| Author | Post |
|---|
wildfan
Member
| Joined: | Sun Mar 1st, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 25 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 30th, 2009 05:49 pm |
|
Coffeecup, I never intended to offend the shuffleboard player. I simply pointed out a facility that I have never seen in use. If you think that attitudes and interests don't change for different generations you are the naive one. Younger retirees are going to places with more modern and state of the art facilities. If you don't believe me have a look at the Kuentz exercise room and then look at the one in Sun City Festival. Where would you go? I know a young couple 55 ish that bought a home here, stayed a few months, sold the house and moved to Pebble Creek because it offered more newer excercise facilities and classes. The lady wante Pilates; not POM POM dancing. Look around you at the new people moving in , how many of them are under 65?
Don't get me wrong, I love SCW, have no desire to go somewhere else, and still believe that this is the premier retirement community. I also believe that if we don't continue to modernize and update our facilities it will become run down and will no longer attract retirees. We would eventually have to open the doors to anyone who would rent the empty houses. There is such a community between here and Sun City.
The PORA example of the new WII room at R H Johnson is and example of the problems in these bylaws. We got rid of some unused pinball machines and put in some WII systems which are being used a lot. That is a CHANGE OF USE which would be prohibited under the new by laws. WE cannot have resident votes every time one of these thing s comes up.
Thes by laws are a bad idea. Please vote NO!
|
Coffeecup
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 23rd, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 13 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 28th, 2009 12:42 am |
|
wildfan, I suggest you look into the club corner of the Rec Center News. There you will find Shuffleboard West an active club that's been around since the beginning. I'm having trouble understanding this argument that says todays senior's (55+) attitudes and cultures are different than my 70+? The average age of SCW residents have stablized around the early 70's and is expected to remain there abouts for the for seeable future. As older residents die younger residents move in. Thirteen years ago the SCW amenities were better than anything else in AZ and perhaps anywhere else. The only thing missing was water (oceans, lakes & streams). Our community remains by far the premier retirement community and all we have to do to maintain it. What additional improvements does SCW need to continue to attract the 55+ crowd?
You're naive if you think that board members leave their personal interests & agendas at the boardroom door. They crusade for what they think is best for them and then consider what may be best for the community. There are few who will vote for something they dislike for the good of the community. I suspect that most board members also want to leave office able to brag that this build or that computerroom was MY doing. I would trust the many votes of residents over the votes of five and no more that nine residents who happened to be board members.
Please vote YES on these bylaw changes so all of us can vote for or against expensive and perhaps unnecessary additions, changes and distruction of our almost perfect community.
|
wildfan
Member
| Joined: | Sun Mar 1st, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 25 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 27th, 2009 06:00 am |
|
HELLO LOGIC, it shouldn't matter which facilities a candidate uses. You don't bother to meet the candidates for the board (and there are numerous opportunities), but we're supposed to believe that you'll bother to educate himself to vote on expenditure issues. I don't think so.
That is just one of the problems with these bylaw referendums. Too few people will be interested enough to get educated and go vote. We must be able to adjust our facilities to meet changing attitudes and cultures. When Dell Webb started this community shuffleboard must have been a popular activity, we have a nice indoor facility. However, I've not seen anyone using it in the last twelve years. Interests change with different age groups, the community must be able to adapt to those changes.
The governing board is charged with making those decisions based not on their personal interests, but on the good of the community as a whole. I don't believe we can trust ourselves as residents to always vote for the common good of the community.
Please vote NO on these bylaw changes so that we can continue to have a vibrant, state of the art community.
|
wallfly
Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 22nd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 48 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 27th, 2009 04:08 am |
|
| alreaady did, thanks.
|
Coffeecup
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 23rd, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 13 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 26th, 2009 08:59 pm |
|
Thanks for the dialog wallfly. I suspect that I didn't convince you of anything and I still believe that residents should be able to vote for or against major projects that add, change or destroy any of our fine facilities. I also wish you a great day. Be sure to vote cause I sure will...
|
HELLO LOGIC
Member
| Joined: | Thu Sep 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 91 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 26th, 2009 03:28 am |
|
| On Mar 8th a post said the "facilities" are what brings people to our community. In the same post it was stated that MOST residents are not interested in refurbishing the facilities. This is confusing, which is it? Each candidate up for election should state which facilities they use and how they feel about expenditures and dues increases. This would make it clear to the residents how they may want to vote. We all don't know the candidates personally. I hope the resident proposal passes, if only to curb the runaway expenditures. If your independently wealthy,good for you, but in todays world need for all should trump want for a few.
|
wallfly
Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 22nd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 48 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 26th, 2009 02:30 am |
|
....They were elected..... and unless someone has better way - We elected them. I think that you would also have your own agenda if you were to be elected to the Board. People volunteer because they think they have something to offer.
