A Day Late...

The dawn of directors supporting membership

Actually, this blog posting is several days behind our normal schedule, but you know the old adage, "if you don't have something good to say, don't say anything." Sitting in attendance at the first board meeting, I was excited by the prospect of the dawn of a new day. The Sun City Advocates worked hard to elect candidates who understood the importance of listening to the membership. Steve Collins, John Fast, and Jean Totten all campaigned on that premise/promise.

A very early assessment

We know it's way too early to pass judgment about where this will all go, but let's be honest here and reflect on their first month's effort. I personally was disappointed to see their appointment to the position vacated when Director Wilson quit. I guess the argument goes that Denny Nichols has a lot of experience (he does) and that he is a nice guy (he is). That said, this was the board's first opportunity to show us they were trying to grow the circle by embracing a more open and engaging process. They elected to do the same old, same old.


My bigger frustration happened at the January 27 board meeting where they got off to a rocky start. I loved the idea they brought back a motion to allow petitions on RCSC property. I hated the fact they jammed it through in one reading. There is a reason for two readings; allowing members' voices to be heard, for or against, is a basic principle that should only be done when there is a specific reason for it. There was simply no burning desire to pass this and waive the second reading. None!


The next two motions were even more convoluted. The first was a simple cleanup of what was presented on paper and the word "the" before Exchange wasn't included. It should have been but it evolved into a too-long discussion on a meaningless fix (and passed when they waived the second reading). The second motion was even more bizarre as the board argued about a motion over calling the co-chair on committees a vice-chair. After a friendly amendment was proposed and defeated (or was it passed?), they finally, after much discussion, withdrew the motion completely.


I know I am picking fly poop, but this board has enormous challenges before them. Getting lost in the minutia of picky bylaw language will do nothing to inspire confidence. All of that should be hammered out long before it hits the board meeting. We know there will be legitimate debate over issues, but they need to focus on ensuring when the motions come up for discussion, the membership has ample opportunity to share their thoughts as well.


Several ways to do that:

1.  Always have two readings unless there is a valid reason not to.
2.  Allow member comments during the course of the board meeting, not just before they are discussed and by those who sign up to speak.

There is no better reason why that matters than to look at the discussion during the second motion. While the argument started over the word "the," it evolved into whether informational meetings should be open or closed to the membership. No one spoke to the matter beforehand but I know for a fact, several of the members had differing opinions about it and wanted to voice their concerns.

3.  The board needs to consider allowing comments/questions at the end of the meeting by the membership. 

If you recall, the members were bulldozed last year with the threat of removing all discussion other than on motions if they didn't go along with the Board/Member, Member/Board, and now known as "The Exchange." We always endorsed the exchanges, but we disliked eliminating member comments at board meetings.

IMHO

My position, while I embrace transparency, is for the board to reinstate information meetings/work sessions so that when they do come before the membership, they know where other board members stand. Clarity on issues matters and more importantly ensures the issues they do bring aren't muddled or convoluted. Prior discussion will help them become more efficient. I know others in the Advocates aren't as open to the idea of any closed meetings other than "Executive sessions," which is the exact reason why comments from the membership help.

Share your opinions

You can watch the Board meeting from January 26 here. Several comments were odd, of particular note; one by a former board member and one by the GM. If you watch, see if you can spot them, and let us know what you think in the comment section below.


Finally, a friendly reminder to fill out the RCSC survey. While it has been highly criticized for length, quality, and on misspellings, it's the only thing we have to work with for now.



I know some of my comments will be taken as being hostile to the new board, but they're not. Virtually all of us who are members of the Advocates are cheering them on and want them to be wildly successful. Based on what we have seen so far, they clearly care about involving the membership and now they need to act on doing so. Using an old sports metaphor seems appropriate here; "It's not how you start the game, it's how you finish it."



As always, just one man's opinion.

Bill Pearson. Sun City Advocate and Sun City Historian