Our Notes and Observations from the Long Range Planning Committee Meeting on 2-21-2022

A few of the members of the Advisory Panel attended the Long Range Planning meeting.  We are trying to attend all committee meetings and bring you the recaps of the meetings.

Meeting notes will be posted to the RCSC website at some point and can be found there when that happens. 

Here is our take on the meeting, a bit long-winded, but it's so interesting to understand the inner workings.  Please leave your comments below.

Long Range Planning Committee on 2-21-22

Chair – Allan Lenesky   Co-chair – Kat Fimmel

Committee Members – 10 and Guests - 9 

It was announced: Guests may no longer ask questions or offer comments. Except when invited by the committee to do so.) 

The structure of the meeting outside of the formalities: 

Not on the Agenda: Mountain View Clarifications – Guest, Dale Lehrer (former Committee Chair) 

Old  Business:

Accomplishments

New Business:

Sub-Committee Reports – Fitness, Priorities and Long Range Plan Update (with Guest, Bill Cook speaking to proposed Long Range Planning Scorecard) 

Discussion:

Role of the Long Range Planning Committee Article X Titled Committees

Mountain View Clarifications 

Dale Lehrer, as past Committee Chair shared 2 planning documents with the committee members only, complete with artist drawings of Mountain View plans for renovations.  The first document contained 66 items in order of importance that the committee recommended to the board for the future plans.  The second document was the same information as that shared at the Board Meeting presentation on 6/8/21, minus 6 items that were omitted (5 architect changes and 1 insurance issue).  She stated there were no other changes in the document language as it passed from the Long Range Planning Committee to the Board. 

Lehrer added that Mountain View planning documents and efforts should be shared with the IT Committee to coordinate efforts. Director Fimmel proposed that recommendation and will ensure it happens.

Discussion ensued led by Lehrer that there was CONFUSION in regard to the three phases proposed for MV. She was certain to go on record that it was Never the intent of the Board to eliminate pickleball, lawn bowling, mini-golf, they will have to wait for Phase 3 of the renovation because of competition of available for building activities and construction storage.

Other committee member comments:

All information should be public and online

Concerns reshared regarding harmful emission studies from asphalt and the amount of asphalt being added to the plans

Pickleball rebuilding is very down the line (10+ years?)

The architects recommended the phased approach to building

Bill Cook stated that Most of the architect changes were due to input on parking and access being too far from activities and safety and security issues, and that design of Pickleball will be based on utilization numbers even though a 2 story building design has been tossed about.

One member did a personal Pickleball utilization assessment and declared that a PB facility was not needed.

Another reminded everyone that when measuring utilization, it is important to consider seasonality and climate issues

 

Old Business – Accomplishments 

Chair, Allan Lenefsky wanted to celebrate the initial utilization plan, Mountain View plans to date, the safety initiative that uncovered the IT issues that will lead to a Tech budget and proposed scorecard for tracking projects and plans in place for the committee to consider future planning. 

New Business – Subcommittee reports 

Fitness – just as IT is 15 years behind, so are our Fitness centers. Much research has been done by a couple of committee members.  Their recommendation is to try a pilot program and invest some dollars and efforts at 1-2 centers and encourage greater usage, participation and benefits to members with the proper equipment and thereby increase utilization. A motion was made to forward the recommendation to the Board for consideration for a November implementation because equipment could be in place for next season’s snowbirds for a truer trial period.  Chair Lenefsky recommended that the recommendation proceed without a timeline. Bill Cook said it was not budgeted and would most likely be further in the future if approved. A Modern Fitness presentation is being considered for a future board meeting. 

Priorities – a subcommittee tasked with ranking the priorities that have been uncovered.  This subcommittee asked to be combined with long range planning as they need more information. This was approved and another member was added to subcommittee.

Long Range Planning Updates – a scorecard template was forwarded to management from last month’s meeting.  Bill Cook didn’t understand the need for the scorecard as information is available in Management Reports. Discussion continued and the example was given of the Mountain View project progress or lack thereof.  It is not clear what money has been spent, etc.  Many committee members felt that if they don’t know ‘where we are today’ it’s more difficult to plan for the future.  Information regarding changes or delays in the plans could be useful by the committee.

An online suggestion box and tracking system was recommended as was another plea for online information and transparency.  Communication requests were made for those unable to attend meetings because of work, health or competing activities. 

