Discarded Sun City
Anthem Board Member
Nona
Tobin
Speaks Out in Newest
Community Blog
(Part One of Two)
(Part One of Two)
May of you are aware of the
unconscionable treatment by which the Sun City Anthem Board maliciously took it
upon themselves to remove Nona Tobin and subsequently replace
her.
Nona Tobin has recently
established a web site / blog that we HIGHLY recommend you subscribe to and read
on a regular basis.
It provides the community
information from one who has experienced the wrath of a fellow Board who have
demonstrated they care little about Nevada law.
The web site is called "SCA
Strong" and we highly recommend you subscribing to this FREE newest and
informative piece for the benefit of Sun City Anthem
residents.
SCA
Strong
Here is an
excerpt from a recent article published.
"On October 3rd
many of you received an email from Bob Goldfried regarding his opinion on the
upcoming recall ballot. I would like to take this time to address Mr.
Goldfried’s objections.
First, let me
state that there is a reason that a recall election process is in place. Just as
the election process allows the residents of this community to have a voice in
how the community is managed, it also allows that voice to be heard if they feel
it is being mismanaged.
In addition, the
recall election process SHOULD also prevent the Board from arbitrarily removing
another Board Member. However, as many of you know, the current Board unjustly
and illegally removed me from my position without a vote of the owners that
elected me.
Regardless of
what happened to me, the required number of members of this community have
legally filed petitions to recall three of the current Board Members and
therefore, the Community has the right to vote on those petitions. My goal is to
promote a fair system that will ensure that owners’ votes count, and that Sun
City Anthem has a board that acts lawfully to ensure fair equitable treatment of
all owners.
The following
(in italics) is the letter sent out by Mr. Goldfried.
I will in turn address each of his comments with my own opinion on the subject below each excerpt, and leave you to make your own decision.
I will in turn address each of his comments with my own opinion on the subject below each excerpt, and leave you to make your own decision.
“By now you have received a ballot in the mail regarding a recall of three SCA HOA board members. During the four years that I’ve lived in Sun City Anthem, it has become apparent to me that our HOA board members are elected in free and fair elections, open to any candidate who decides to run. We have an election every year, in May, alternately for three or four of the seven board member positions. If homeowners do not support current board members, those homeowners have been, and continue to be, free to find candidates who they do support, and to vote for those candidates, in duly held regularly scheduled annual elections. For that reason alone I am opposed to the recall, quite independent of who is currently on the board.”
Why should
owners not use the legal removal election process if more than 10% of the owners
legally call for it?
The law
governing how volunteers are annually elected to HOA boards also specifically
defines the only lawful way elected directors can be removed – by an owner vote.
For the reasons mentioned, the removal of a director is higher bar than getting elected in the first place.
For the reasons mentioned, the removal of a director is higher bar than getting elected in the first place.
NRS 116.31036
(1)
“…any member of the executive board, other than a member appointed by the declarant, may be removed from the executive board, with or without cause, if at a removal election held pursuant to this section, the number of votes cast in favor of removal constitutes:
“…any member of the executive board, other than a member appointed by the declarant, may be removed from the executive board, with or without cause, if at a removal election held pursuant to this section, the number of votes cast in favor of removal constitutes:
(a) At least 35
percent of the total number of voting members of the association;
and
(b) At least a
majority of all votes cast in that removal
election.
The lawful
method for calling for a removal election is also specifically
defined:
NRS 116.31036
(2)
A removal election may be called by units’ owners constituting at least 10 percent, or any lower percentage specified in the bylaws, of the total number of voting members of the association.
A removal election may be called by units’ owners constituting at least 10 percent, or any lower percentage specified in the bylaws, of the total number of voting members of the association.
Therefore, it is
legally required to conduct a removal election if more than 10% of the owners
call for one—whatever their reasons.
Their right to do that is protected and should be respected even if their chance of success (even without active campaigning against it) is small.
Their right to do that is protected and should be respected even if their chance of success (even without active campaigning against it) is small.
“Moreover, the recall petitions do not allege any criminal conduct, fraud or other dishonesty, or gross abuse of discretion on the part of the three board members.”
This is not
true.
There are many recent complaints filed with the Ombudsman which are now assigned to NRED investigators.
I filed four of them myself because of intolerable actions taken against me personally or that I observed being unfairly taken against other owners.
(In 13 years living here, I have never before filed complaints with the state against the HOA.)
There are many recent complaints filed with the Ombudsman which are now assigned to NRED investigators.
I filed four of them myself because of intolerable actions taken against me personally or that I observed being unfairly taken against other owners.
(In 13 years living here, I have never before filed complaints with the state against the HOA.)
