Eleven Courses within Sun City
Sun City was built as a "golfing community." It will always be a "golfing community." Our history is invaluable in helping us understand the important role golf played in the marketing and selling of Sun City. The challenge for all of us living here is in the number of courses. For those who don't know, there are 11 total; 8 courses owned by the RCSC and 3 country clubs. The 3 private courses used to be owned by the folks living on and around them who joined. They've all sold to private investors. The 8 RCSC courses are all available for members that can play for a fee.
The Del E Webb Development Corporation (DEVCO), sold 7 of the courses to the RCSC with the sale completed in 1977. It was the deal of a lifetime, the cost being "$10 and a cup of coffee." It included 7 of the courses with Quail Run coming 2 years later.
Over the years, the RCSC has drifted from the self-sustaining aspect. Golf is an expensive game, even more so with the added pressure from the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR). We now know:
It gets way worse. When the pandemic hit, golf was the only game in town (literally, as everything else was shut down). For the first time in a long time, the number of golf rounds grew; that was a good thing, at least on its face. In April of this past year, at the member/board exchange, questions came from the floor as to why it was so hard to get on RCSC golf courses. The board pleaded ignorance to the problem but vowed to get to the bottom of it.
All of this information was disconcerting, at least to the membership. Apparently, the management team thought it was just fine. A couple of us started digging and the numbers we found were disturbing.
Confusing? Yup. Here's what it boils down to:
This September, at the Member/Board Exchange, the membership needs to stand up and say, enough is enough. The date is Monday, September 12, starting at 9 am at the Sun Dial Auditorium. These are OUR amenities, bought and paid for by each and every one of us living in Sun City. They were never intended to be given away to those living outside the community. Enough is enough.
The Del E Webb Development Corporation (DEVCO), sold 7 of the courses to the RCSC with the sale completed in 1977. It was the deal of a lifetime, the cost being "$10 and a cup of coffee." It included 7 of the courses with Quail Run coming 2 years later.
The courses were sold with a couple of stipulations
- They should be used for golf only and they should be run on a self-sustaining basis.
- Board president Myron Waggoner told newspaper reporters repeatedly, that they would not be subsidized by the non-playing membership (roughly 85%).
Stipulations that have not come to bear
- RCSC has been subsidizing golf from the yearly budgets by about 2 million dollars per year
- We also know they have invested roughly 50 million dollars from PIF on the golf courses and related golf buildings
The money spent isn't a bad thing. As we said above, golf is a major factor in Sun City's amenity package.
This is all tainted by how little we knew regarding expenditures. Many of us have argued for transparency, the RCSC has been anything but. They've buried figures rather than just telling the members what was going on. They should have come to the membership and let them know the importance of golf and why subsidizing it was so important. They didn't.
This is all tainted by how little we knew regarding expenditures. Many of us have argued for transparency, the RCSC has been anything but. They've buried figures rather than just telling the members what was going on. They should have come to the membership and let them know the importance of golf and why subsidizing it was so important. They didn't.
Members want to know - why is it so hard to get a tee time
It gets way worse. When the pandemic hit, golf was the only game in town (literally, as everything else was shut down). For the first time in a long time, the number of golf rounds grew; that was a good thing, at least on its face. In April of this past year, at the member/board exchange, questions came from the floor as to why it was so hard to get on RCSC golf courses. The board pleaded ignorance to the problem but vowed to get to the bottom of it.
New data born from member complaints
From those complaints came a report from the RCSC regarding golf. It was interesting and revealing.
- We found out the average round of golf for a resident full-play pass was $12
- We also heard the non-resident full-play pass was roughly $20 per round
- They also told us, that only 3% of the total rounds played came from non-resident full play passes; which equates to 10,000-12,000 rounds
- They went on to tell us that non-residents buying full-play passes had access to the web portal, just like members
Interpreting the disturbing new information
All of this information was disconcerting, at least to the membership. Apparently, the management team thought it was just fine. A couple of us started digging and the numbers we found were disturbing.
- The reality is the sale of non-resident full-play passes had gone from about 50 in 2019 to 150 in 2022
- Looking deeper, it turns out non-residents can be guaranteed a golf car for an additional $500, much less than a member pays
- Then it gets really ugly because it appears these non-resident full-play pass purchasers can bypass the lottery and join the small group pre-booking by paying a small charge
Are you confused yet?
Confusing? Yup. Here's what it boils down to:
- Nonresidents can and do access our golf courses for less money than members pay to golf
- They can also get a golf car for less money than members pay for a golf car
- And they have equal or better ability to prime time tee times than members
Members First Philosophy - We have to fight the Board for it...
