I'm not saying that these are bad candidates (although they don't share my views), just that I would have liked to see some candidates more representative of the majority of the population of Murieta, ie under 50 years old.  Until some of us can find the time to do what the historical board members have done, giving more time than they ever agreed to probably, (thank you for that) and running the community the best way that they can, I don't see things changing much.  Like any political body it seems to me that the board spends more time and effort defending decisions that may not have played out as planned, or other contributing factors have affected negatively, than time spent planning and implementing the future of the community.  Were it me, I would cut my losses and listen to the majority of the residents wishes and move forward.  Our cable system is antiquated.  Families (and the teenagers that make them up) are the norm.  The lack of a Community Center is a real issue.  Traffic is important.  Remember that since the balance of residents has shifted to families, that means there are more commuters.  Parks need improvement, streets need maintaining.  The list goes on and on and on. This a thankless job, and I applaud current and past board members, but I think we are due for a change.  Obviously that's easier said than done.  

There should indeed be more candidates and directors drawn from our very talented pool of middle aged folks. This is a constant refrain, and a valid concern. But only they can answer that call. The time demands of sitting on the Board and committees make it very difficult for non-retirees, and we should be very thankful for those non-retirees (as well as the retirees!) who find the time to make that sacrifice while juggling jobs and kids. I strongly recommend that the younger set (gee, now I really DO sound like a geezer) start working their way into the system by participating on a committee, which is a great way to start learning the system and the issues and to make a helpful impact with a less crushing demand on your time, and is the path to preparedness for the Board when you can find the additional time to make that commitment.

Soon comes the time for the annual sign-ups to apply for committee membership. There usually are sign-up clipboards set out at the annual meeting, and I'm sure that if you call the office (3500) you can arrange to get your name on a list for the committee(s) of your choice if you can't make to the meeting.

It's too easy to sit on the sidelines and complain (which is not to say there aren't things to complain about). Getting involved can and does make a difference. There's a ton of talent out there in this community. Please pitch in and help us make Rancho Murieta an even more wonderful place!

Been there done that (board and committees), wish I had a t-shirt.

It is incredibly difficult to carve out time for either. Committee meetings are during business hours (most under 50's are working and have kids). I have lobbied for after hours committee meetings for the past three years with no success. Fortunately, I was able to serve on the board for just over a year due to a flexible work schedule (and fewer home demands). Board meetings are later, but the time needed to actually be an informed and active board member (i.e., read your packet, lead committee meetings and special meetings) adds up very quickly.

During my time on the board, monthly meetings often went until 12 or 1AM. What a waste. I'm glad to see they don't go so long anymore. Nevertheless, our meetings have widely been inefficient and non-responsive. Some board members don't read their packets until the item comes up during the meeting. Much of the inefficiency also comes (in my opinion), from individual posturing (board and member alike).  But I digress...

Meeting times are set for the convenience of staff. That is a message that has been driven home to me and others repeatedly. The status of our representation will not change until the access for younger members is changed. Let's see that happen before we keep scratching our heads and ask "how come?" every election cycle.

Blake raises an excellent and very salient point. Committee meetings tend to be scheduled during the work day because one or two staff members (the employee who runs the relevant operation, and a secretary to take notes for minutes) attend. That scheduling in turn makes committee participation very difficult for members who have "day jobs."

This is another perennial issue which is inextricably tied to the difficulty in recruiting non-retirees for committee work and board seats, and is a huge obstacle to attendance of committee meetings by non-retiree residents who want to see what's going on in the committees, which is where one can learn far more about issues that may only get a few minutes of superficial discussion at a televised board meeting. Committee meetings very often are where the real "action" is. In fact, it often seems to me that directors who weren't in that committee's meetings often are not aware of the nuances of the deliberations that went on in committee and are often left to have to vote to adopt the committee's recommendations without full information on the twists and turns of the issue before them. So a strong presumption of correctness tends to attach to committee recommendations, and accordingly that is where an issue's fate tends to be determined.

Some directors manage to hold their committee's meetings either just before or just after normal office hours, so that working stiff commitee members and interested duespayers can attend without too much disruption to their own work schedules,and the disruption to staff's schedule is limited to shifting their normal working schedule a couple of hours one way or the other.

This practice should be regularized across the board by a formal policy declaration. Mid-day committee meetings, which are all but impossible for working stiffs to attend, should be abandoned.

Overtime costs are sometimes advanced as a reason why committees must meet during the regular office hours. But those costs can be mitigated or eliminated, and some amount of overtime cost would be worth it anyway to protect members' participation rights and to help RMA recruit more members into committee and Board participation. Inaccessibility of the process is a direct cause of this lack of board candidates and lack of member involvement which is regularly bemoaned but inadequately addressed.

The overtime costs if any of having secretarial staff put in the couple of off-shift hours could be avoided by simply using a tape recorder at the meeting so they don't have to attend. A secretary could then take notes off the recording and prepare the minutes during the regular workday. Or simply just adjust the secretary's work hours for that particular day and avoid overtime altogether. Lots of people work variable shifts. The "key person" staff person, who does need to be there to interact with the committee, is in almost every instance a salaried administrator who doesn't earn overtime. As the rest of us white collars and professionals know, part of the deal with a salaried position is fluctuating and occasionally long hours, it's what goes with the non-big bucks.

There's nothing evil about this traditional practice of scheduling committee meetings to serve the scheduling needs of employees rather than those of the members. It's just another of those "the way it's always been" things. But its priorities are upside down. It's time it changed.

I find this all very interesting - but I agree with all the comments that have been made - unfortunately, it isn't conducive to have those working join the board and be on committees - and that is very sad - regardless of age here, there are many of us that work outside of rancho murieta and even if we do work here, we cannot attend or become involved - also, if we are not a home owner we cannot participate - being a resident here for almost 7 years, my husgand and I are renters, even though I would personally like to be more involved (at the board level) - I cannot.

I understand having rules and regs - I understand that you need new faces and people involved in different committees - but because of the contraints, it eliminates those of us that have expertise in different area's, are willing to give of our time and help the community grow stronger and be the best it can be.

I personally have served as a Community Services Board member for the City of Hercules, was very involved in the Community Center that was built in that community (including the pool) ran for City Council,been president of numerous types of committees - and none required that I be a home owner in the community that I lived in.

So, it is sad that those of us that have alot of experience and are willing to help are not allowed to hold a board position. My husband and I pay taxes just like everyone else - no, I don't pay the home owner fees, but we do our very best to support this great community!

Just wanted to say a bit of something - We have chosen to make this our home, we love the community and do all that we can to help in the community - and I am sure there are others that have the same concerns as well.

I believe we need to take a positive approach to all the issues, and instead of just talking about things, we need to move into action - the youth of our community have a lot to offer.