It is not
surprising that you have the misconception that you do since there is active,
full-on corruption of the official record to conceal what’s really going on in
this community.
This involves all the directors against whom petitions were signed.
For example, the Board President and Secretary blocked a clear statement of my complaints from being placed on the agenda (as required by NRS 116.31087) and therefore dismissed my legal right as a unit owner.
The Board Attorney also allowed six members of the Board to meet without me, the seventh (and supposedly equal), Director.
This involves all the directors against whom petitions were signed.
For example, the Board President and Secretary blocked a clear statement of my complaints from being placed on the agenda (as required by NRS 116.31087) and therefore dismissed my legal right as a unit owner.
The Board Attorney also allowed six members of the Board to meet without me, the seventh (and supposedly equal), Director.
“While the law does not seem to require such culpable conduct as a prerequisite for recall, shouldn’t we, as responsible, mature people, require evidence of criminal conduct, fraud or other dishonesty, or gross abuse of discretion, before we take the extraordinary step of recalling fairly elected board members?”
This is a very
well-reasoned argument and fully supports my claim that my removal from the
Board on August 24 without notice or due process, and certainly not by 35% of
the owners voting me off in a legally-mandated removal election was neither
legal nor fair.
The six members
of the Board took actions in secret against me without even hearing both sides
of the issue, let alone indemnifying me or providing a defense or an open
hearing, as requested and legally required.
This unacceptable practice of deciding in executive session to take action against someone without giving them a chance to defend themselves is ALSO what happened when they decided to evict the Foundation Assisting Seniors.
I would argue that those actions alone were “dishonest” and a “gross abuse of discretion.”
This unacceptable practice of deciding in executive session to take action against someone without giving them a chance to defend themselves is ALSO what happened when they decided to evict the Foundation Assisting Seniors.
I would argue that those actions alone were “dishonest” and a “gross abuse of discretion.”
“Or are our annual elections simply a charade, a waste of time, subject to being reversed at the will of a dissatisfied minority, regardless of the merit of their claims?”
Having a removal
election does not make the annual elections a charade at all.
However, how I was removed certainly does.
However, how I was removed certainly does.
Six members of
the Board secretly voted to remove me from the Board seat that 2,001 owners had
elected me to fill just 116 days earlier.
Doesn’t that look like they just thumbed their noses at the 2,001 owners who voted for me?
Doesn’t that look like they just thumbed their noses at the 2,001 owners who voted for me?
“Shouldn’t we, as responsible, mature people, require evidence of criminal conduct, fraud or other dishonesty, or gross abuse of discretion, before we take the extraordinary step of recalling fairly elected board members?”
You are right.
They should not have kicked a Director off the Board without any evidence of wrongdoing, but they did.
They should not have kicked a Director off the Board without any evidence of wrongdoing, but they did.
The allegations
that I was making a profit from my board position were patently false and beyond
ludicrous, but more to the point of your argument, they should have produced
some evidence, filed a complaint against me, and gotten a ruling from proper
authority.
But, they didn’t.
They secretly decided based on no evidence that I was guilty and that they had the “fiduciary duty” to declare my board seat vacant immediately upon my being handed the notice of their action.
But, they didn’t.
They secretly decided based on no evidence that I was guilty and that they had the “fiduciary duty” to declare my board seat vacant immediately upon my being handed the notice of their action.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Tomorrow...Part Two
-
I am becoming convinced that the HOA Directors fall into the same category as does their Blog Mouth Piece: People in Need of Psychological help.
Sun City Anthem is one of the top 55+ retirement communities nationwide. We have over 7,100 homes. My wife and I have lived here since 2006. Until 1/1/17 the quarterly HOA was a VERY LOW $250/quarter. There were 2, 3 times when the quarterly dues was waived. Wasn't there a problem a few years ago that we had too much money in the HOA?
This year the dues went up about a $100 a year. Minimal given the size of our complex, the amenities and common areas.
It appears that some residents are not happy with this increase.
Name one thing that has not gone up since 2006. Our facilities and common areas are close to 20 years old.
Things break, wear out and become outdated.
First class amenities ate one of the reasons our home values are high and Sun City Anthem is a highly desirable destination with a low inventory of homes for sale.
Secondly a decision was made about 2 years ago to discontinue using a third party management company and "self manage". While I am not a proponent of this change fearing that the board would micro manage the general manager I am very happy with the professionalism of our GM and enjoy reading her monthly reports. Much more detailed and informative than when we were managed by a third party.
There appears to be a group of unhappy residents.
Though the rumor mill I heard they asked the board for things they did not receive. Hence a recall! I did not research this.
The recall letter and ballot leave many unanswered ???
The letter contained no explanations.
Residents I called knew nothing about it.
What I have learned came from on line searches.
