With 11 resident candidates and one Developer candidate running for four open positions on the Board, voting will be a challenge not merely for the candidates but for us residents as well. While campaigning has been relatively calm so, rumors are circulating that campaigning will not remain calm for long. As we enter the campaign in earnest, I see that the ACE-supported candidates are now flooding the community with a mailer.
This year we have two major blocks, ostensibly with divergent views that are running for the Board. They include:
The well greased, so-called new gang of four, actively supported by ACE, an acronym for Anthem Citizens for Excellence. This group has hopes of taking over the Board by placing each of their four candidates on the newly elected Board, thereby creating a majority bloc and effectively repeating what had been accomplished in the election of 2005 when the original gang of four was elected. This new group includes:
Then we have what some might call the Board-connected candidates, those who are currently serving on the Board or who are serving on an Association committee. This group includes:
1. Edward Burrell
2. Nelson Orth
3. Edward Rucinski
It will be very tempting for homeowners to support their friends and neighbors, or to either go with the so-called Board connected candidates, which for some may also include the Pulte candidate, or to go with the ACE-supported candidates. I see no reason for anyone to support the Pulte candidate, Jeremy Fritz, as pleasant and as affable as he is, since Pulte is no longer required to have a seat on the Board and Jeremy must win a seat by garnering your precious votes.
In your review of the ACE-sponsored and Board-connected candidates listed above, I believe it would be a huge mistake and a disservice to the Community to assume that either grouping of candidates by itself would provide us with the best candidates to assume a position on the newly elected Board. That line of reasoning is not only naive but is simply wrong.
While some are only too accepting of the new mantra that change is good, few are asking the question of whether the price we must pay for such change is too high in terms of the potential for adverse consequences to the Community and the qualities that define cohesive and effective leadership.
Your decision should be yours to make based on the information that is available to you, and not determined by some group on either side telling you how they would like you to vote. What has the appearance of machine type politics and voting has no place in Sun City.
While all of the candidates have many fine qualities to offer the Community, in selecting a candidate I believe it is important to consider the future and with that to consider who among the candidates is best qualified to lead us in the years to come.
In looking for future leaders, I had mentioned in an earlier editorial on this matter that in addition to having demonstrated an ability to lead, the candidate should also exhibit a certain undefined passion in seeking a position on the Board. In listening to and learning from the candidates, I have concluded that there is one exceptionally well qualified candidate above all others who can provide the Community with that kind of leadership the Community will need in the years to come. His name is Bob Frank.
Bob Frank. Whether as a Colonel the Air Force or working in private industry, Bob’s career is noteworthy and exceptional for his many leadership accomplishments. Bob has demonstrated a level and range of leadership abilities that few in the Community can match. Sun City would greatly benefit from Bob’s demonstrated management skills and from the experience gathered in his distinguished service to the country. Bob is keenly sharp, very personable and works well with others. As a proven leader, Bob has the communication and managerial skills needed to implement fiscal integrity and to achieve open, honest and respectful communications. For a listing of Bob's significant leadership positions, click here: Bob Frank
Mike Dixon. Mike, an independent thinker and scholar with degrees in Chemistry and Computer Science, is a highly principled person who is capable of providing the Community with the highest level of analytical problem solving skills. Mike was a systems analyst and project manger at Bechtel, the largest engineering construction company in the U.S. His personal experience as a General Contractor and owner and manager of an acclaimed San Francisco restaurant will bring a needed level of expertise to the Board. Both Mike and Bob Frank share a commitment to providing our Community with effective leadership and financial accountability. They share similar views about Trumpets and they desire to make community governance inclusive, with open, informed, and respectful dialogue.
Roger Cooper. Roger, a dedicated and valued volunteer, has been involved in every major issue facing the Community. Roger, with a major in accounting and actuarial science, brings a keen and needed level of financial accountability and expertise to the workings of the Board. As President of the Community Services Club, Roger, a deeply caring person, is constantly called upon to meet the ever pressing and wide ranging special needs of those who are in need. Roger's career has ranged from budget analyst to decade long managerial responsibilities, supervising and directing the work of up to 75 employees on one assignment, becoming a manager of a regional office staff together with managing several field offices, as well as being recognized for his special expertise and being called upon to implement many nationwide projects for HUD. Roger is very conscientious and hard working, deserves the Community's support, should continue his service on the Board and needs your vote.
Carl Weinstein. Carl, with a Masters in Business Administration, is currently the Chair of the Property and Grounds Committee, giving him an important insight and perspective into a key area of Association management. Carl has had over 20 years of personnel experience as a Director of Human Resources in both private industry and government, enabling him to work effectively with others on the Board to achieve common objectives. One of Carl’s more enduring qualities is his openness and his ready willingness to share his views on matters of Community concern. As I and Carl are fond of saying, Carl is very comfortable in telling it like it is, even in his capacity as a Committee Chair. Carl, demonstrating a flare of independence, goes out of his way to seek Community input and involvement in the works of his Committee. Carl also brings us a valued history of 7 years of service on other community boards. A vote for Carl is a vote for the Community.
In conclusion and to repeat, I heartily recommend:
Bob Frank
Mike Dixon
Roger Cooper
Carl Weinstein
What about the other candidates running for the Board? Here is my perspective on some of the other candidates who are running for the Board.
Rosalyn Berman. Rosalyn was a valued asset when she served on the Finance Committee, where her audit skills excelled and where I had applauded her efforts. However, I do not believe the Board or the Community needs or can afford to have what amounts to a surrogate on the Board for her husband, David Berman, who became upset over Board politics and abruptly resigned from the Board and abandon his duty to the Community in the middle of the 2006-07 term, at a very critical period in our history. I cannot help but think that were it not for David’s deep involvement with ACE, the placement of Rosalyn on the ACE ticket would likely have fallen to someone else. With all due consideration, it is my opinion that what David was so willing to abandon last year, he now wants to reclaim through the election of his wife to the Board. Otherwise, I see no real reason for her candidacy. In my opinion, Carl Weinstein would make a far better choice for the Community.
Barry Friedman. Barry is consummate gentleman, personable, loved and respected by all. Barry had been one of Sun City’s more significant and dedicated volunteer leaders. While Barry may deserve a seat on the Board, the question for me is whether the Community in the process can afford to unseat an equally qualified and dedicated volunteer, Roger Cooper, who had been serving on the Board. Under present circumstances, I do not see both Barry and Roger being elected to the Board. In my mind, it’s either one or the other, or neither. While I like and respect Barry, I think Roger makes better, more qualified candidate who can bring a broader range of needed experiences to the Board.
David Green. While David makes a valued and continuing contribution to the Community in a variety of ways, his efforts are not as well appreciated that they should be. David most recently had served as a member of the Finance Committee. Unfortunately, David is not well known and he appears to lack the kind of broad community support that I believe is necessary to get elected to the Board.
Phyllis Washburn. Another valued and dedicated volunteer, Phyllis may suffer (or benefit) from what appears to be her deep commitment to follow the lead of Favil West, at least based on her past actions as Chair of the Lifestyle Committee. Also, and somewhat detracting from her candidacy, Phyllis tends to incorporate an unwelcome and unnecessary degree of negativity in her campaign speeches.
I regret and apologize that I am not able to comment on the no doubt fine qualifications of Ed Burrell, Nelson Orth or Ed Rucinski.
Ron Johnson 22 March 2007
