Kickoff event for RCSC 2022 Board of Elections

All candidates that attended either the 9 am or 1 pm session of the Candidate Informational Meeting on Monday, June 6th, were invited to contribute a few words to this blog.  In Alphabetical Order:

Darla Akin

John Fast

Nancy Greathouse

Cheri Marchio

Bill Pearson

Kristi Svendsen

Jean Totten

Mike Wendel

Not everyone contributed to the blog by "press time."  If we receive their comments at a later date, they will be published.

**********************************************

Cheri Marchio:

The idea of the information sessions is sound. Current and past Board Members have a wealth of knowledge to share. It quickly becomes complicated when information is more than 10 years old and processes and systems have changed.


I found some of the responses enlightening and at times surprising. I could begin to see where some of the miscommunication, misinformation, and RCSC/Board vs Members arguments begin. Some rules or procedures seem wishy-washy when the board needs them to be (10-month availability, liquor license requirement for officers only, voting by phone). Some comments didn't ring true ("members run the committees", "we represent everyone, not just certain clubs or interests", and "we try to spread around the committee assignments"). I was very surprised that candidates were encouraged to bring their own agenda to the Board. Hmm, I guess I am just a big believer in a Master Plan and Implementation Strategy.


And there were responses that referred to members' comments that 'beat a dead horse', that are misinformed, and that somehow full-time vs "winter-visitor" members should be treated differently.



While I remain decidedly undecided, the candidate information sessions didn't provide me with the reassurance of education and support necessary to do a great job out of the gate. I understand a learning curve, I understand the scope of applicable knowledge is immense, and I understand people are helpful but a 3-hour orientation, asking questions of Bill and Marcia, and just hanging in there during your first year of service doesn't seem like enough proper preparation.


I would like to see another opportunity similar to this that could be run by the 'rookies on the Board' -- there may have been slightly different responses.

***********************************************

John Fast

As you know I flew in from Denver for the sole purpose of attending the mandatory meeting. Thanks for lending me your pen during the meeting! I thought the meetings were helpful in understanding what the current board members do and how much time they spend on their duties. The for profit fully compensated boards I am most familiar with spend a lot less time on their duties than our RCSC volunteer board does so I am wondering if we may have erred on the side of micro management. In fairness, each person is different in how comfortable they feel with delegating duties to our paid management. Some times, in my view, there can be too many "Cook"s in the kitchen. (pun intended) Don S. made a good comment in as much as he said when he was president he had to take on the role of GM and the hours he spent doing that were incredible. Thank you Don! I got the impression that we (RCSC board) was struggling with the remote work concept that became so prevalent during COVID. My staff and bosses allowed me to work remotely most of my later career so I am comfortable with it but I can completely understand that this is an experiential thing and our age group is several technological generations behind the rest of the world. I thought Dale did a good job of fielding questions but I think we are and she is struggling to reconcile the past with the answers provided. Fielding questions is also difficult because of what is going on in the background with rewriting the Bylaws again. No one is quite certain what the new bylaws will contain but many have expressed the suspicion that there will be little to no opportunity for member comment before the majority of the board passes them.


With respect to my personal situation the board is in the process of getting an opinion from their counsel regarding whether a snowbird (non-Arizona resident whose late fall, winter and early spring abode is in Sun City) can be a candidate for the board. The issue really boils down to what the RCSC Articles mean when they state " all Members shall have equal rights and privileges, and be subject to equal responsibilities." If the ability to be elected to the board is a Member right, then I would think snowbirds should be eligible and the Bylaws can't take away that right from a member based on where their principal residence is. Understandably, this is a technical question that neither I nor the Board has the expertise to issue a definitive ruling on. I think the board is doing the right thing and applaud it for getting advice from an expert who is qualified to rule on the question. As a practical matter, I would like to see Snowbirds have the opportunity to be candidates because it would expand the pool of people available to serve and I strongly believe they have the same recreational interests as full time residents.