The restaurant matter has been a fiasco since day 1.
Million dollar view but... why not find out what makes restaurants in other sun city communities like sun city grand in the Phoenix area work. If nothing will work, use area for something else and move on. The restaurant will never be a money maker for the HOA.
Let's act like adults and allow the board and staff to professionally manage our multi-million dollar asset.
If you don't care for the board, run in the next election. The American way.
This recall is a waste of time and energy, has created many rumors and "smarts" at a group of people with just too much time on their hands & and a lack of knowledge about how to maintain and manage a multimillion dollar asset that most of us enjoy and recognize how our facilities and common areas positively affect the value of our home.
John, it's impossible to address all of your comments, but in my estimation, in many cases, you seem to criticize certain elements of SCA, yet because he dues seems reasonable, everything else seems to be acceptable.
Have you ever considered they could be lower if we were more efficient?
I too have been here since 2005.
First, there is no argument as to the dues. It is a moderate amount now, and there is no argument as to the need for repair and maintenance.
That's what dues are for.
This entire recall is not about dues...now...it's about people and how they are governed, managed, and treated.
Let's begin with the General Manager and members of her staff.
Can you justify paying the following incomes:
1. General Manager-----$270,000
2. Community Association Manager...$105,000
3. Facilities Director---$154,000
4. CFO---$200,000
5. Activities Director---$95,000
Sun City Summerlin has 7,800 homes, 4 restaurants, and 3 golf courses. Their GM is paid $160,000.
Sun City Anthem has 7,144 homes, no restaurant, and the golf courses are privately owned. We pay nothing.
She was recruited by having provided her a private plane for her husband to fly her here, a $1000 dinner at Anthony's at the M Resort, and two days of interviewing there at a cost of over $1,100 when that could have and should have been done on our campus FREE of charge. Did you know we also paid $98 for a pot of coffee? All documented.
Did you know that certain members of the Board were barred from the interview process?
Are you a member of a club? Ask them how "life has changed" since the arrival of the new GM.
Do have any idea how entertainment is now affected? I suggest you contact an entertainer who would like to perform and the costs they now incur and the "strings" pulled to get a show. It would sicken you if you did. Ask the Clubs what they now have to go through to even put on a show for their members.
Let's talk about the Liberty Center. CCRs state you cannot authorize a major lawsuit unless you have a sufficient number of residents who agree to proceed.
No resident was given the opportunity in any way to dispute the merits of the lawsuit.
A vote was taken, the sufficient total was not received, but this Board went forward with the suit anyway. As a result, any person selling a home must disclose that major litigation is pending. That will affect home sales and if you think Pulte will just lie down and pay, you are in for a big surprise.
Now let's address some of the other actions of the Board.
To my knowledge, there are now about a dozen formal complaints filed for actions that have violated Nevada law.
Are you going to tell me that they had the right to remove a Board member without even allowing her the opportunity of a defense...a defense she is entitled to by law?
Are you going to tell me this election isn't stacked with corruption in the manner it's been run?
There has never even been a formal announcement to the community a recall exists...until they got some deceptive letter in the mail from a CPA firm no one heard of that most tossed. You think that was an accident or collusion in order to anything possible to stack a deck.
We are now $90,000 over budget in legal fees, and NONE OF THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE REMOVAL ELECTION.
Restaurant?
Come on, do you favor losing $40,000 in loans...YOUR MONEY... due to the "professionals" you refer to not being smart enough to vet the loans? That's 5 restaurants now, John. All gone.
...and now, they want another one, this time they WANT TO have YOU finance it through additional dues payments?
Have you ever known anyone who has used The Foundation Assisting Seniors? Do you prefer their space being vacated in order to have A BETTER DRESSING ROOM FOR ENTERTAINMENT?
It's in the budget, John. Have you ever taken the time to read it?
And the financial reports you believe are so accurate?
They have lacking SUBSTANTIAL information as to the manner in which they were prepared, the result of which will have to result in higher assessments to maintain financial solvency.
I suggest you look closely at the backgrounds of those who complain.
Most are EXPERIENCED and SUCCESSFUL business people whose knowledge is far superior to most; have legitimate concerns, and are NEVER APPROACHED for any kind of advice or guidance in financial matters.
Last but not least, those people who you believe have too much time on their hands CARE about the financial future of their community.
I have to ask you, what did you do for a living before you retired?
Many of us would like to see your credentials in order to examine if you are in a position to criticize those whose backgrounds have substantial financial knowledge and years of experience.
What amazes me most about your comments are the questions you have raised which essentially revolve around competence, yet you still maintain we have professionals doing the job...
...that a relatively low dues assessment justifies all the waste and manner in which people have been treated.