There's never been a time that board members were willing to allow this abuse of authority by the management team. We've always been protective of our amenities. We've always subscribed to the simple premise; MEMBERS FIRST.
This September, at the Member/Board Exchange, the membership needs to stand up and say, enough is enough. The date is Monday, September 12, starting at 9 am at the Sun Dial Auditorium. These are OUR amenities, bought and paid for by each and every one of us living in Sun City. They were never intended to be given away to those living outside the community. Enough is enough.
Bill Pearson - Advisory Panel, Sun City Advocates
44 comments:
Sun City West allows non-resident golfers to freely access their web portal to book tee times. Are they having similar issues?
Sorry meant to say pass holders.
Sun City West has off-set (after members have had first chance to book) and they don't sell reduced rates to non-members. They freely admit a lot of non-member revenue but never at the expense of the members.
Is it that Sun City Golf online booking system cannot prioritize or is not yet set up to prioritize the residents first? Could this be a simple fix?
Great question and sadly what we have come to understand when it comes to anything technology driven in Sun City, there is no such thing as a simple fix. We fell 15 years behind and they are trying to catch up but it is years in the offing.
Just for the heck of it; here is the link to Sun City West golf pass rates. A full play pass for members is $3500 ours is $1550. Their non-resident full play pass is $1500 ours is $2750 with golf car or $2250 without golf car. The difference is their full play pass gives the access but winter rate is $29 every time they play and summer $17 per round. The reality for them is, they don't want to encourage full play passes with give away rates.
Here's their link: https://suncitywest.com/golf-cards/
Your question sent me scurrying about Sun City West policies. i had read the answer before but forgot the details. Here is how they handle the lottery and outside play:
1). Only RCSCW member are eligible for the lottery. They can sign up 14 days in advance and the openings are drawn 7 days in advance.
2). Non-residents can sign up to golf 4 days in advance of the tee time requested. Which means members have three full days to select tee times ahead of non-members.
They did admit they are having some issues with the lottery and are working through them.
Ok. Thank you for the link. I will contrast and compare.
But that doesn't answer my question.
Has anyone in your group checked and/or asked the question about prioritizing members v. non-resident pass holders in the current system? You can't just make that assumption until you know for sure. Yes, our IT is being worked on. We have great people now. I'm hopeful about the future. Thanks.
Fair point and we can ask at the Sept member/board exchange. Unfortunately every one of the current non-resident full play pass holders was sold the pass on the basis of equal access as the members. The good news, is if they are able, is any pass sold after the change could be made (if it can be made), would only address new purchasers.
We'll see, but the reality is the action the board/management took in July (a $250 increase to both passes from $2000 and $2500) was all the board and management felt was necessary. Frankly, that will do little if anything.
"Has anyone in your group checked and/or asked the question about prioritizing members v. non-resident pass holders in the current system?" During June 30 meeting (see youtube video time 2:24) Dir Nowakowski asked and Mr. Cook responded: We can implement that but would take more time to manage. He didn't elaborate on "more time" or what "manage" meant. So apparently they can - but they didn't during this latest small rate hike.
Painful anonymous. I watched that segment again and it was painful. The board members are addressing a topic they are clueless on. Sorry, but clueless is being kind. They simply don't understand this isn't a question about the financials, this is a question of, as Karen said, "prioritizing the members over the non-members."
To your point anon, Cook did say they could adjust the TAG system to let non-residents book 4 days out rather than 5 days but it would take more time to manage. Here's what he didn't tell you; the minute they do that, those full play passes become less attractive. Members would get priority over non-members. The prime time tee times would be filled by members first. What a novel freaking idea.
Here's the other question, perhaps you can answer it: Do small groups (30 or more) allow non-members to be part of their group, pay the $2 or $3 dollar over-ride and bypass the lottery? If they do, that gives them more rights than members who aren't part of a small group.
Worst of all, i had to watch the general manager and the director of golf stand in front of the world and tell us golf made money. I hate being lied to, hate it. Golf hasn't made money in a very long time. They're still not and he knows that.
The reference Cook made relative to Sun City West and the money they lost was in the pandemic year when they (SCW) closed the courses to outside play. Otherwise Sun City has been subsidizing golf on a yearly basis in greater dollar figures than Sun City West. Then there's the other thing, Sun City West went to the residents and told them straight out, golf needed to be subsidized. Sun City buried the numbers and hoped no on would notice.
Director Collin's motion would not have fixed it, but it would have gone a long way in putting the members ahead of the non-residents. Management wanted no part of it and apparently the majority of the board agreed. Steve's point was well made; you either are listening to and supporting the members, or you are not.
