day. I have become pretty resolved to the fact we will spend about ten years playing catch up from the 2010-2021 financial debacle. I thought Linda and Kim did a great job and was a nice touch. Enhancing roles of members is always a good thing.

What struck me was how few members were in the room for either session. It begs the question; Have members just given up...or as the rationale from the leadership will go...everyone is just happy. Not my job to speculate and frankly, i am past the point of caring. Dave's remark's about those getting involved being clowns, hustlers and BS artists kind of says it all. And frankly, the new and improved bylaws appears to support that thinking process.

Two more thoughts. When the question was asked about golf i wish the board members could spell it out for golfers. We know they feel they are getting screwed because they have to pay and others (other than 10 pin bowling) don't. The board simply won't tell members (golfers and non) the golf courses are and will remain the single biggest challenge facing Sun City.

It's one thing to debate whether golf can cover the yearly costs through the fees they collect? For the most part, they don't but they try and be close to break even (rarely they are able to). As those costs continue to explode (and they will) you cannot meet those expenses by giving rounds away on the cheap. The golfer who spoke regarding the surcharge was fair, but the rest of the story was left unsaid.

Capital expenses from PIF and CIF for golf (2000-2032) are slated to be in 100 million dollar range. The revenue from home sales (PIF and CIF) on a proportionate basis would be around in the 40k range. Golf is and will be bleeding us, but in fairness, we own them and we must maintain them. What we can't do is pretend they are close to being breaking even (when factoring all of the various pots we collect and pay out of).

There will come a day when the leadership will have to get serious and open about the future of 8 golf courses in Sun City. It's not today, or even tomorrow; if for no other reason than the 10 year deed restriction aren't up for renewal until 2033/2034. At some point, depending on what happens with those costs, they will have to get real.

Finally, there was a massive increase in the transfer fee ($300-$500). I know the argument has been it's been $300 forever; the question is how much work is there when a home is purchased? Nope, don't care, other than it means the new buy-rate at point of purchase for a property is $6,680. Lot of money and as i have been saying for the past 15 years, those new buyers should be treated as gold. Bring them in and make them feel special. Help them understand the community they will be calling their home is unique and the best choice they ever made.

We know from our history, DEVCO did this because every new home sale was an open door for family, friends and relatives to visit and become the next new home buyer. Instead, we opted to push them away.

Again, i am well past my sell date. But you asked for my thoughts and there you are Jean.

 

Couldn't agree with you more on all points, Bill.

As a non-golfer and non-bowler, I don't experience those "what they term additional" fees first hand. However, because golf teeters constantly on not being sustainable, I know darn well that I'm paying for it out of my assessment.

I love the way that they "creatively" found another place to raise fees ie. the Transfer Fee. Most of us don't pay attention to that so it will slip right on by. The only folks it might impact are a few new owners-to-be. I wonder if we've extinguished all other sources of hidden revenue or if in the coming years, we will have to initiate another new "CIF" fee called "JB" fee (just because).

How did you feel about the fact that only is slated for IT after the last shameful performance of the introduction and failure of the new website? To explain: the only dollar figure that I found for IT was on page 17 under 2026 Budget – Capital Projects (Reserve Study), All Other (Equip, IT, Plumbing, Signage) 8 projects, a total of $280,000. After the recent introduction of a woefully under-prepared for web site, I personally would love to see us take every available dollar (perhaps forget about the re-do of an indoor spa at Bell) that is available and concentrate on getting the website to run correctly!!!!!!!!!!! If that means doing away with TEG, then do it! There must be software out there that is more compatible for us than what we have. It has been embarrassing to watch the results of the "new and improved" $300K website as it has unfolded.

 

Not being a tech guy, i am kind of stuck suffering the whims of whatever they've done regarding the website. Whenever i've been involved in projects like this (smaller scale for sure, but we've launched a number of sites over the years) we've focused on them being user friendly. Don't even get me started on TEG. Allowing a golf software program to be used in a patchwork manner as they tried to integrate it with the rest of the RCSC operating system was crazy. We made so many bad mistakes between 2010-2o21 it is almost unimaginable.

I also make no claim to being a numbers guy. I can muddle through but i don't enjoy rooting through budgets and the like. I do appreciate the fact they have made things easier to understand with the graphs and pie charts. On the other hand, they need to do a better job on the line item expenditures for those who want to do a deeper dive. Hopefully the upcoming sessions for those interested will be well attended by those who want to know more.

I am unabashedly a Kevin McCurdy fan. His efforts regarding transparency has been exceptional. I'm hopeful the new GM will bring her marketing expertise along with her and i like what i have seen from the new director of golf.

