Has anyone wondered what it looks like when a group of clear-thinking, commonsense people concerned about their property values and ever-increasing amounts of annual assessment money meets a group of destructively free-spending board volunteers and paid general manager with zero oversight in charge of millions of dollars that does not belong to them?
You have an RCSC Membership Exchange Meeting. You have fed up Sun City assessment-paying property owners with no financial protections according to RCSC bylaws, who spar with a volunteer board of directors and paid upper management who have all the bylaw protection they want and free power they need to spend this community further down the drain.
But the board of directors and general manager do not appear to see the current $600,000 RCSC deficit as a problem. Raising the annual assessments Sun City property owners pay seems to be their definition of fiduciary responsibility.
The difficult question now becomes, how can this one-sided, bylaw-protected inequity be changed to provide RCSC members with some financial protections? A couple of RCSC property owners have suggested a third-party audit of the RCSC financial and business records.
That is a great place to start and necessary to provide the transparent information Sun City property owners deserve. The board of directors seems to avoid that conversation. All they have are empty excuses like “we learned from our mistakes” or “things will get better” while continuing to employ the same upper managers and operate behind closed doors.
Some decisions appear to be calculated efforts to see who is paying attention. We are all too old not to know exactly what we are doing when making decisions that affect thousands of RCSC property owners and privilege card holders.
Until the RCSC membership as a whole cares enough about our property values, annual assessments and general RCSC governance, nothing can possibly change for the better.
Please send your comments to AzOpinions@iniusa.org. We are committed to publishing a wide variety of reader opinions, as long as they meet our Civility Guidelines.
Share with others