I'm not a golfer. And I tell ya I don't see it in my future as a hobby, lol.
I do believe member/resident golfers should get a "head start" in booking over non-residents. Seems only fair even if it's more work.
As for the small groups, member/residents would be the ones to initiate the small group outings in your example, correct? Again, I'm not a golfer so maybe if they actually have issues with this they should express their concerns.
As for golf showing a profit this year, it is quite possible. I have noticed a lot more play on the courses this year. Made me wonder if golf is coming back. I have millennial second cousins who live to golf. Again, I have no knowledge of golf trends. I have looked at 990s since I discovered them online about 5 years ago. I never paid a lot of attention as I'm more focused on the financial statements.
I do think we need the money from outside play. I'm ok with subsidizing golf, same as I am with all the other activities.
I've lived here and paid pretty close attention over the past decade. The outside golfers eat at our restaurants and shop in our stores. I'm also hoping this helps with less empty store fronts which seems to be happening more. Maybe they'll become future member/residents?
I don't know what the answers are but this management team and board seem open to discussion and suggestions. So I say a good calm and rational approach at meetings, comments and postings online and in the newspaper will get more results than angry confrontation. I really like our new manager and I can't believe how many critical issues he has been faced with in his first year. Work with him, help him and and I think you may be pleasantly surprised.
BTW, happy belated 75th birthday William Gordon Pearson. 😛
Thanks for the belated bd wishes, but thank goodness i'm not that old. This was just my 74th. Yikes, where the heck did all those years go? Or i could look at it like you were just a touch early for number 75.
I have mixed emotions about the new GM. I had high hopes and in fact he did a couple of things i applauded. Holding the session where we heard about the state of our technology was a real plus. He would have done himself a favor by not telling us "it's no one's fault." Obviously, someone was responsible. He didn't have to blame anyone, but don't make a fool out of yourself with comments that are BS.
I like the way he has handled the Viewpoint Lake fix and especially the home owners on the lake.. I like the fact he gave reports on both golf and 10 pin bowling. All of that is far better than the previous GM who shared little. I didn't like the way he threatened to have the residents arrested last Sept for being in our own building. He smartly rethought it and said we could stay.
I didn't like the fact doors were locked at 9 am at the annual meeting last Dec and that the first half of that meeting was "lost" due to technical error. I think financial information is better being shown, but even that has a long way to go.
Finally, you raised the issue and i must respond. The general manager should never lie to the board or the members, NEVER. It's one thing to be mistaken; saying something that isn't true shatters any trust anyone has. Back in the old days (pre-2006) some RCSC board members used to keep their own sets of books. They knew where every nickle was spent.
You said you know about the 990's. That puts you in the top 1% of the membership from a knowledge perspective regarding our financials. The last one we can access shows golf expenses was 2019 and they were 8 million dollars. We know since then expenses have exploded. 2020 and 2021 will be at the very least the same and may be as much as 1-2 million dollars more.
We also know by taking every dollar collected from their year-end financial statements for golf the respective totals showed 7.1 million and 7.2 million dollars. Not all of those numbers are used for the 990's, but giving them the benefit of the doubt, the RCSC has lost at least a million dollars each year and it may be closer to 2 million dollars.
Board members, at least a couple of them believed him when he said, golf was profitable in 2021. I suspect that's one of the reasons not to have supported Director Collin's motion. Perhaps he meant to say, the RCSC has done better than their own budget projections; but that's a far different story from "golf was profitable." Their budgets, as we all know by now, mean little.
Anyway, i do enjoy the exchange, and this discussion with you. My goal has always been to help residents understand how special and unique Sun City is. There's been one absolute every board has functioned under; "members first." That wasn't the case in June.
My apologies! I thought you were born in July 1947. Sorry about that. Now let's see if I remember it next year. The pandemic did a number on us all in one way or another. I don't believe any of us came away unscathed.
I didn't know that the 990s were a big deal. I didn't think I knew any more than anyone else. I really thought the financial statements were the most important.
I'm one of the ones in the audience that thought that 2021 golf could be profitable based on my observations alone. I don't believe that's a lie. Nevertheless, I still believe the member residents should have the tee time booking head start.
I'm ok with the GM saying what he did about technology. I'm so thankful this crisis was handled quickly and the guy from SCW was hired.
I'm also ok with them locking the doors at 9 a.m. at the Annual Meeting. I never thought of it as anything but a security issue given that so many residents were in the same room. There were even more people than bingo night! As long as I could get out to use the facilities when needed, I'm fine.
I tend to look at everything with safety, security, liability and management of risk first and foremost. I can trace this back to the experience of living in the Northeast during 9/11.