I'm not sure who would suffer if those rooms weren't built, but they have been and are being used, fully - and they are nice. I think the golf courses and rec. centers are nice too.
As far as your golf buckets - well, I prefer to get passed those things. I can no longer play golf - but they may have had a reason to get the green labled ones - maybe the others were being stolen. The green is easier to spot, who knows - ask them the reason.
I guess I tried to understand what was so good 13 years ago that you cannot get passed it. We elected the Board, it was not appointed. Thank goodness they stood up to take on the challenge. We all signed on for this. We all knew it when we bought here. If you do not like the decisions being made by those that were elected, this is America and we do have elections. This is how it is done. Thinking back 13 years ago - even 25 years ago - there was discourse then, too - new buildings and improvements happened in SCW. Some people were not pleased with things then but,and life went on. They will never please everyone at the same time, but they are trying.
I have volunteered all my life and loved every minute - even when people didn't agree with me, I knew I did the best I could, at what I did. When you know your life is being cut short, you prefer to dwell on positive. I would rather spend my time using everything I can in this great little community - while I can. I am not looking back, I'm living and it is wonderful.
I'm sorry we don't agree and I hope you find some happiness and I wish the best for you.
Meanwhile, the elections will happen and life will go on.
|
Coffeecup
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 23rd, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 13 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 25th, 2009 10:05 pm |
|
Hi wallfly, Yes I did attend meetings and expressed my concern over the expenditures of some of the items I discussed below. Most would also expect that being a member of an official committee would provide additional weight to suggestions and concerns. Committees that had retired businessmen, marketing directors, golf courses managers, computer hardware and software managers just to mention a few asking questions, making suggestions and voicing concerns. All were ignored. SCW is full of experienced people and to think that nine elected board members have all the answers is naive. they all arrive on the board with their own egos, agendas and personal biases. I would trust the opinions (votes) of thousands even hundreds of SCW residents over nine board members. Yes I did see the splendid Del Webb SALES office. I also saw the offices that were used to manage SCW.
I asked who would have suffered if those rooms, offices and buildings were not built? I haven't had an answer yet.
My home is not being improved at the expense of my neighbors. If so I would expect them to have a vote on how much to spend.
You're right in your assesment of our golf prices versus those of a private course. That being said, it does not excuse the dramatic increase in the cost of playing golf here in SCW. Our golf courses don't have loans to repay as most private and public courses do. I paid $650 a year for unrestricted golf 13 years ago. It's now costs $2600. A 400% increase while inflation was a fraction of that. Both my wife and I paid and played unrestricted golf for $1300. It would now cost us $5200 to play. SS and pensions increase at the rate of inflation. Consequentially many golfers are finding themselves priced out of golf. I'll just mention one minor unnecessary expense that a past manager with the approval of his board authorized. Thirteen years ago there were white, off the shelve 5 gallon sand buckets on all the tee boxes. We now have 162 green special made logoed sand buckets. These buckets didn't improvement anyones game. I suspect that if the golfers much less tahn all residents had been asked to vote on new green logoed buckets we would still be scooping sand from the old white buckets and much money would have been saved and I would be enjoying the game of golf just as much. How many expensive $100K+ frivolous expenitures could have been avoided if the residents were able to vote.
SCW as is and as it was 13 years ago is a great place to live. All I, and most other residents want management and the board to do is maintain our facilities, golf courses, pools, parks and all other SCW amenities in mint condition. That's what they agreed to when they accepted a position on the board or as our general manager.
|
wallfly
Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 22nd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 48 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 25th, 2009 01:06 am |
|
Did you attend the meetings for that expense? Did you express your opposition to that expense? Those expenditures do not happen with out many meetings, and resident input. Were you one? If so, good, your voice was heard. By the way, did you ever SEE the Del Webb offices? They were splendid.
Thank goodness for the new rooms that house new activities. Isn't it wonderful that the vision Del Webb had is coming true. A place where we can be provided the space to do what we have always wanted to do with those who want to do it. We don't have to be in someoes garage to do the activity that we love. By the way, have you made improvements to your home? Keeping up helps the price of your home.
