Sun City 
Anthem
Is Transition to 
"Self-Management in Trouble?
Part Two of 
Three

by
Jim 
Mayfield
Director
Sun City 
Anthem
Part 2
Improper Governance is the Root Problem
Background
Transition from developer control of governance of a Homeowners 
Association to homeowner control is commonly a difficult period in the life of 
an HOA. 
But, transition at Sun City Anthem has had periods that were 
particularly acrimonious and left a legacy of discordant stories and bitterness 
that impaired the ability of SCA to develop an organized governance structure 
focused on maximizing homeowner benefits. 
About six years ago, the Board, led by President Jim Long and comprised of highly qualified Board members, 
initiated a process to develop a documented philosophy and structure for Board 
governance at Sun City Anthem. 
The device used to create a documented governance structure for SCA 
was a Board Policy Manual 
(“BPM”).
I participated in the initial stages of the process as the chair of 
the Finance Committee and then as a Board member during the final stages of 
completion and adoption. 
I observed multiple admirable attributes of the 
process:
Patience
Thorough research
Collective participation by the whole 
Board
Broad community input
Respect for diverse ideas
Transparency
Professional input
The development of the Board Polity Manual took many months and 
spanned the work of two Boards. 
The end product—the BPM-- reflected the use of 
theoretically sound governance principles as well as the practical effects of 
compromise and recognition of the unique SCA culture. 
As a result of that hard work and process attributes described 
above, the adopted Board Policy Manual received widespread approval throughout 
Sun City Anthem.
Unfortunately, the implementation of the use of 
the BPM to achieve consistent, effective governance was progressively undermined 
by:
1. Unreliable management services provided by FSR (the former management 
company)
2. Misinterpretations of the Board Policy Manual by Board officers for 
self-centered personal reasons, and
3. The shift to 
self-management.
As the effectiveness and acceptance of the Board Policy Manual 
declined as a regulatory structure, the last two Boards attempted to patch 
observable defects on an ad hoc basis. 
The patches were usually created by a small 
group of Board members, appointed by the President, without substantive 
involvement by all Board members or affected volunteers. 
This approach left homeowners, volunteers, management, and certain 
Board members confused, frustrated and lacking confidence in the overall 
usefulness of the BPM for the governance of Sun City 
Anthem.
This brief history of the governance at SCA is presented to support 
the premise that neither management services provided by a 
management company nor management services provided by SCA direct employees will 
achieve cost effective, operational excellence until the root of the 
problem—inadequate Board governance—is fixed.
If Inadequate Governance Is the Root Problem, what is the Solution?
The solution to inadequate governance is straightforward. 
The next Board must develop and adopt an 
effective governance model reflective of the requirements of 
self-management. 
I deeply regret that the majority of the 
current Board members did not support a concurrent process to the implementation 
of a new management approach to address a new governance approach. 
This task will now fall to the new Board elected in a few weeks. 
I hope the next Board addresses the governance issue using the same 
methodical approach used to develop the governance model reflected in the 
original Board Policy Manual.
Specific Elements of a 
Solution
Changes to Organizational Concepts 
During the examination of whether or not to become self-managed, 
the Board was repeatedly advised that a successful transition to self-management 
would be dependent upon the adoption and implementation of a new governance 
model. 
What are the specific differences that need to be addressed under 
self-management?
Current Sun City Anthem Model
Board organized as a Management Team directed by President / 
CEO.
Board Officers provide direction to the General Manager, Community
Asssociation Manager, and Chief Financial Officer without Board action.
Asssociation Manager, and Chief Financial Officer without Board action.
Board focuses on Micro Management of operational 
activities.
Maximum transparency to prevent public debate and disclosure of 
Controversial issues or management breakdowns.
Needed Model
Board organized as independent governors with equal authority and 
accountability.
Board officers communicate decisions resulting from Board 
actions.
Board collectively focuses on setting policy, fiduciary duties, and 
assessing the performances of the General Manager, Community Association 
Manager, and Chief Financial Officer.
Maximum transparency to provide homeowners insight into controversial 
issues and actions to correct management breakdowns.
Changes to Commitment to the 
Community
A governance model must reflect the values and expectations of the 