I think almost everyone behaved badly on that day last September. I wasn't there. I watched the video. With all of the crazy that goes on these days I completely understood and supported President Wilson's shutting down the meeting. I was kind of surprised that the people that showed up didn't know about the no sign BP14. Some of the policies were rolled up into the bylaws in 2018 so possibly that was part of the confusion.
I want to think that the Annual Meeting recording was lost because the technology really is that darn awful. I liked watching the committee meetings but understood about that too. When the technology can handle it I'd like to see them again on YouTube.
The budgets...I see them as fluid. I don't love the word placeholder. Things happen and adjustments have to be made. Like real life at my house lol. I'm ok with it.
I love that they're moving forward with the Lakeview pickleball estimates/drawings (whatever they're calling them). I went back and watched this part again after I checked out the suggestion to research the golf thing. I am an avid birder and I do 65% of my birding by ear now. I bird Viewpoint/ Lakeview area at least once a week. Paying attention to the water drop yes. I have no problems with pickleball being next to the park. I can tune them out. We all need to give and take and cooperate. The attendants and park workers at the Lakeview Rec are so nice and helpful. I had to add that.
I agree with members first but if we don't have healthy corporate finances the members wishes can never be met.
There will be a lot of challenges in the next 5 to 10 years. We need to have a spirit of cooperative problem solving if things are going to move forward. Just my 2 cents.
I enjoy the back and forth as well. I think everyone learns when people stay calm and civil. Thanks.
Thank you to the last poster! Level head, observant, accepting, and willing to voice your opinion without telling everyone else they are wrong. This is the kind of communication and discussions we need!
I don’t see how golf can ever be “profitable” if they truly add up all costs, like $4 million maintenance sheds, $12 million landscaping projects, and everything else. But I sincerely don’t know.
Regarding last Sept meeting: I believe Pres Wilson had the option to simply tell the one person to put their sign down. And I believe BP14 only applies to “posted or distributed” signs - it says nothing about walking around with one. So many things are interpret-able, and manifestation of those interpretations define character. I hate to Monday morning Q-back, but it seems like how you deal with any given situation has something to do with whether or not you believe other people have value.
I do have a hard time swallowing that it was just a coincidence that the part of the Annual Membership meeting that was destroyed contained all the questionable actions of Chair and what lawyer said. Then you add in that they had opportunity to try and recover it - but chose not to. So even if it wasn’t actually malicious or unethical - don’t you think you would take all reasonable actions to eliminate the appearance of such??
“cooperative problem solving” “back and forth... calm and civil” - amen to that. Thanks.
Well said Jeb. We absolutely believe every RCSC member should be entitled to their own opinions and be willing and able to express them. Imagine what Sun City would be like if the board actually listened to them. OMG, what a novel idea.
There's no better example of the board shutting down discourse than what happened in April, May and June at the Member/Board exchange meetings. Long time RCSC members who are avid golfers complained bitterly about accessing tee times. The boards response; no big deal. Really? Freaking really?
All of which sent me scurrying to the financial data that is posted on the RCSC website. That coupled with the summary report given at a board meeting about golf and it was truly revealing. I've spent the past two months breaking it all down in detail. For some, they won't care, for others, it will be eye opening.
You can find the discussion here on talkofsuncity, it now has over 8000 views and i expect the topic will be a hot button issue at the Sept 12 member exchange meeting. https://www.talkofsuncity.com/threads/its-not-even-about-golf-anymore.4414/page-11
Bill, I cannot believe that I am commenting about golf on a site about golf.
I have told you on more than one ocassion that you are wasting your time with 990s. You should be looking at the year end audit statements, but then if people want to go down the wrong path I cannot stop them.
The following are figures I gleaned from the last budget and finance meeting. Although I can post only five years, I compared them to audit statements I have and these are spot on. I tried to show these to Jean Totten last Wednesday as well as Tom Marone but they were not interested. They would not even look at them with Jean saying she had other priorities if elected not financial and Tom after asking a question about depreciation and then went on about, gasp, Roberts Rules of Order. So we have a candidate who wants to be elected to the Board of a $130MM+ non profit and doesn’t want to know anything about its financial condition. As for Tom, you really shouldn’t write about fold and its financial condition as you are clueless. Now to golf and its finances.
Now, as the Declaration of Independence says, let the facts be submitted to a candid world. I have devised a chart that should be easy to read and the only item not figured in the net income is depreciation.simply put depreciation is a paper figure that represents fixed assets (vehicles, furniture, buildings, etc. that have already purchased. It is used as a tax reduction tool concerning the “useful” life of an asset.
