A Political Agenda, the SCA Security Patrol

and the Fate of the Information Building

we need to take a step back

Occasionally we can find instances where political agendas interfere with common sense. For example, take the so called security issue and the fate of the Information Building on Anthem Parkway. If Sun City’s past campaign history has told us one thing, various projects of one type or another seem to bubble up around election time to get our attention.  And so it was with the Board’s initial proposal to seek outside interest in leasing the Information Building for commercial purposes.

Then along came a suggestion for an alternate use by the Security Patrol—they could make use the building. This alternate use by the our Security Patrol was essentially offered as a counter measure to the Board’s proposal to lease the building. This proposal has been addressed and actively promoted during the current campaign for the Board with the suggestion that the Patrol has a real need for this building. With all due respect, I vehemently disagree.

The Security Patrol’s proposal for using the now SCA owned Information Building is that it would serve as a combination Neighborhood Watch Center and as a Community Information Center on Neighborhood Watch Programs. It would be occupied by at least one person, presumably during the daylight hours only, not less than 8 hours a day, or the equivalent to 14 four-hour shifts per week.

This week the Property and Grounds Committee first considered and then acted on this proposal, with a recommendation to the Board to approve such a proposal. While the Committee seemed intent on taking some agenda matters under consideration with a view to learning more before making their own determination, that was not the case here. I believe the Committee rushed to judgment and should reconsider this matter. I believe the Community would have been better served if the Committee had voted to not approve the Security Patrol's proposal to use Information Building.  

After carefully reviewing the proposal in some detail, I have concluded that the proposal lacks merit; had a political agenda rather meeting any real Patrol needs; fails to address a Patrol need; fails to address the real needs of the Patrol; unnecessarily depletes existing patrolling hours for unneeded information services; fails to recognize that patrol resources are woefully insufficient to meet current patrolling needs; places homeowners who might visit the site at unnecessary risk; and lastly, unnecessarily places the Association at potential risk for financial liability in the event of site-related traffic accidents.

More specifically, the proposal:

1. Rather than enhancing Sun City's security, will actually have the opposite affect. If adopted, the proposal will detract from the level of security we currently have.
2. Was initially conceived in an effort to counter the Board’s plans to lease the Information Bldg. for commercial purposes. With Pulte’s recent announcement that they would likely oppose any effort that would require the opening up of the Anthem Master Plan to accommodate a commercial site at that location, there was no longer any need for the proposal. Instead of dying, however, the proposal continued to be promoted as part of certain ongoing campaign efforts. The perceived needs of the Security Patrol were considered worthwhile.
3. Rather than meeting actual security need, would focus efforts on providing non-security and information needs by addressing a “neighborhood watch” center and serving related homeowner inquiries. While struggling to justify some productive use for this space, the Patrol already has a future home in which to conduct their business activities in the Community Services Building, space, by the way, which had been redesigned to accommodate their needs. Even allowing that “neighborhood watch” services are needed, then by all means perform those services in an environment at the Community Services Bldg. that is conveniently located and will not place homeowners and others at unnecessary risk (see Item 6 below.)
4. Fails to address the real needs of the Patrol by ignoring the basis for the Patrol’s very existence, namely, the level of volunteer efforts.
5.  Would make it even harder for the Patrol to meet their patrolling needs by reducing such efforts to meet non-patrol duties. To staff and operate the proposed Information Center, the patrol would have to divert 14 or more shifts per week away from patrolling services, shifts the Patrol can ill afford to lose. That the Patrol has long been understaffed has been recognized for years—the plain and undisputed fact is that there are insufficient volunteer patrol hours now to meet current patrolling needs at desirable manning levels. This has been a very serious problem for years and has gotten worse year after year as the Community has grown.  To now suggest that the Patrol can afford to reduce the level of patrolling coverage even further to man an Information Center does not make any sense for the Patrol or for the Community. A long-term Patrol objective has always been to place two volunteers in each vehicle 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Now with 3 vehicles authorized the Patrol is unable to meet that objective, let alone providing complete street coverage relying on just one person per vehicle. To meet their desired level of service, the Patrol needs more than 100 additional volunteers. For more information on this aspect and some data on the shortfall to mull over, CLICK HERE.  
6. Puts homeowners at unnecessary risk. As a potential resource center for homeowners, the location of the Information Building makes no sense at all given the existence of the conveniently located Community Services Building.  While the Information Bldg. temporarily served the needs of the Developer, it has been vacant for several years. During this period since then, the traffic load on Anthem Pkwy. has increased substantially as thousands of new homes and residents living in Sun City, Solera, Anthem Highlands and Maderia Canyon have been added to the surrounding areas. They all use Anthem Pkwy. Aside from the traffic load to contend with, traveling to the Information Center would be a real challenge since the site is accessible ONLY by traveling south on Anthem Pkwy. from Reunion. Then with only 2 visitor parking spaces, there is no guarantee that parking would be available. But the real problem to overcome would be in attempting to exit from the site. If a homeowner should decide to exit when oncoming traffic is present, homeowners will be at risk for an accident. Moreover, being required to enter the fast traffic will increase that risk substantially.   
7. And finally, the proposal will place the Association at potential risk of liability. Given the traffic loads on Anthem Pkwy., excessive speed, and an inability to make safe and controlled exits from the Information Bldg. in the presence of oncoming traffic, the Association may not be able to avoid financial liability for a potentially hazardous condition in the event of a tragic and, or deadly accident by a site visitor, driver or passenger in an oncoming vehicle going north or south on Anthem Parkway. The argument can be made that the existence of this Information Center created an unacceptable hazard under the attractive nuisance doctrine.  

In light of these several issues, the P&G Committee may wish to revisit this matter. In the event the matter is forwarded to the Board, the Board is encouraged to reject the proposal.