And Then There Was Eight. Actually, it's not 8, but 8 million dollars.
Towards the end of last year at one of the board's planning sessions, we heard and saw a proposal to include repairing the leak in Viewpoint Lake in the Preservation and Improvement Fund (PIF) budget. It was going to be done for 6 million dollars, which was shocking because 11 years earlier the bid was twice that. The RCSC had received a reprieve on the leaking lake, which was a blessing at the time. Following the 2021 presentation, I had an opportunity to chat with some in attendance who were far more knowledgeable than I am about stopping water loss into the aquifer.
Point blank, they told me that they were familiar with the company making the proposal, and there was no way that company could do it for the six million dollars. Their comments seemed reasonable. It came as no surprise to see their latest request for an additional 2 million dollars; inflation, supply chain issues, etc. For those not following, the plan is to drain the lake and reseal the bottom with a new lining. Every dock on the lake will be an issue. Draining the lake and transporting and storing the water to a golf course will be an issue. Moving owners’ boats and storing them will be an issue. The fish in the lake will be an issue. The issues will add up; the price tag will as well. We predict the cost to blow past 10 million dollars. We'll see.
Over the years, those of us attending board meetings have questioned the RCSC bid process. The answer is always the same: there is a bid commission (3 board members) who review every bid, and “no, you cannot see the bids.” While looking at a bid would be virtually meaningless to most, the real questions are more about who gets to bid and how or why they are accepted. Let's be clear, no one is suggesting that there is anything sinister about it; we just feel everything the RCSC does should be more transparent. After all, if there is nothing to hide, why hide anything?
An even bigger problem is how the process works. Rather than having a set budget, the RCSC will tell you (and they have in fact said this to me repeatedly) that the cost is whatever the contractor tells us it is. But wait, if you look at the numbers posted on their long-range PIF budget, they will explain unabashedly, those numbers are just "placeholders.” Said another way, they don't mean anything when it comes down to what they finally pay the contractor. I guess when you have excess millions, what's another million or two here or there?
If you think those of us who are members of the Sun City Advocates are just blowing smoke up your nose (being polite here), do us a favor and visit the RCSC website. We would ask you to scour high and low for numbers that will tell you/show you how much money any given project funded through the Preservation and Improvement fund (PIF) costs. There is one place where you will see somea heading rough numbers because I used them in one of the magazines that I wrote for the RCSC. That was years back, and when I got them, I knew just how badly they had been twisted. During the annual membership meetings where a quorum was never reached, they would show the accumulated money spent from the PIF but never list the projects they were spent on. I was familiar with the projects, and they mislabeled them on purpose.
Let us be even more specific. Go on the RCSC website and find out the total cost of the Grand Avenue Recreation Center project, starting with the purchase of the land and including through completion of the second building. Try and find out how much money they spent on the South golf course pro shop. See if you can find how much they spent on golf course renovations, new water irrigation systems, desert landscaping - the list is near endless. Then, if you really want to drive yourself to drink, try and identify whether it came from PIF or from yearly Capital Expenditures. Better yet, I can save you the trouble and just tell you to go pour a cold one.
It is simply time for the RCSC to embrace absolute transparency. It's time to quit hiding behind Article 10 of the AZ State Statutes and show the community how our money is being spent. It was a good start when President Lehrer stopped calling us "cardholders." Now it's time to start treating us like the owners of the organization.
The RCSC Bid Process? A hundred questions, virtually no answers.
Over the years, those of us attending board meetings have questioned the RCSC bid process. The answer is always the same: there is a bid commission (3 board members) who review every bid, and “no, you cannot see the bids.” While looking at a bid would be virtually meaningless to most, the real questions are more about who gets to bid and how or why they are accepted. Let's be clear, no one is suggesting that there is anything sinister about it; we just feel everything the RCSC does should be more transparent. After all, if there is nothing to hide, why hide anything?
An even bigger problem is how the process works. Rather than having a set budget, the RCSC will tell you (and they have in fact said this to me repeatedly) that the cost is whatever the contractor tells us it is. But wait, if you look at the numbers posted on their long-range PIF budget, they will explain unabashedly, those numbers are just "placeholders.” Said another way, they don't mean anything when it comes down to what they finally pay the contractor. I guess when you have excess millions, what's another million or two here or there?