FYE 12/31. Total income. Net income (deficit) before depreciation. Depreciation. Net Income (Deficit) after depreciation
2016. $5,426,873. ( $135,251). $1,804,400. ( $1,939,651)
2017. $5,609,805. ($345,665). $1,845,358. ($2,191,023)
2018. $5.582,048. ($319,605). $1,729,529. ($2,109,134)
2019. $5.671,720. ($420,989). $1,917,685. ($2,338,674)
2020. $6,688,280. $222,166. $2,281,764. ($2,059,598)
2121. $6,429,726. $449,136. $2440,582. ($1,991,446) These figures have not been verified
by the CPA (audit in progress)
So one can see from these figures that the argument that members are not “subsidizing” golf for approximately $2million per year is neither accurate nor truthful. The real figures to concentrate on are total income and net income before depreciation. Figuring in depreciation covers what has already been purchased so there can be no “double dipping.”
Hope this helps the members understand the RCSC’s finances a little better. BTW, we should raise the price of fold for guests and let them book the leftover tee times. I also believe the Director of Golf should be responsible for setting the rates and divvying tee times in conjunction with the the Greens Committee.
Dave Wieland
The site compressed the numbers in relation to the various categories. The format shown is not what I typed. Thought you should know.
Thanks Dave. I'm a little confused with the double negative:
"So one can see from these figures that the argument that members are not “subsidizing” golf for approximately $2million per year is neither accurate nor truthful."
Are you saying your figures show that Members are subsidizing golf at $2 million a year?
I'm not a CPA, so please explain something to me: Does Net Income contain all golf related expenses? Everything, like grass seed, inventory, personnel, all equipment purchase and maintenance, and new construction? I believe someone's argument was that since the Lakes Maint Shed contained a push mower for Duffyland it wasn't a "golf" thing...
Dave, Jean was there to greet interested members who were interested in signing her candidate sheets so that she can run for the Board. She had told members she would be there to listen to them. She did not ask you to bring financial statements with you to monopolize her time; that was not the place to have her understand what you were saying. You have no right to say that she is a candidate who wants to be elected to the Board of a $130MM+ non profit and doesn't want to know anything about its financial condition. I bet if you call her, she will make a point to have a one-on-one discussion with you in a more appropriate place.
As for me, I have readily admitted that I am not a financial guy and the cost to sustain golf is not my main concern. My concern is allowing non-members to pay less than Members.
And as far as your comment to Jean that, "You have no right to say that she is a candidate who wants to be elected to the Board of a $130MM+ non profit and doesn't want to know anything about its financial condition."
Take a look in the mirror my friend! You have no right to be on the Ad Hoc Bylaw Committee reviewing and revising the Bylaws, that are required to comply with Robert's Rules, when you are clueless about Robert's Rules.
I stay in my lane by admitting I'm not a financial guy. I wish you would stay in your lane by resigning from the Bylaws committee!
I'll play your game Dave, but you need explain a couple of things to me, what is the purpose of the 990's? Where do the figures they send to the IRS come from? Why would they claim 8 million dollars of expense when you say it so much less?
Eagerly awaiting your explanations.
By the way Dave, the income figures you posted by year are fairly consistent with the revenue side of their 990 filings, nowhere do you post the expense side of the equation. Showing me the depreciation without the expenses is meaningless.
Based on what you have posted above, how much of golf's costs are subsidized by the membership?
The more i think about what you posted Dave, the less sense it makes. You claim you've "gleamed" this from the last budget and finance meeting. Can you show me anywhere or anything that states exactly what has been spent on and for golf on a yearly basis? Can you point me in the direction or links to pages that show the cost of fertilizer, feed, water, labor costs (both for maintenance and behind the counters, half of the expenses for the two lakes as stated in the purchase agreement? The line items for equipment; mowers, golf cars, wells the utilities costs for those buildings? You know, all of it.
Like you i have some relative work experience. For my last nine years in office as president, i had to sign and submit (our accountant filled them out) Labor Management Reports (LM2's). It is the equivalent to the 990's the RCSC submits. Every time you tell us to ignore them i cringe. The last thing in the world we would ever do is submit inaccurate reports to the Federal Government. Doing so, could send me to prison.
So, are you telling us all, the numbers the RCSC submits are lies? False? Understated? Overstated? Wrong because they don't care? That's just plain nonsense Dave, you know it and i know it. The RCSC has always played the game with financials, at least with the membership. Are you actually saying they are playing games with the figures they file year to year?
Your easy to read chart is far from easy to read and frankly it's akin to the general manager telling all of us the RCSC made money on golf in 2021. It's easy to tell the world you know what you are talking about, now show us the supporting documentation. Because until then, the 990's are they only data that we have relative to golf course expenses. And they are pretty damning.
