Yuk; is there a
more awful-sounding combination? Perhaps Lutefisk and chocolate milk. Sorry,
this week between Christmas and New Year's, is almost always a lost exercise in sanity; and my cravings for a touch of normalcy are inevitably thirsting to be
quenched. Most love the holidays, I long for the flip of the calendar.
To be clear, even more so this year than most. We suffered through the pandemic in 2020, were hit with the tumult of the McAdam's firing in 2021 and the craziness of 2022 with the failed and flawed bylaw rewrite. The great news is, most of you reading this celebrated an RCSC election outcome that was stunning. Fast, Collins and Totten crushed the other candidates and created a sense of hope moving forward.
The outgoing RCSC
board couldn't resist one last twist of the knife. They called a special
session for Thursday, December 22 to pass the budget that included the lot
assessment increase from $496 to $525. The meeting lasted all of 9 minutes; you
can watch it here. It would
have been over sooner, but the incoming board member, Jean Totten, spoke
against it for her allotted 3 minutes. It mattered not.
There are several
schools of thought regarding the necessity of the increase. Mike Wendell shared
his opinions here, and former board member Rich Hoffer voiced his
concerns here. Both lodged valid arguments against the increase
given the massive carry-forward funds. Apparently, the board wasn't interested
in the general manager being forced to rewrite his budget. My only comment
regarding the million dollars this increase will generate is; to spend it
on the membership. Clearly, they have been saving it rather than investing it
in the clubs as they have been neglected for too long now.
We need to pick
your brains. There has been a debate/discussion raging amongst several of us
who function as the core group of Sun City Advocates. Some wanted to do a full-blown
survey, and others wanted to retire the group and enjoy our lives watching Jerry
Springer reruns. Common sense prevailed. For now, we want some feedback from
you and would ask you to give us your thoughts on these two questions:
1). Should the Advocates continue their amazing efforts to restore the value and values Sun City was built around?
2). If your answer is yes, tell us the one thing you want us to focus on moving forward?
3). Feel free to share with us any other thoughts you may have.
You can submit
your responses here.
2023 looks to be a
fascinating year as we began to restore our sense of community and the voices
of the members. We will be asking you to step up and become involved in the
self-governance concept. You all did an amazing job given the vote totals, but
that was the easy part. Now the real work begins, and as I told several
incoming board members, this doesn't have to be that difficult. Creating a
welcoming organization rather than an exclusive structure where only a handful
decide our future will insure their (and our) success.
As always, this is
just one man's opinion.
Bill Pearson. Sun
City Historian.
23 comments:
There remains much to be done. In fact I don't think the necessary changes have even started beyond the recent election.
I want to see a change of mentality at RCSC board and management from viewing us as "cardholders" to viewing us as "owners" and "members". The corporate outlook is wearing a bit thin. As for dues, I don't mind the $29 increase but I do mind the hoarding of cash balances. If we need reserves for future facilities replacement, then label it as such; otherwise the members/owners have better places for the money.
I'd like to see golf reoriented to the owners and away from outside play and the rate of growth of pickleball nationally, regionally, locally, and professionally all dictate the need for more facilities and broader placement across the entire community.
I agree with Anonimous. The work has not started yet. Advocates has much left to do to educate even the existing RCSC BOD. Fast, Collins and Totten cannot use the resources of RCSC to push their views, if different from the rest, without creating friction we do not need. Advocates can continue to do that part of education and policy advocacy.
As to the matter of the increase in fees approved by the parting BOD that were not needed on top of the existing reserves, I MOVE that the funds be allocated to buying the GM out of his contract, whatever it is IF it cannot be terminated for cause. Plenty of evidence has accumulated to show cause (incompetent budgeting, automation, capital budgeting, surveying owners preference, etc). RCSC needs a competent GM. If termination on fair and amicable terms causes litigation, then use the raised fees.
From all that we have learned over the last year, the BOD was only part of the problem for having abdicated their responsibility of oversight and demanding competent performance. The performance of the GM, protected by the BOD, has been abysmal and demonstrably incompetent on many fronts. Improvements to RCSC operations will come only with a new GM. Some costs may have to be incurred to get rid of the bad to make room for the new. The outgoing BOD has created the budget to do so.