You were on the Golf Committee. Golf expenses sky rocketed? I have no idea where you came from but I can tell you where I came from, golf prices were at least triple (in some cases more) from what I see here. Do you golf? Do you use all seven courses we have here? Ah, do you use the private courses and wonder why you still have to pay for the 7 under the rec center? Is seems that the Golf Manager is doing what was suggested.
I am not sure of what you have a problem with in SCW.
People here have the option of using all of the facilities or none. But you knew that when you moved here. Time does not stand still.
|
Coffeecup
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 23rd, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 13 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 24th, 2009 07:05 pm |
|
Remodeling the RC offices twice after Del Webb left. Seems to me that if a for profit organization was able to manage SCW while building and selling homes without fancy offices we should have been able to simply manage SCW without those improvements. An unnecessary improvement that didn't improve any owner-members enjoyment of our community. Several $100s of thousands of dollars spent unnecessarily. Look around the various RC facilities and note the new rooms, offices and buildings that have been added since Del Webb left. Then ask yourself what and who would have suffered had that room, office or building not been built. In almost every case the answer would be no one except a few RC employees. Many unnecessary improvements to the tune of millions of dollars!
At least three computer t-time systems before they got it right. Thirteen years ago there was a paper t-time system that worked without any computers involved. I also remember that the golf courses were full all the time. An unnecessary expense of computers and the price of golf sky rocketed well beyond the pace of inflation. The result; loss of rounds of golf. I was on the RC Computer Committee and questioned each and every suggestion for new computers and phones. The only justification I heard was "we must keep up with technology." SCW was built out at that time and whatever worked then would have continued to work.
Perhaps you can explain the value of our Golf Manager. I was also on the RC Golf Committee. During that time all cost savings and income producing suggestions were ignored. Our Golf Manager is now implementing several of those suggestions. Could we have an unnecessary manager on our payroll?
What say you wallfly?
|
wallfly
Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 22nd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 48 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 24th, 2009 05:36 pm |
|
| What is an example of "New construction that is unnecessary to the original function of the facility"?
|
Coffeecup
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 23rd, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 13 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 24th, 2009 05:26 pm |
|
New construction that is unnecessary to the original function of the facility. In place of construction you could have equipment, systems and processes. And we're talking about $100,000 or more. Doesn't seem like much in today's world with trillions being spent every couple of days by the federal government, but a $100K here a $100K there, pretty soon it too adds up to real money.
|
wallfly
Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 22nd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 48 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 24th, 2009 04:38 pm |
|
Question, Coffeecup.
What is an improovement in your thinking?
|
Coffeecup
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 23rd, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 13 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 24th, 2009 07:17 am |
|
I agree that community apathy is a cause for concern. However we are speaking about building new or destroying existing facilities not maintaining our swimming pools, golf courses or any other existing facilities. The proper care and feeding of our facilities will not be impacted by this proposal only the unending and many unneeded expensive improvements.
I'm not sure what you are basing your claim on that we are having trouble attracting younger retirees. Perhaps you could direct me to the local communities that have anything close to the amenities we offer. Your suggestion that we will become a "non age restrictive rental community" is just a little bit over the top.
We had several 15% increases recently while inflation was a third of that. Most residents understand that costs increase as inflation increases. The large increase in dues is due to unnecessary improvements not the cost of ongoing maintenance. we all understand that air conditioners need to be replaced, roofs need fix'in, trees trimmed, golf equipment repaired or replaced. We didn't need a new phone system, t-time system or computer system when the current ones worked. Past improvements that cost several hundreds of thousands of bucks. I could remind you of many more unnecessary improvement over the past 13 years that I have been a resident. Why are you and the other opponents of this proposal afraid of allowing the owner members the right to vote on large scale improvement?
|
wildfan
Member
| Joined: | Sun Mar 1st, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 25 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 23rd, 2009 09:52 pm |
|
One of the main things wrong with this proposal is that we have too many residents who don't care about the community as a whole. Too many people in SCW think they shouldn't have to pay to support the fa ilities they don't use. If items come up to a vote of all residents we will have too many saying "I'll vote no because I don't use the ________ (swimming pools, tennis courts, pickleball courts, golf courses) and I shouldn't have to pay for repairs or upgrades. "
We already have trouble attracting the younger retirees because the facilities in other retirement communities are more attractive. We must attract new residents if we want the community to survive long term. If not we'll become a non age restrictive rental community.