It's just so sad they treated the bylaws like throwaways. It was their chance to show/tell members they wanted them part of the process.

 

I wonder what the total amount of money in the 2026 budget is for golf? Would love to see that total.

 

I think the projected expenses from the budget for golf was going to be very close to the projected income in 2026. There are increases slated across the board and every time they have an increase, the number of rounds drops. The bigger the increase, the less rounds played. They did note in spite of the price hikes, they have increased revenue each year. The problem is costs keep spiraling up.

The other side of the ledger, capital (PIF and CIF) is seldom talked about. In fact, until a few years ago when Kevin McCurdy became the CFO (or whatever his title is), there was virtually no discussion about the capital investments. Golfers lived with the belief golfers were paying their own way. There was one year coming out of the pandemic where the rounds played hit 350,000 and the RCSC actually made a profit. The courses took a pounding and resulted in golfers angry at the playing conditions.

It's always going to be a balancing act and one day someone will have to get realistic about our long term future regarding golf. For now, bringing in Edie as the director of golf appears to be a really positive move. We had been trapped in that death spiral of really cheap golf for the full play pass buyers and small groups grabbing all the prime time tee times for too many years.

The surcharge folks pay an additional fee (reduced) every time they step on the golf course, so its not as big a problem as the full play pass. The other problem they need to get their head around is the 25% no shows. The system created a vacuum where 5-somes often times went off with only 3-4 players. It was a way to avoid having someone getting stuck with your group. It's long been an issue and one that is not easily solved in a senior community where folks get ill.

The challenges are plentiful and it appears the Golf Advisory Committee (GAC) is trying to address each of items in a logical manner. It all starts by understanding the financials, something that has been poorly explained for far too long.

 

Thanks much for the review Bill. Having watched the budget presentation, which I thought was well done, it just seems some golf expenses get hidden. Like equipment, seed, fertilizer, etc. I’m not saying these expenses are not in the report, but sometimes they seem to get lumped together with similar items. For this reason I would appreciate seeing a golf only expense category.

 

It's my understanding that buildings, Club Houses etc. at the various golf courses listed under Building and Infrastructure and the expenses of those buildings aren't charged against golf.

I'm sure Bill could verify if that's true or not. But if true, golf is losing more money than they are reporting?

 

Great example Tom. Thanks! A total for all things golf would be appreciated.

 

Back when i was more involved with the RCSC, the GM had included the capital improvements for golf course outbuildings under infrastructure, so on the non-golf side. I questioned that but was told it was an accounting procedure and that was the correct way to do it.

With that out of the way, i have followed those same capital expenditures (high ticket items mostly coming from PIF and now CIF) and when i write 100 million dollars between 2000-2032, that includes those golf outbuildings. I look at the concept from this perspective; because we took ownership of those 8 courses, how much money will we have invested in that ownership because of capital investments. We know a large chunk of that 100 million dollars will come over the next 7 years because of the state forcing us to cut water use via desert landscaping (there's been a fair amount done already).

Like i've said, we own them, we have to maintain them. I've been accused of hating golf and golfers, not even close to being true. The problem was we had a structure that buried the yearly costs and it was really difficult to see how much we were subsidizing it. That's why i applauded Kevin's efforts. He broke everything out in a way that is way easier to understand.

The argument was because they were capital investments, the organization depreciated their costs by spreading the impact over the allowable time period. I just scratched my head, because either way, we were spending a boatload of money. But to be clear, those costs are different than the the yearly costs to run the golf course; wages, water, seed, fertilizer, etc. Those yearly costs appear to be close to the revenue they take in.

Going forward, i feel good about what is happening in this respect: We've finally come to understand cheap golf for full play pass buyers isn't a strategy. We had a small proportion of the golfers in Sun City getting the best tee times for the least money. I finally got really outspoken a few years back when we decided cheap golf for non-residents was a good thing as well. We had non-residents taking resident tee times to the point where members were being bumped while non-residents joined small groups and enjoyed low rates and prime time tee times. The argument was they "were good people." Literally, that was what i was told.

I think Eddy will do a great job and he appears to be working good with GAC and the golfing community. His biggest problem will be if golf shrinks in popularity over the next ten years, will he be creative enough to keep tee times filled?

 

While only a handful actually attended the two Budget Town Halls, MANY more have seen it viewing online!

Monday 343
Tuesday 77
Total 420

Online viewing is far exceeding in house RCSC participation.

RCSC YouTube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCdLy0Uy9sKWCJNLz37tn5ug/videos

 

Considering there are over 30,000 members, 420 is a very small pittance.