Advocates can do the job of documenting GM incompetence and for the community to learn and also advocate the BOD for a new GM.
Interesting comments anonymous and sadly true. I had high hopes the new GM would come in and be a breath of fresh air. After the debacle at the board meeting in Sept of 2021, where the board charged off the stage and left him to deal with it, my thoughts were he would learn from his mistakes. Hardly, he got worse.
Then came the day the director tossed him the softball, "what happens if we don't pass a budget?" and he told us all, "i might have to shut down the centers," i knew all was lost. No; i'd have to rewrite my budget or we could survive by spending some of the carry forward was mentioned. It was bull shit of the highest order.
Let me be very blunt, being the GM in Sun City isn't an easy job, and frankly is damned near impossible when you fail to understand there are more people to satisfy then the 5 majority members of the board. The telling everyone we are a business, not a community won't win you many points will it?
My advice to the incoming board members and new officers is simple: document, document and then document some more. I have no idea the length of his employment contract, but the reality is when given directions or asked for information/data, he has a contractual obligation to provide it. If not, well you get the picture.
RCSC staff and management views toward the membership will be greatly influenced by the GM. The GM received his marching orders from the new board and it is not beyond the realm of possibility that he can accept different marching orders from the new board. Thus, I do not believe that simply throwing the current GM out on his ear would represent sound leadership on the part of the new board.
I think the new board needs to meet, draft and agree on whatever the new direction is to be. This is the proper role of the board. Once the direction is set, the board needs to call in the GM to discuss the new policies and agree on a process and timetable for implementation. Either board and GM agree on the process and timetable along with agreed upon benchmarks, or the GM needs to offer his resign.
Agreed anonymous, the new board should find a way to come together; with or without the gm. I'm not advocating for or against him. He either accepts setting a new agenda and goals or he doesn't. Not my concern.
I am more focused on how much the board is able to work cohesively and to be clear, that doesn't mean they have to agree on everything, it means each is entitled to be able to express their opinions without complete and utter disdain heaped down on them. That change alone would be refreshing.
With those simplistic goals out of the way, the true measure will be the level of involvement from the community. Can they enhance communication? Can they help clubs succeed? Can they, will they reach out to the enormous talent pool living here and invite them to take ownership?
That's all more daunting than the first two paragraphs because it will take a longer term investment and commitment. We'll see eh?
I don't necessarily agree that those goals are simplistic!
We have seen how certain things have been ram-rodded down the throats of other boards members who don't necessarily agree. We have witnessed the "My way or the Highway" method of presiding. We have witnessed decisions not being made by the entire board.
The real trick will be, once a board decision is made and passed, will those opposed fully embrace the decision whole heartedly or will it be another contentious year?
Only time will tell.
Well, in the rush or not to can Bill Cook, have you ever thought of the cost of the buyout or litigation? Probably not. Then there is hiring a new GM, we advertise or use a headhunter which is not cheap. Everybody is a Monday morning quarterback but what has he done wrong other than continually piss Bill Pearson and the Sun city advocates.
Well we all about to find out if the Advocates are the real deal or the amorphous mob I always thought they were. We should know by June.
What ever stories Barbara and Karen posited for their termination, it’s not true.
Happy Friggin New Year.
Hey buddy, sounding a little sullen and angry, lighten up, it's a new year and some interesting changes are in store. Let's dissect your comments for clarity sake:
Paragraph 1). Don't know about any "rush" to can Bill Cook; ultimately that would be up to the board and would be based on his performance and interactions with them. My comments have simply been to document any performance issues. As far as what he has done; pissing me off is the least of his sins. Threatening to have 200 plus members arrested in Sept of 2021 wasn't a good look and threatening to close the rec centers if he didn't get his new budget passed was even worse. In between those foolish remarks was a slew of statements the board left unchecked or challenged and were questionable at best. But hey, it's a New Year and a fresh start for everyone. By the way, being worried about the costs if he leaves has to be balanced against the costs if he stays and can't do the job.