There are already provisions in the bylaws to limit what the board can do, and limiting to what extent dues can be increased. These new provisions are too restrictive and are poorly written to the point of being vague about what they actually mean. Many residents seem to think that fees should be the same as they were when they came to SCW. Nothing costs the same as it did a few years ago, and there is no reason to believe that our facilities can be maintained for the same costs as they were in the past.
|
Coffeecup
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 23rd, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 13 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 23rd, 2009 09:21 pm |
|
I wonder what the impact to past projects would have been if this petition had been proposed and passed following Del Webb’s exit? I suspect many projects would not have been approved; several increases to dues would not have been necessary, just as many homes would have been bought and sold and we all would have enjoyed the well maintained facilities just as much.
I'm not sure that this petition is written without some problems in it. However, the essence of it's goals seem to be right on. We all bought into SCW with the existing facilities and with the expectation that they would remain in a well maintained condition. What is wrong with several thousand owner members deciding if an expensive change or an addition to our facilities is justified? Better a thousand owner members voting yea or nay versus nine board members.
The bottom line seems to be some reluctance on the part of the Board and Management to allow the great-unwashed owner-members to decide how to spend their money. A “we know best”, attitude shared by most bureaucrats, whether in Washington, Tucson or Sun City West.
|
Seibert
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 9th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 9th, 2009 05:54 am |
|
Relative to the SCW petition to require membershp approval for expenditures of $100,000 or more, consider this; the membership of each club is a minority of the total population of SCW. Most residents are not interested in refurbishing tennis courts, redecking the swimming pool areas, or buying new excercise equipment, etc. - all major expenses. There are hundreds, or maybe thousands of us who complain (brag) that we do not use any of the facilities, so why should we pay Rec. fees? I suspect that if this petition is approved, no major expense will ever be approved. Our facilities are what brings people to our community and maintains our property values. We elect the Rec. Center board to make these decisions.
Wlliam Seibert; 14713 Ravenswood Dr. 623-214-9217
|
wallfly
Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 22nd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 48 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 19th, 2009 08:21 pm |
|
Love it!
with you all the way!
|
snuffysmith
Member
| Joined: | Wed Nov 23rd, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 13 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 19th, 2009 07:26 pm |
|
I can't believe you're waving the American flag around these cry babies. It's not my American way to act like a spoiled brat and do ANYTHING to get what I want.
What a hypocritical proposal. A petition that says the board can't do anything over $100,000 without resident approval, but if they'll agree to spend an extra $200,000 to save a few tennis courts we'll forget the petition.
You speak of the board like some evil body that has been in power forever. Not true, one third of the board turns over every year. Any resident can run for the board. If you don't like what they're doing put you name in the hat for a board seat and change it.
Very few residents show up to vote at board elections. Even fewer bother to attend meetings. If this proposal flies the whole community will wind up being manipulated by a few special interest groups.
|
wallfly
Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 22nd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 48 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 19th, 2009 04:02 pm |
|
Where have you been? This has been discussed for how long?
An extra $200000 for some of us is a lot to spend for a few of you.
BTW - your tennis courts belong to all of Sun City West.
|
Robert Hoffman
Member
| Joined: | Thu Feb 19th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 19th, 2009 05:15 am |
|
February 18, 2009
Open letter to Sun City West Residents
If you are an American, the very least you can do is stand up and be counted with your fellow Americans. Most of us despise Socialism, yet it keeps trying to captivate us even in our private lives.
There are many definitions of socialism and one of those definitions implies simply taking of something from one and giving it to another.
Getting to the point, our Sun City West Board of Directors has taken upon itself to reduce a portion of what we already have and give that portion to another. There was no survey of resident opinions and it was shoved down our throats with the expectations of no objections or challenges.
We should be thanking and supporting Bob Mansfield for his proud stand up American challenge to the Board and their aggression in this respect. Taking away three of our tennis courts and giving that space for 12 pickle courts goes against why we choose to live in Sun City West.
Our dictatorial Board has chosen to stand ground and hold to their decision. With that kind of thinking, we as residents are forced to either accept what the Board decides or fight back in any way we can.
Bob Mansfield did just that by petition. The board was crying the blues until they got a legal opinion on the forms used for the petition. To the Board: Why not just drop this unfair decision which is unpopular and build the 12 pickle ball courts at R.H. Johnson or Beardsley where there is plenty of room and provides for expansion. Both clubs would be very happy with that decision. Yes, it would cost $200,000 more but it is our money and we don’t want this kind of conflict in the community. Why be penny wise and pound-foolish? God only knows that the Board has done that a few times in the past.