governed—Sun City Anthem homeowners. 
Failure to do so inevitably results in a lack of support for Board 
governance and management operations, as well as, engagement in community 
service. 
Therefore, the governance model and resultant Board Policy Manual 
must reflect more than a set of rules. 
It must reflect five 
commitments by those who are elected to govern Sun City Anthem. 
1. Commitment to 
Equally Shared Governance 
The officers of the current Board, particularly the President, 
adopted a model that mirrors a management model (versus a governance model) in 
which the President and Treasurer make decisions without the 
effective participation of all Board members. 
This model subjugates other directors to a role 
of being treated as employees of the President and Treasurer for financial 
matters, who are expected to rubber stamp their decisions or “pound sand”. 
Those who support this model missed a key principle: 
The CEO and Treasurer of an organization 
report to the Board, not the other way around.
This model has resulted in homeowner disengagement from serving on 
the Board, committees, and service groups. 
It also encourages a culture in which homeowners perceive of 
themselves as a consumer of services perspective versus owners with 
responsibility. 
Evidence of this problem is reflected in the 
fact that:
a. Only approximately 500 
residents participate in community service in a community of over 12,000 
people
b. Only half of the 
homeowners vote in the Annual Board election or voluntarily return the age 
restricted community survey, and
c. Few homeowners 
volunteer for election to the Board or committee 
service.
2. Commitment to 
Effective Governance Under Self-management
The existing Board Policy Manual was created to support the role of 
the Board and its officers under a management concept organized for the use of a 
management company. 
While the transition to in-house (self- management) management has 
proceeded effectively, the Board has not taken actions necessary to implement a 
revised governance process that reflects its role and additional obligations 
under self-management. 
The lack of a process to evaluate and revise the Board Policy 
Manual has led to an ad hoc approach to development 
of a concept of governance. 
This approaches patches situations as they 
arise versus one to create a strategic, comprehensive, holistic concept for SCA 
governance.
3. Commitment to 
Management Oversight 
The current culture on the Board focuses on the concept that the 
Board is a “team” which should act in unison to support management and portray 
an “all’s well” perception in the community.
I support the concept that the Board and its committees must 
support the General Manager and other management employees. 
But, the Board also has a fiduciary 
responsibility to be an effective employer responsible for open, assessment of 
the performance of management. 
One example of the failure of the current Board 
to implement this concept is the fact that the Board has never adopted a job 
description for the General Manager or a documented, structured review 
process. 
4. Commitment to 
Law
Board members have a responsibility to understand and follow the 
law, including SCA governing documents. 
Using loopholes to circumnavigate the intent of 
laws to avoid transparency, public accountability, and homeowner rights must be 
unacceptable. 
Certainly, the probability of getting caught and being held 
accountable under the law should never be the basis for legal compliance. 
5. Commitment to 
Service
Being on the Board requires time and a commitment to learning the 
laws and governing documents of SCA. 
New members experience a steep learning curve in their first year 
of service. 
It also requires a commitment to resolve conflict and accept 
accountability for individual decisions. 
Being on the Board is not about personal authority or recognition 
in the community. 
It is about public service.
Good Governance Is a Practical Issue That Affects 
You
State laws and SCA governing documents provide your Board and 
General Manager with extensive powers to make decisions that are binding upon 
you. 
Failure to implement a well-designed system of governance that 
protects and serves homeowner needs leaves homeowners vulnerable 
to:
1. Management running SCA for the convenience and benefit of 
employees instead of you, and
2. Board members 
implementing personal agendas instead of community 
expectations.
As a result, homeowners will experience adverse 
effects upon:
Levels of service and quality of life within 
SCA
Costs of ownership (e.g., assessment 
costs)
Your property rights
Your property rights
Home values
In Part 3, I will present actions you can take to insure that the 
governance of SCA serves you.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
-
Visit us tomorrow for Part 3 of Mr. 
Mayfield's assessment of self-management.
Until then...
Got a comment?
Send it to us at:
 
 


Just want to "Thank Jim" for, taking his time, to provide our community with this informative narration.