Discussion: Role of Long Range Planning Committee

Article X – Committees

The Board shall be empowered to create or eliminate committees as they may deem necessary to properly and effectively carry on the affairs of the Corporation.  Members may present specific concerns and issues to the appropriate committee for review and recommendations to the Board. Committees have no decision-making authority.  Committees are limited to presenting ideas and recommendations to the Board or Senior Management.  

Section 1 H: Long Range Planning Committee: The purpose of the Long Range Planning Committee is to provide the Board with reports, recommendations, and suggestions regarding the future needs of the Members and a suggested timeframe to implement future facilities and programs to meet those needs.

Discussion points:

Some committee members felt that true long range planning was being impeded by lack of board Vision and Strategy for the future of Sun City.

We are not a city of volunteers, we need new branding

Need renewable conversations and analysis of trends and next generation ideas, not just a cut and paste of the past

Committee should be tasked with researching other 55+ communities – online and in-person

 

Next Meeting: Monday, March 21st – 8:30 am – Executive Board Room at Lakeview Rec Center

 

Personal observations:

Kristi Svendsen, Advisory Panel, Sun City Advocate:

·      The state of our I.T. is "to blame" for the rumor mill that surrounds the MV project. I was too busy settling in; I failed to note just who said this.

·       NO MENTION of a survey similar to what SCW just performed. No mention of the 2021 Board dismissing the survey that was performed in 2019 or 2020 by who? The LRPC? I recall last spring there was quite a kerfuffle over that! 

·       Steve (LRPC member) brought up his opinion that our fitness equipment is 15 years out of date. There was discussion about getting some new cardiology equipment. Bill Cook SHOT DOWN the idea. Cmte. pushed back. It will go to the Board as a motion. Once chastised, Bill confirmed there would be exploratory work done, but cautioned it "will cost thousands of dollars."

·      There was discussion of Sun City being "under a dome" and we are not what we used to be. "We are dying on the vine." (quote from one cmte member) The elephant observation in the room is we are not keeping up with the times; we are growing "obsolete." This is an actual quote: WE ARE NO LONGER THE CITY OF VOLUNTEERS. (I wanted to scream NO SHIT, SHERLOCK!)  

Also, my impression was that there was a lot of shared noise about REBRANDING Sun City, since we are "dying on the vine" and "no longer the City of Volunteers."  

·      Discussion of a Vision Statement and WHERE should it come from? The Board? (I wanted to scream the same oath.) I am certain that our eyeballs were rolling in unison there.

·       This place appears to have casino-tight camera-fed security. Where is the terminus and why are they watching every move we make? Most (or least) importantly, are there cameras secreted in locker and rest rooms? Where are the monitors for all this activity? Who monitors the monitors? 

·       Lastly, I think Allan was masterful at facilitating this meeting. I would like to see them each "taking turns" at facilitation, but that's just my (socialist) opinion. I am of the opinion that Board members Not chair Any cmte. 

 

Cheri Marchio, Advisory Panel, Sun City Advocates:

·      The lack of vision and a strategic plan is reprehensible.  We are a multi-million-dollar corporation.

·      The language in the Articles of Incorporation on Committees and the Long Range Planning Committee is crystal clear and this Chair cannot follow the guidelines.  How are members supposed to offer specific input/concerns if they cannot speak at the meeting?  The Long Range Planning language specifies recommendations with timelines to the Board – he wanted the Fitness recommendation stripped of the timeline. 

·      Members imploring transparency and openness are ignored.

Lori Ellingson, Advisory Panel, Sun City Advocates:

• The only thing that was accomplished was they voted unanimously to ask the board to bring forth a motion to get some updated fitness equipment to put in one of the rec centers as a trial basis. Steve oaks put together an extremely thorough slideshow presentation during the January meeting. He went to three or four outside communities and fitness Centers and researched what types of equipment and fitness programs they offered to their members. He suggested that they move forward with updating the fitness equipment at that meeting one month ago. They, of course, Needed more time to analyze, research, and do a thesis study on everything before making any decisions.
• 
  
• They wanted to form subcommittees within the long range planning committee. One of those was on fitness, one was on the environment and going green, and the other one was what time of day was best for them to pick their nose (that last one isn’t true of course, I just wanted to see if you were still reading this.).
•  
• The board members that were there were Dale Lehrer, Darka Akins, Sue Wilson, and of course Allan as the chairman and Kat as cochair. Dale handed out list of what the ad hoc planning committee had presented to the board for the Mountain View remodel. She did not hand anything to the guests.