If the Board would back down, I am sure that the petitioners would be willing to withdraw their fight.
Otherwise, we can expect similar decisions from the Board in the future.
Perhaps they will take away 25% of space from the computer club and give it to the new “walkers club”? Maybe they would take away 3 days per week from the woodworkers club and give that time and space to the new “newspaper readers” club? How about removing the bleachers at the softball field for extra parking spaces? Etc.
Enough said. It is now your decision to support or not to support this socialistic idea. Is another $200,000 too much to pay for a peaceful community?
Robert Hoffman
Resident of Sun City West
|
dlk
Member
| Joined: | Sun May 6th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 19 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 15th, 2009 12:18 pm |
|
Where Do I Sign?
I'm all for getting on the band wagon here.Our so called general manager has no clue what it's like to live on a fixed income.I'm tired of these fees going up every year ,you would think in hard economic times,that someone would turn off the flow to this guy.His concepts are out of touch with true reality.
This is our money he is spending and I sure want a vote on how and where it's spent.The 100K cap limit, still gives him more than he needs.To see the bearsley rec. project of 700k is going to far.This addition was totally uncalled for and was a waste of money.I also think that this project price tag was way to high,in what we actually got, leading me to believe that there might be other issues here,we are not allow to see.
I would recommend a state full aduit of SCW,I no longer trust what goes on behind closed doors.When people that,live here are turn away from these closed door meetings, leads me to believe that all is not fair in SCW. This is a small community and our voices must be heard in order to maintain some form of control of how our money is spent.
DLK
|
wallfly
Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 22nd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 48 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 14th, 2009 10:56 pm |
|
Oh no ..... are we starting that? Save it for another day when you need to complain.....
This petition is no more than a few people who are upset that they can no longer play tennis at what was thought to be their exclusive rec center.
There are no less than 107 "special interest groups" in the community. Right 107 chartered clubs......all with a special interest. The way I see it, each has a place to meet provided by each of us, through our fees....just like Metal, Wood shop, Men's Club, Art, Weaving, and even Tennis, to name a few. this "interest group" wanted their own place too. So, instead of spending more $ to build new space, the board decided to convert part of the Palm Ridge courts from one racquet sport to another and spend less money. Hmmmmmm, interesting idea..... saving money and providing for one more" interest group". Because a few people did not want that other "racquet sport", they want to take their ball(or racquet) and go home...
PEOPLE, there are so many REALLY BIG PROBLEMS out there!
The RCSCW is not one of them! Get real!Last edited on Sun Feb 15th, 2009 01:42 pm by wallfly
|
leaderx7
Member
| Joined: | Wed Sep 24th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 22 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 14th, 2009 09:29 pm |
|
Without approval of this petition to curb runaway spending by the RCSCW board ,SCW will be in the same situation as the nation is with a congress spending until the country is bankrupt. Residents of SCW need to get active in the selection of board members as a way of having their voices heard in the future.
|
wallfly
Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 22nd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 48 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 14th, 2009 02:50 pm |
|
Were you at the meeting?
Sorry, happy house hunting in Happy Trails....
|
HELLO LOGIC
Member
| Joined: | Thu Sep 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 91 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 13th, 2009 03:16 pm |
|
| I didn't want to live near the YMCA. When I puchased here, it was within my means. The specialty groups,golf and now pickle ball are running people out of here. Look at the for sale signs. Too much change, Happy Trails is looking good.Still don't know "WHERE TO SIGN THE PETITION".
|
Milo
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 12th, 2009 09:02 pm |
|
For a family of two, the cost of joining a YMCA for one year is around $75 per month, senior rate. That's $900 bucks per year! Now............which would you chose? For those of you that think we should only pay for services we use, it's time to take a little inventory of what we are getting in these fine communities. It's cheap!
If it puts a strain on your budget, take a look at Happy Trails or other areas. Always live within your means.
|
tommader
Member
| Joined: | Tue Feb 10th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 3 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 12th, 2009 05:55 pm |
|
| Your idea would be bad, but the petition only calls for a member vote if the Board wants to replace a pool with a rifle range or replace a tennis court with a pickle ball court and that cost would exceed $100,000. Oh, and by the way the petition also calls for member approve if the Board wants to build an ice rink or condo or a roller rink for any group even tennis plays, However, the Boards believes they have that right now.
|
snuffysmith
Member
| Joined: | Wed Nov 23rd, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 13 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 12th, 2009 04:08 pm |
|
WOW! What an ill conceived idea. Perhaps we should take this same logic to our federal government and require a vote of all citizens prior to any expenditure over $100,000. This sounds to me like the small self serving tennis group is still trying to stop the picklesball courts.