Bill, I will be happy to bring my sheets so you can see where I am coming from. It will have itemized expenses for your review. I wanted to simplify with the most relevant numbers to prevent confusion or eyeglazing. If to bring a 990 to the exchange next week, I will bring my info and show it to you.
Tom, since we are into mirrors at the moment!, go back at look at all your posts on golf and losing money saying they lost $25million since God knows when and tell me you knew what you were talking about. You had no idea what you were talking about.
As for me resigning from By-Laws committee, I don’t respond well to bullies and I guarantee you that more powerful people,I.e., bankers, lawyers, CPAs, contractors, politicians large insurance brokers, middle and upper management of Fortune 100 companies and they never got their way.. so my answer to you is, no.
Nothing personal, only business.
Dave, conversing with you is a waist of my time. You are a legend in your own mind.
You're a sad person who thinks it's only you who's right.
I'll look forward to seeing your documentation. That said, you've still failed to tell me why the RCSC submits data on the 990's regarding golf? You have lots of answers and quick to claim you know what you are talking about, except when it comes to the 990's. You just blow it off as being in error.
I'm always willing to listen, but explain the logic/rationale of the RCSC filing false documents to the feds.
I am curious Dave, have you ever looked at the 990's? Because if and when you do, you will see the financials align very closely with the RCSC end of year filings. They should because they are prepared and sent by their accounting firm who verifies the numbers are accurate and signed off on by the RCSC.
You went after Tom in a bit of a rant about the 25 million dollar "loss," which i find interesting because those are the numbers (data) the RCSC has submitted. While none of us claim to have the expertise you have, all of us are more than capable of reading/researching available data. We also are smart enough to know, what we see is in all likelihood the truth *rather than trusting what people tell us).
You know as well as i, the vast majority of board members has one primary concern; will there be an increase to the members the beginning each year? Chastising Jean for not being interested in your "documentation" is a bit disingenuous. How many of the current board members did you offer to share that information with? Seems to me if that's your criteria for a a good board member, you should be teaching a session to all candidates.
The problem for me is, your "expertise" appears to be missing this one basic component; the easiest, cleanest document to read and follow are the 990's. Yet you've told us repeatedly to ignore them. Yet, you've never told us why?
Not trying to be argumentative (well maybe i am), but help me understand where you are coming from. Because the one number that has always been missing in everything the RCSC has shown us is the expense side of running golf courses. Now that we see it, it's pretty damning.
Bill, I have stated on several occasions that I have never seen 990 but request you or anyone in possession of a 990 (year doesn’t matter) to show it to me in order that I can see its format. This will allow me to have apples to apples discussions. My failed attempt at chart reveals why I had my administrative assistant create the spread sheets for me.
I can show you the cumulative figures for the first quarter but depreciation is not broken out by business group.So golf figures show positive revenue. I hope you can understand where I am coming from.
One f8nal point, I believe the the acquisition of the fold courses for $10 and cup of coffee was from Tom as he referenced Trust Deed. The actual phrase you would see on contracts that are not for a stated price is “$10 and other good and valuable consideration.” Consideration in legal terms means something of value,I.e., money ,property, jewelry, basically assets of value.
Tom, when I was with Jean, did I ever interfere when people wanted to talk with her or sign her petitions? No I did not and you know damn well as you sat across from me with your wife. Did I not have the figures in front you for your review and did you look at them? NO, you sat there across me like theSphinx and the pagan god Baal. After you left Jean and I had a very nice discussion on issues common between us and I can safely say that the necessity of Roberts Rules of Order was never needed. You see Jean is running for office and I am a constituent and I like being fully informed about candidates unlike some who “drink the candidate’s kool aid” and vote that way.
Happy post Labor Day and let the games begin. Deus illud volte.
I don't recall you ever telling me/us that you had never seen them, but it matters not because now we know. You were on the board for more than a single 3 year term and you've been on the Budget/Finance committee for even more years. I was on the board for three very long years and i also never was shown the 990's.
It wasn't until an RCSC member posted the link on TOSC to see the 990's that everything became crystal clear. We've (boards and members) have been told repeatedly golf (and all divisions) have met or exceeded their budgets for the year. Truly a meaningless statement.
What no one has ever seen is the expense side of the discussion. Not the members, not the golfers, not the committee members and in all likelihood, not most board members. As i said numerous times, that wasn't by accident. They were intentionally buried because once you know, there needs to take an action to address golf being subsidized.