Paragraph 2). An "amorphous mob" was a curious comment so i went to see what you were trying to call us, here's the definition of amorphous (for those who don't know): "lacking a clear structure or focus." To be clear, we had no interest in setting up a formal structure, on the other hand, we had a singular focus that we articulated from the day we formed: To get Karen and others elected in 2021 and in 2022 elect a slate of 3 more board candidates who would make a majority who would listen to the membership. How did we do?
Paragraph 3). Fascinating comment because you weren't a board member when either were fired so you should have no idea why they were. They were terminated in an executive session so unless someone from the board told you something they shouldn't have, you are simply blowing crap out your ass again.
Paragraph 4). Happy freaking New Year to you as well. I know all of us at the Advocates are excited about our future; hopefully you are as well.
Bill, nice response but I would like to respond to you point three. True I was not on the Board when the Barbara and Karen thing went down, but neither were you. That said on more than one occasion you you stated that Barbara was “fired” because of questioning the financial statements and that you had phone conversations on several occasions. I have requested from you what specifically she was questioning. Since this action took place in early 2021 the 2020 statement was not available it had to be the 2019 statement. I have reviewed this statement several times and I cannot determine her reservations. I then believed it might be the statements that are produced monthly which are known as compilation statements. These are not reviewed by the outside auditors and simply produce a general snapshot of the RCSC for that month. I have asked you a few times what her complaints were about the statements but you have never really responded with details. I just wanted to learn if her concerns were the same as mine. Should not be a state secret. I “battled with Jan for years when I was both on and off the Board about financial statements with no repercussions. Consequently I believe the Barbara situation is about something more.
As for Karen, I believe she posted somewhere and you confirmed that she was going to tell her side of the story. She posted in the Independent in early July, 2021 some nonsense about due process which my old legal aid radar went off saying this involved something more. I Interviewed enough clients to separate the wheat from the chaff so to speak. I still believe that to this day.
If you have anything concrete to add to my observations please advise.
I also have some thoughts on the financial statements for the new members of the Board I would like to discuss as I am a member and they are legally obligated to meet with me.
The Cubs and the D Backs will be terrible this year. Keep an eye on the Seattle Mariners, my dark horse.
Best wishes for the New Year.
“I also have some thoughts on the financial statements for the new members of the Board I would like to discuss as I am a member and they are legally obligated to meet with me. Christine”
Where is this in our many RCSC “official” documents? Many requests have been ignored by past Board members. Hopefully the 2023 board won’t have this gag order. Your reference, if needed, would be appreciated. Thanks for your consideration.
Dave: It's yesterday's news and i have confirmed it from both Barbara and a now departed board member. One last time and then i am done regarding her: When we talked (well after her being fired), she told me she had requested the Auditor's report in July of 2020 (so most likely 2019) while Jan was on her month off. Bill gave her both the auditor's report and accompanying auditor's notes.
While you lament how lame many board members lack of financial knowledge is, she was in a whole other class given her expertise. When she read both, she had numerous questions. That triggered her contacting other board members about how and why things were done the way they were. That sent several of them into a panic mode as they thought she was attacking the general manager.
That was hardly the case, she was asking questions which is what board members should be doing. Their role in oversight has been obliterated over the years as the GM has become God-like when it comes to their performance. The biggest single change this year should be in holding the GM accountable. Pretty simple really.
As far as Karen, the idea 6 board members can flush anyone the community elects is bad policy, short of gross negligence, theft or a breach of their fiduciary responsibilities. If you think i am wrong, look at the results of the her being re-elected in 2021. Clearly, members weren't happy about how she was treated.
That is exactly why i posted the story on TOSC about the Sun City West board member who was removed. 1000 signatures from the membership (on property by the way), and a recall election that sent him packing. That's the right way to remove a board member.
I would strongly encourage the new board to reach out to members well versed in accounting practices and financials and try and create a more user friendly reporting process. You've told us several times you had this very discussion with the previous GM and clearly some of the things that were done in the past were purposely vague and misleading.