We elect a board to manage this community. If you think they are doing badly, sign up to take a seat on the board and run an election based on "no further enhancement to facilities".
Things wear out. Priorities change. Our board must have the authority to react to these issues.
Cost for everything are rising. You can't join a decent health club or tennis club for what we pay in rec fees.
|
HELLO LOGIC
Member
| Joined: | Thu Sep 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 91 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 11th, 2009 04:43 pm |
|
| Tell us where to find this petition, so we can sign and tell our friends who may not have computers or read these blogs. Thanks.
|
leaderx7
Member
| Joined: | Wed Sep 24th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 22 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 11th, 2009 05:35 am |
|
Finally someone has come up with an idea/process that, if approved by the voters, will not only slow down RCSCW Board willy nilly spending large sums of money unchecked but will negate reasons for annual fee increases which are also pooly thought out by the board. By the way I signed the petition with my eyes wide open.
|
HELLO LOGIC
Member
| Joined: | Thu Sep 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 91 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 10th, 2009 10:54 pm |
|
| WOW! I'm impressed, unfortunately this forum doesn't get enough readers to help in your quest. The board has had things their way for so long no one even trys to question the decisions. They will tell you one thing and do another, or if you do question, they'll vote in a rule change. GOOD LUCK, I hope you can do something to turn the "business as usual" around.
|
tommader
Member
| Joined: | Tue Feb 10th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 3 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 10th, 2009 09:06 pm |
|
Open letter to Sun West City Residents: Feb 10, 2009
It is apparent the Governing Board wants to destroy our facilities and use the maintenance fees for their own purposes. Palm Ridge residents are the current victims. What facilities and who will be next? Concerned citizens have petitioned the Board to make clear in the bylaws that destruction of our current facilities, or creation of new sports facilities, requires approval of the membership.
The Board contends it would not be able to do business as usual if they were required to seek membership approval in order to destroy any of the existing facilities and to use the membership fees to build new sports facilities. Apparently, the Board does not believe that they have a fiduciary responsibility to maintain and preserve the existing facilities (as required by the bylaws). Nor does the Board see anything wrong with misusing the association fees to build and maintain new facilities without asking the membership for approval. Apparently, using the membership fees to maintain and improve the existing facilities( as required in the CC&Rs) is not high on their priority list.
It appears the Board wants to ignore the CC&Rs and the bylaws of the association and use the membership fees paid by 30,000 members to destroy the tennis facilities at Palm Ridge so they can build a "premier" PICKLE Ball facility for the use of a small special interest group. If this is business as usual, I want it to STOP. I also want it made clear to the Board that the purpose of the recreation fees is to maintain and improve the existing facilities, not to build special interest facilities without getting general approval of the people who are financing these new facilities.
Even though the Board has collected fees to maintain and improve the existing facilities, it has chosen to ignore the repairs and allowed the Palm Ridge tennis courts to remain in poor and unsafe conditions for years so they could apparently use the maintenance money to build pickle ball courts. Neither the general membership nor the Palm Ridge residents were asked if this was acceptable.
I am afraid that the Board could easily conclude that this special interest group could use a health spa and resort to relax in after the pickle ball games. “Business as usual”, I suppose, would begin with destroying the Palm Ridge pool and letting contracts for development of a resort and spa. All of these amenities would be financed by membership fees now and in the future. Ethically speaking, the Board apparently sees no restrictions against this scenario or their current actions in the CC&Rs or the bylaws.
This situation frightens me. Nine people control a $19 million budget based primarily on the fees collected from 30,000 residents and they believe that the governing documents do not restrict how that money is used and when the membership must approve expenditures for NEW facilities. More than 1300 people must also be concerned, since they signed the petition to clarify the bylaws for the Board.
The petition only seeks to make clear what any reasonable home owner would expect. Namely. 1. That destroying or not rebuilding damaged facilities requires membership approval; 2. Construction of facilities for new uses or new functions that exceed $100,000 requires membership approval. (This does not restrict the Board's ability to maintain and improve the existing RECREATIONAL FACILITIES at ANY COST). It however, does prevents misuse of recreation fees and controls the whims of the Board to grant favors to special interest groups at the expense of the members without their approval.
Tom Mader
SCW Resident
|
Current time is 06:14 am | |
|