I've long argued it should have just been presented to the membership and let them set an amount they were willing to commit on a yearly basis. There's a valid argument to be made, golf is too important to fail. I still feel that way, BUT THERE SHOULD NEVER, EVER BE RCSC MEMBERS SUBSIDIZING OUTSIDE GOLFERS WITH CHEAP GOLF RATES OR EQAUL OR BETTER ACCESS THAN THE MEMBERSHIP.
The problem with your rebuttals regarding the 990's is you have no basis to tell us they aren't true or accurate. Rather than digging yourself a deeper hole, posted below is the link to the RCSC 990's. You'll have to cut and paste it into your browser. There's 5 years on there but if you dig you can go back another 7 or 8 years as many of us did, you will find the RCSC submitted data to arrive at the 25 million dollars in subsidies. Or you can simply click on TOSC, some of us have done the heavy lifting and posted all of the data there. The Advocates have been committed to providing the information long buried so members can make up their own minds (see below for the link).
https://www.causeiq.com/organizations/recreation-centers-of-sun-city,860214132/
Bill, I stated that I would share the info with you before the meeting as what you would like to know cannot br done in 3 minutes. Are you willing to meet me at the breezeway at Sundial at about 8:15 and I can show you want I have been talking about. My point on the 990s was I wanted to see the format, how the information is presented. In spite of not having seen a 990 I am going to guess that it does not contain the CPA notes which are very important. I have said this to you many times that the CPA audit is more important and that is because provide information relevant to the financial section. The last time I told you this was before the June 30 Board meeting, maybe you didn’t hear me.
Linda McIntyre, you have me a bit confused, you want to see the audit with the management report. Did you mean the management letter which discusses internal controls or were you referring to the PR report that is before the financial info in the FYE statement from companies like Microsoft, JP Morgan Chase or General Motors? Could you please clarify what you were referring to please. For the purpose of the RCSC the audit report is technically the management report as it presents the fiscal condition at the end of the year.
Along a similar vein, RCSC members are not stockholders as RCSC is a not profit which only has members. Corporations and partnerships have shares. Thanks for your interest.
David. I have heard most of what you have said and read more than i can remember. Now that i have posted the link for the 990's, did you even look? CPA's notes are immaterial at this point. Take a look at what they (the RCSC) has sent to the feds. Look at who prepared it and explain to me why it isn't accurate.
You've stated more times than i can count that neither Tom nor i know what we are talking about. I have no idea what you could show me what would explain the logic of the RCSC filing false reports with the IRS.You know this as well as i do; they wouldn't.
There's a far better reason for them to bury/hide these figures from the committees, members and board members. I need you to look at the 990's and tell me why they would be wrong.
Maybe this link will be easier for Dave. He needs to look at the 990's for the Recreation Centers of Sun City Inc. Part III, 4b...
https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/full_text_search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=Recreation+centers+of+sun+city
Bill and Tom, the pressed on the printed links and nothing happened. I am accustomed to links being highlighted in blue which is why I believe they did not work. Maybe I have to take the long cut.
As for you and Tom not knowing what you are talking about, I believe you are reading the 990s in correctly as you are not accounting for depreciation. When I first mentioned golf was profitable sometime this year, I was referring to the 2019 and 2020 statements. As for previous years, while golf was showing a net loss before depreciation, you cannot could depreciation as part of the “loss” as depreciation represents assets that have already been paid for. Hence, the actual losses are smaller than the $2M figure.
I take from the tone of your last post that you are not interested in the least as to my meeting offer. I cannot understand why. I am bringing my paperwork which I was given to the committee with all the necessary figures, you just had tip-off take it home and review closer which brought to this point. All I am asking is for one of you to print one out and bring it.
So are you in or are you out? See you Monday.
P.S. Tom, I believe the reason you are pissed at me is because when you and Jean were making all sorts of noise about the by-laws, it appeared to me that you wanted me to blurt out something.After awhile you decided to leave. Sorry to disappoint you Skippy, but I have no idea when they are being released, who has reviewed, etc. Evidently this prompts you to demand my resignation (fat chance) because I don’t own a 20 book even others were available. This breather is getting real old real fast sort of like the Velveeta Voldemort’s 2020 election BS. Have a positive day.
And here I thought you were a smart computer savy guy! Don't you know how to cut and paste the link?
What Tom said, eh? You want us to believe you are genius savant with numbers but no idea on how to cut and paste a link. Some sites don't allow you to click on a link. That's why i specifically wrote; "cut and paste the link."
I'll be more than happy to look at your "numbers." The problem is, based on what you posted above, they will be meaningless. If you take the time, make the effort to cut and paste the links we have provided you'll see financial information supplied by the RCSC in easy to read and follow form.