“OUR” New 2023 RCSC Board Officers
2023 RCSC Board Officers Announced
The RCSC Board of Directors have selected the following to serve as officers for 2023:
President: John Nowakowski
Vice President: Steve Collins
Secretary: Jean Totten
Treasurer: John Fast
Committee Chairs, Co-Chairs and Community Liaison appointments for 2022 will be announced later this week.
OK Bill, the story slightly changes from it was about financial statements to F/S and Board member duties. Fine, but I would still like to know what issues she found. My guess is the it was a qualified statement because of the property company and the foundation which has always bothered me. In short, because of this the auditors cannot make an unqualified letter on the audit report. Won’t go into the jargon but I understand her reservation on that.
Interesting Board make up and will have my popcorn ready to see how things go. Hope they retain the parliamentarian from last year. Very smart woman and she was a big help to the now defunct by laws committee. Too bad they didn’t pass as you could have had a quorum of 800 instead of 1250 for the March meeting. You could have had the signing of petitions on RCSC property reinserted by March and you could have had the Board change by laws by a majority. I guess you reap what you sow. I do wish the new Board and officers good luck because they will need it.
I did find Tom’s comment on TOSC recently when he said that the by laws were defeated because it gave too much power to the members. If memory serves me correctly, there were comments from the same masses that not enough power was returned to the members. You find that as curious as I do?
Dave, the too much power pertained to allowing the collection of signatures on RCSC property. The board didn't want to allow the Members to have the greatest amount of access to the community.
The not enough power comes from the fact that the Members were still not allowed to cast a definitive vote at their own Annual Membership Meeting when the Articles of Incorporation clearly give that power to the members.
The Board and the Membership will never come together if the Bylaws continue to handcuff the Members. If the Board is doing their job with the best interest of the Members in mind, then they shouldn't have to worry about recall petitions!
Happy New Year!
Tom, at first back in the day I never understood that rule. After thinking about it a bit I could see how it could be abuse by having petitions being offered that had nothing to do with RCSC in the slightest. The committee discussed this for many hours try8ng to allow signatures without this going of the rails such as petitions for Save the Whale Shit or for political purposes outside of RCSC domain. It never was a question of allowing members access but petition content and behavior, I.e., blocking entrances, visiting clubs, etc. The Board was taken out if the process so if the request for petition fell within the parameters, a petition was issued with a number by management staff. You just have to be concise for the reason for the petition.
The reason it was removed prior to the vote was because a Board member would not vote in favor of the revisions because of this. Allen made it quite clear that he wanted it removed in order to have the revisions passed. He also stated that he would motion to have it included after the new Board was seated. That failed.
Annual Meeting, proxies and quorum probably took up most of the time and nobody died because of it. The quorum took up the most time as their would two factions on the committee, one keeping the current1,250 and the other to lower it. I was with keeping it as I believed lowering it to 500 would present problems beyond belief, especially if you figure in proxies. As you are aware I hate proxies for RCSC even though they are granted in the Article of Incorporation. Since the Article provide no guidance on proxies, people who have no idea what they are doing coupled with a low quorum spells big trouble, such as a small group with the majority of proxies are voting to impose rules for over 33,000 people who might not agree with it. Those are General Proxies and I hate them because they can be trouble, a fact I was trying to educate Karen on this but she seemed a little obtuse to the ramifications. We believed that a compromise of 800 person quorum with a limit of 10 proxies per person would prevent ugly scenarios. As voting on motions made from the floor at the Annual Meeting, RCSC must have to determine mostly if it is legal which requires research. The was a time limit on the Board responding. Again think of what kinds of crazy shit could be presented as then voted on and potentially pass.
The by laws should have passed as if future Boards like current has a majority, changes could have been made because it would only have taken a majority vote. Not exactly forward thinking by the Advocates, but not my problem now because the document I called a shit sandwich is back in force. Have fun storming the castle.