The Biggest Sin of All. Here's an exercise in futility for you.
If you think those of us who are members of the Sun City Advocates are just blowing smoke up your nose (being polite here), do us a favor and visit the RCSC website. We would ask you to scour high and low for numbers that will tell you/show you how much money any given project funded through the Preservation and Improvement fund (PIF) costs. There is one place where you will see somea heading rough numbers because I used them in one of the magazines that I wrote for the RCSC. That was years back, and when I got them, I knew just how badly they had been twisted. During the annual membership meetings where a quorum was never reached, they would show the accumulated money spent from the PIF but never list the projects they were spent on. I was familiar with the projects, and they mislabeled them on purpose.
Let us be even more specific. Go on the RCSC website and find out the total cost of the Grand Avenue Recreation Center project, starting with the purchase of the land and including through completion of the second building. Try and find out how much money they spent on the South golf course pro shop. See if you can find how much they spent on golf course renovations, new water irrigation systems, desert landscaping - the list is near endless. Then, if you really want to drive yourself to drink, try and identify whether it came from PIF or from yearly Capital Expenditures. Better yet, I can save you the trouble and just tell you to go pour a cold one.
Here's The Bottom Line.
It is simply time for the RCSC to embrace absolute transparency. It's time to quit hiding behind Article 10 of the AZ State Statutes and show the community how our money is being spent. It was a good start when President Lehrer stopped calling us "cardholders." Now it's time to start treating us like the owners of the organization.
Bill Pearson, Advisory Panel, Sun City Advocates
TL;DR
Planning placeholders masquerading as budgets, transparency without proof, and communication minus information. We are not kidding, the RCSC as a corporation has some clean-up to do.
8 comments:
Well, and soberingly stated, Bill. Now, please bring me a full bottle of Yamhill County (Oregon) Pinot Noir and a straw.
Thanks unknown, i guess after 45 years of sobriety, i am fairly well versed in soberly stating. It is sad to see how fare we have fallen from our roots. The tenets that served us so well; a sense of community, responsibility, ownership and accountability have all been swept aside by rewriting by-laws and eliminating the membership. Tragic.
Which BOD member recall is the fastest path to change?
Sorry anonymous but my neighbor has now filed 4 separate recall petitions. The first one, three times for the former board president, the last one was for 3 of the board members. In each case (except for the one they "lost"), their attorney argued their wasn't sufficient reason for issuing a recall petition number. Let me be blunt, that is BS. Before 2006 there was language saying that in the board policies but the general manager took it out when she wrote the pile of crap that is in the by-laws now. Oops, the absence of once present language, hurts their argument. The truth is they figure they can just say and do what the want. Who cares what their documents say? We do, apparently they don't.
It is apparently necessary for the BOD to get a legal opinion for just about everything. Bill, in your opinion will it become necessary for the members to take legal action to overcome this bogus legal opinion obstacle? It is so out of hand that I believe many members would be willing to contribute a legal fund, including myself.
Also, do we have any legal professionals on the member side of this issue that we can recruit for assistance? Currently, the BOD has an unfair advantage and a conflict of interest.
Or, is it better to resolve the problem with patience through the election process?
To add to my comment, I believe there are grounds for violation of fiduciary duty by several BOD members. I am not a lawyer. When the BOD approves up to 40 millions dollars for a facility that does not even have a complete conceptual design plan, that is example of what I am talking about. I know the money isn't spent yet, but how much would you budget for a hat that you have no idea what size it is, what is material it made from and there is no clear design or logo on it? Personally, the would be zero dollars for me.
To answer your question Bob, i have always argued against legal actions where we are essentially suing ourselves. We watched one local activist group spend 20 years trying to sue the board into changes. It was costly and the end result was a hardening of the arteries where no one budged.
My preference is patience and changing it from within. One more election cycle could be the tipping point. Just to be clear, i think there are several options for legal actions, I think the abuses are that plentiful. The sad fact is it would rip the community apart and we are trying to restore Sun City to the tenets it was founded and built under.
Bill:
Well said. If we are already paying too much for the facilities, why would paying a bunch of lawyers make things better. Hopefully the big ticket items will not be final before we have the opportunity to replace the offensive board members with new ones at the ballot box and live happily ever after.
Post a Comment