Log in

Nichols: Board needs to quit personal agendas


Hello fellow RCSC members. This is Denny Nichols, former president of the RCSC Board. I was privileged to serve on the RCSC Board during the time Fairway was rebuilt, so I know firsthand how difficult it can be to represent all the members of RCSC. I was honored to be appointed to serve on the board last year. Being a board member is never easy, but my experience tells me if you are open, honest, and ethical about your dealings and try not to push an individual agenda on the membership things work out just fine.

Last September, I wrote about discovering that President Fimmel had secretly ordered the editing of the board meeting video before it was posted on the website. Without rehashing the details, I can say I was not satisfied by many of the board members’ blind eye responses to this clear ethical violation. So, now here we are in 2024 and the board officers and management have once again been playing fast and loose with their ethical and fiduciary obligations and once again got caught. Enter stage right “librarygate,” exit stage left two more directors. The board has once again set up the perfect us against them scenario and is circling its wagons, hunkering down for the upcoming fight.    

Last year, I shared my opinion with the board members that there is no such thing as a secret in Sun City. In my long experience with leading the RCSC board and several committees, I never found it worthwhile or possible to keep secrets from our members.  While there will always be a few negative emotional reactions to any well-reasoned, well-communicated proposed action, these fade quickly, and most of our members appreciate the good faith volunteer effort that goes into a rational well-reasoned proposal.

Unfortunately, just like before, the current board leadership has spent all their efforts trying desperately to control the outcome (pickleball, theater, Best Friends Dog Club) and demonstrated they are willing to do just about anything and “bend” any rule to achieve their agenda. So, here we go again – spend another $500k plus with an architectural firm to find out we don’t like the current board’s plan any better than we liked the previous board’s plan.

How about we break this spin cycle and use some of that money to have a true experts independently develop options and plans for the members to consider?