To anonymous who posted on 1/2 regarding financial statements, I would like to talk to you and compare notes. I will be at the Member exchange on Monday. If you don’t know who I am, either Bill, Tom or Board members can point me out.
To be very clear, the only motions that could be made from the floor at an annual meeting were motions to change the bylaws, nothing else. Beyond that, they would have been needed to be made and posted well in advance (as required by our documents). Hence, no surprise motions, they would have had to meet the requirements.
One final safeguard is found in the Articles of Incorporation: Motions made either by the board or by the membership cannot be in conflict with the Articles. While in my opinion the board has taken liberties in motions they have passed, both parties should be better versed on what the Articles actually say.
I guess if there is/was something Dave and i agree on, the current articles are indeed a shit show, the problem is the new ones didn't fix much of anything.
Bill, thanks for telling me that putting my life on hold for 8+ months was a total waste of time for no apparent reason. Appreciate that. BTW it is the current by laws that are a shit sandwich, not the Articles.
Thanks for the cleanup in aisle 5 Dave, of course i meant the bylaws; i consider the Articles of Incorporation a thing of beauty. They've only had less than a handful of changes since 1972 when the RCSC was officially named as our governing body (1968 since it was formed). By the way, the bylaws in 2005 were much cleaner and easier to read. It was our former general manager and all of us who served on the board that voted to turn them into the shit sandwich they became.
Sorry about those wasted 8 months of your life (not really), but you volunteered to serve on a committee that was set up to fail. Think about it in these terms; the day the committee was selected, the RCSC leadership had 6 votes in their back pocket, no matter what came out of their efforts.
The only no votes were Steve, John and Karen. The rewrite was less than membership friendly but because there was language allowing a smaller number (800) for a quorum and the ability to sign RCSC relative petitions on property, it was supported by the full committee. Then the shit hit the fan.
When it went for a vote, we were told 4 of the board (Sue, Mike, Darla and Dale) wouldn't vote for it unless the language regarding petition collection on property was changed. That started the collapse of the work document, which somehow failed passing even though the majority status members of the board got what they wanted.
If you are disappointed in the outcome, talk to the 4 who forced the change and then didn't bother to even pass what they demanded. For my dime, the new board can take their time and make the changes on a one by one basis and get it right.
Bill, Dave, and all,
I think it is pointless to banter about whether the current bylaws or the proposed ones are the worst. Both are seriously lacking! I suggest that the Board look at Sun City West's bylaws. They look professional while RCSC's
appear to be written by amateurs, which we were. As lay people, we did the best we could, but there are so many things to consider and the ramifications of changes. The SCW Bylaws would be a good template for RCSC to follow.
Janet Curry
I admit that I am a fickle follower of the Sun City blogs, but I would like to interject something. Leaders, RCSC BOD, that do not trust and the rightful will of people, RCSC members, are tyrants. When the RCSC BOD is completely rid of tyrants, the positive results will make all the endless negative discussions in all the SC blogs unnecessary.
The negative energy will be converted to positive ideas and solutions that will come from within all of you.
Bill P. and others have been on a mission to rid the RCSC BOD of tyrants with success. Congratulations. Bill, please don't lose sight of your other mission which is to increase membership involvement. Bring further forward the John Meeker in you. I know you understand what I am saying. People listen to you.
Sorry about the lecture. I am taking my weary butt back into my cave. I appreciate all of you. Happy New Year!
Hey Bob thanks for the kind words. I spent my first 15 years here being a cheerleader watching us abandon our tenets and the values that made Sun City unique. Going dark wasn't fun, just necessary. We saw the first fruits of our efforts today. Still a long road back, but we are at least are on the right roadway to get there.
Bill Pearson - I like that - "continue bringing forward the John Meeker in you." I concur. You have helped enlighten many members about the value of SC - history matters! Thanks for everything you've down to open so many eyes!
Why are some comments disappearing? Both here and on the Facebook page.
?
Owner deletion or someone just deciding it may not represent a certain point of view?
I thought if the purpose was to educate, that all points of view should be represented, as long as there are no libellous statements or obscenities.
Post a Comment