On the question of the use of electronic communications to attend meetings I found some quotes on the internet that Arizona law allows this type of communication so long as the bylaws don't prohibit it. Based on my limited research on Roberts Rules of Order I think I agree with Dale's comment at the morning meeting that Roberts Rules of Order would require specific rules for allowing electronic participation in meetings. I was a bit surprised by Darla's opinion that electronic communications are not reliable enough to be used for RCSC business because I have participated in so many meetings this way without any reliability problems. Again, I think this is just a matter of getting comfortable with modern technology. I found Dale's answer to this same question in the afternoon session to be a bit more non-specific.


So, having spent $500 and 40+ hours on this part of the board candidate process, I think there are improvement opportunities that can be made in our recruitment of volunteers for the RCSC Board. Nothing is perfect and we will always be a work in progress. I would encourage all candidates and board members, to really study the RCSC Articles of Incorporation, The RCSC Bylaws, The RCSC Board Policies, the Arizona Law on Nonprofits, the Arizona liquor laws, the tax laws governing 501(c)(4) entities and to speak with as many members, including board members, as possible so they can make informed decisions. I would also encourage all candidates and board members to take a walk about through all of our facilities to get a real feel for the challenges we face as an organization. While you are walking about say hello to employees and members and ask them how they feel about the RCSC. I have done this and found it to be truly enriching and enlightening.

*************************************************

Bill Pearson

((Bill wrote a piece in TOSC after the meeting on Monday.  I will insert a few snippets of that conversation here, but since he hasn't finished his thoughts on that thread, I won't include the whole thing.))

Yesterday, I attended the first candidate informational meeting. As usual, of late, i left dumb founded. Having served on the RCSC board for three years (2012-2014), having run a non-profit organization and having been on Sun City boards for the past 20 years, i didn't expect to learn much. Sadly, i did.


The one item that triggered my sadness/frustration was a response i got from the current board president. We had an interesting exchange, but at one point i asked Dale if she thought our history was important. She said no, she was more focused on looking forward.


It has been the short-sighted view by so many of the board for so many years. In many cases, they appeared to be running from the history, rather than learning from it. Based on Dale's answer, i have a better understanding why they feel that way. History apparently is just tiring old crap. That was then, this is now.

........"The first community of its kind; the first lawn bowling green in Arizona; three golf courses and three recreation centers in the first eight years; an astounding accumulation of housing options; a state of the art hospital within the walls; the fourth rec center was considered beyond compare, a round resort style setting; the largest Sun Dial in the country; the largest indoor pool in the USA; seven more golf courses and four more rec centers built in a ten year period; and let's not forget the venue that amazed everyone, the Sun Bowl. I could go on for hours, but you get the point. They were trend setters, not followers or copycats."

....."Enter John Meeker and for anyone interested, he was the guy who saved this very expensive project; the great social experiment as it was called. I could write a book on the things he did. Perhaps the first change was to abandon the principle embraced in the community's first four years, non-involvement. He understood for this to succeed, the company (DEVCO) needed to be invested in shaping the community and their future."

....."For so many years, the community accepted those responsibilities. They were involved, committed and dedicated to Sun City maintaining their principles, tenets and values. The community documents were built to allow and encourage debate, discussion and even disagreement. It was the best of all worlds and Sun City was better for it."


...."History played it's role and in 1999 when the RCSC board of directors passed the Preservation and Improvement Fee (PIF), Sun City's future was secured and insured. It was the single most important action ever taken over the years. Those 9 board members were fearless."

*************************************************

Kristi Svendsen

I am concerned at the Lack of Training for Board members. I have served on three nonprofit Boards and two State of Oregon Commissions. Not surprisingly, the NPO Boards all had Mandatory Board training for New Members as well as Old Members who felt they needed it. Also, rarely by referral from the President of the Board. The State Commissions were another thing altogether. Since they are Governor-appointed, the appointment comes with some prestige, but after that, you are ON YOUR OWN. I now believe it is because the agencies seeking Commission members were just looking to fill federal grant obligations. "Rubber stamps" were being sought. In the case of both commissions, Commissioners began Pushing Back. Our activism was not well-received.