This isn't rocket science Dave. There are accumulated expenses from running golf courses and there is a revenue stream from golf. When the RCSC bought the golf courses, the agreement stated the revenue should cover the expenses. The problem simply is we have never seen those accumulated golf expenses. Now we have.
Bring the data with you and i'll be happy to look at it. Hopefully by then you will know how to cut and paste and you will see what the RCSC has claimed has happened in golf for the past 12 years.
Stonewalling Dave? You know the 990s, once you are brave enough to view them, will silence your claims of contrary financial information. Do you really think the RCSC has submitted false information to the IRS for years??
Dave. As long as we are sharing pleasantries, give me your layman's understanding of depreciation.
A few points guys, I am not stonewalling as I have posted and spoken to people, would like to see the FORMAT of the 990s. The format of a990 may be entirely different from an audited financial statement. Which brings mr to another point, I am using an iPad which does not allow me to cut and paste and I do know how to cut and pastes. This is a stripped down edition at least four years old, add to that I have never needed to cut and paste since I retired 15 years ago. Does this provide another reason to resign the by-laws committee? My other computer is a chrome book which I despise and it has been out of order for nearly a year.
Depreciation is an accounting/tax deduction which represents the amortization of fixed assets already purchased over their useful life. An example of sorts is the Board purchases a Ferrari for Bill Cook and it cost $500,000. Now under an accounting rule the depreciation of vehicles is 5years. This means that each year for 5 years the RCSC can deduct $100,000 in depreciation as that is the useful life from an accounting/tax standpoint. If the Board did purchase this vehicle I would be the first on a recall petition. Depreciation is solely a paper figure for tax purposes. Consequently the members are not “subsidizing “ the depreciation portion of golf as the fixed assets had already been purchased. Other examples of fixed assets and useful life are buildings (25years), furniture (5 years). If you care to find out which fixed assets are depreciable and their useful life, ask Bill Cook or Kevin and I am quite sure they would be happy to tell you.
See you Monday.
Dave, I have an I-Pad that's probably older than you and I can still "copy and Paste" on it.
Bring your I-Pad on Monday I'll show how to do it!
And my name's not Skippy!
Thanks for the remarks regarding the depreciation Dave. It's an interesting discussion because it is often used for tax purposes for for-profit corporations. As a non profit we still use it as a book keeping function. Where it does help the organization is say the board approved a million dollars for new golf cars and rather than showing a million dollar expenditure, if it is a 5 year useful life (i know there's different variations) they would then show it as a 200k per year cost, rather than a million dollars in that single year.
Where this gets really interesting is i saw some figures for the first quarter of this year for golf and they did drill down costs on lots of items. Seeing only a single quarter doesn't mean much. I suspect what you are telling me is you have the past 5 years. The problem, based on what you posted compared to what the RCSC claimed they spent and collected on the 990's is ions apart.
Bill Cook has apparently said the 990's aren't where we should be looking, but that obviously begs the question, why not? I don't care how they depreciate their purchases because whether it's over 5 years or deducted in a single year, it's still a million dollar expenditure on golf cars the membership is paying for.
Perhaps it would be in Bill Cook's and the memberships best interest to explain the 990's and why they are different. If his argument is depreciation,he should be prepared to show us how that changes the expense side of the equation.
I understand the general manager has been asked to bring a copy of the 2020 990's to the meeting this coming Monday (Sept 12). Very cool, because so many of the members have neither heard nor seen one. The suspense is mounting, will he or won't he bring it with him?
Bill, any C corporation (Microsoft, Google, etc.), Subchapter S, LLC, partnership and proprietorship that has fixed assets can depreciate them. In my experience the two areas that accounting fools around with are capital purchases and depreciation. Too many examples to put here..
See you Monday.
The Effects of Depreciation on a Non-Profit
(Relevant excerpt. Note RCSC is a 501(c)(4) that does not receive gifts/donations. They would include their depreciations on their 990s if it was allowed!)
Considerations
Non-profits ****may be able**** to recognize a portion of the fixed asset gifts each year equivalent to the annual depreciation expense. This eliminates the situation, in which a non-profit shows a surplus in the year of the gift and deficits in subsequent years. This could be a problem because a non-profit with a surplus may have difficulty attracting donor funds, even though it may actually be running an operating loss.
##
Small Business
Business Models & Organizational Structure
Non Profit Organizations
By Chirantan Basu
https://smallbusiness.chron.com/effects-depreciation-nonprofit-36628.htm
Simple solution to the 990 controversy, show us the work sheets that go with the 990's. Either the numbers are what the are, or, the "depreciation" factors into the massive differences stated on them when compared to their financials. Everything in life is explainable.
Post a Comment