This is Who I believe are being sought by the "powers that be" on the Board: RUBBER STAMPS is All they want. The Board plus RCSC management has unfortunately coalesced into some kinda weird Boardocracy.


What has happened since Jan Ek came on Board? (Entendre intended.) Management has grown AND IS GROWING by leaps and bounds! This all boils down to "Less for me to do" by spreading the job duties, which blunt and fog the "responsibilities." Bill Cook is right: IT IS NOBODY'S (No one person's) fault. This is what bureaucracy does: SPREADS THE BLAME and tamps out accountability. Then, we find ourselves surrounded by BureaucraPs. (Hope I coined that term.)


My take is they are looking for Rubber Stamps. I think they were thrilled that they can read our campaign in that Only us rowdies (Advocates !!) showed up for their introductory meeting.  They threw Darla in as a predictable offering. We have No Idea who they are eventually sending into the arena. We can Guess all we want and will likely figure it out soon enough. 

******************************************************

Jean Totten

First, I appreciate the time and effort that the Election Committee spends on this process. The concept is a viable one but after attending one session and watching the other, I feel it could use some tweaking. Just as the FAQ’s are prepared and available on the RCSC website for interested members, perhaps the FAQ’s that come out of these sessions could be compiled and given to candidates ahead of time. It’s tedious to listen to each panel member answer the same question.


While it’s helpful to get previous Board member’s opinions, it would be much more advantageous to have sitting Board members give their opinions. Where were Steve Collins, Kat Fimmel, Karen McAdam and John Nowakowski? Their opinions/thoughts are as necessary as those of previous Board members from over 10 years ago. Time has marched on. Technology has seen to that.


It was both interesting and appalling at the same time to hear some of the statements/thoughts given. For example, “people can express what they really feel much better in private than in an open meeting; the idea of putting special emphasis on one Phase of Sun City or another; how important committees are but little is done to attract new blood to them; this Board isn’t ready for Zoom meetings.” I was very interested to hear how decisions are made since it has been stated that members do not meet outside of Board meetings. When is the planning, the discussion, the ‘meat and potatoes’ discussed? I’ve not seen it at the “formal” meetings. Motions are brought to the floor, very little discussion ensues, and a vote is taken.


In my past life, I was the “Marcia Johnson” to a Board of about 20 members and an Executive Committee of about 10. Every year after the election, the new Board had a Strategic Planning Session. Ground rules were established- as they should be:

1. Define a clear outcome for the meeting. ...

2. Break the ice. ...

3. Set clear expectations. ...

4. Set ground rules for behavior. ...

5. Identify potential challenges. ...

6. Encourage full participation. ...

7. Use visuals and brainstorming tools to communicate ideas,  

and my personal favorite

8. No idea is a bad idea.

The purpose of the time spent together was to connect four key areas – our mission, defining our business’ purpose, establish a vision and decide what needs to be achieved that year and how to get along and work together. A Master Plan might be presented; budget would be discussed.



Nine people are elected to represent over 32,000 members in charge of a non profit corporation worth over $100 million dollars with a working budget of over $22 million. This is equal to a small municipality. Three hours of orientation!! Unacceptable.

My last question - "What do you see as the biggest obstacle the Board faces this next year" was eagerly pounced upon by Denny Nichols.  He reminded me that it will not be their responsibility to determine that; it will be mine if I am elected.  After the meeting was over, he also commented to me that I should have an agenda - my agenda - prepared.  That, I told him, is not a problem!  I already have an agenda, a commitment, and a promise - both to myself and to the members who elect me.

*****************************************************

Mike Wendel

I don’t think I will be running. I was hoping to learn something but walked away feeling otherwise.