After reading the response from Association President, Rex Weddle, it appears that there is conflict between NRS 116, Sun City Anthem CCRs, and the December, 2016 issue of the Spirit magazine.
....conflict that requires CLARIFICATION.
NRS 116
Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, the association may commence a civil action only upon a vote or written agreement of the owners of units to which at least a majority of the votes of the members of the association are allocated.
Sun City Anthem CCRs
Such action shall require the vote of owners of 75% of the total number of lots in the Association or Neighborhood Association, as appropriate.
Spirit Magazine (December, 2016 issue) Page 14
"The statue indicates that a minimum of 50% of ALL SCA homeowners cast a vote in favor to ratify the lawsuit and the BOD's decision. This means that 50% of the homeowners need to submit their vote."
So, which is it?
Note the Spirit claims that all that is needed to go forth with the Pulte law suit is a simple majority of those who cast a ballot...
...as long as at least 50% + 1 unit owners vote. (3573).
If the 'rules" shown in the Spirit Magazine are those that are used, this appears to violate BOTH NRS116 and Sun City Anthem CCRs.
In addition, the Spirit article did NOT PROVIDE any opportunity in which to have any CON statements made, another VIOLATION of NRS 116 that requires equal space for both sides of the argument.
It was previously noted that an EBLAST (not all people receive them) sent on November 11, 2016 stated that any CON arguments be submitted no later than November 9, 2016...
...two days AFTER THE CLOSE of opportunity to have them published, hence no CON arguments in neither the Spirit nor the letter from the Law Firm.
The Spirit article also DID NOT STATE that any SELLERS OF SCA home sales MUST DISCLOSE ANY PENDING LEGAL ACTION brought by Sun City Anthem.
Mr. Weddle, in my opinion, in order to "sell" this law suit, has both INTERPRETED THE LAW IN A BIASED MANNER, VIOLATED BOTH NRS 116 and SCA CCRs and allowed a BIASED POSTING in the Community Sponsored Magazine, The Spirit.
In my FURTHER opinion and that of many others in Sun City Anthem, that this Board and management have UNDULY made a BIASED ATTEMPT to obtain approval for a civil action.
The "trust factor" of this decision has been severely violated, and as a result, I personally cannot in any way support this civil action.
We have made numerous attempts to obtain the "full story" in order to arrive at an intelligent decision, yet the actions of Board and Association Management have ONLY provided information THEY WANTED YOU TO HEAR.
We have also found out that if you previously voted, and wish to CHANGE YOUR VOTE, YOU CAN DO SO.
Simply go the Administration Office in Anthem Center, and request a new ballot.
Also, ASK THEM to obtain the original ballot you cast, and HAVE THE INDIVIDUAL AT THE ADMINISTRATION DESK VOID THAT UNOPENED BALLOT.
I would also suggest YOUR PHYSICALLY WATCHING THE INDIVIDUAL VOIDING THE INCORRECT BALLOT....
...in lieu of the questionable 2016 Board of Directors election results THAT INCLUDED:
1. the many questions that remained after a number of unit owner ballots were supposedly misplaced and left the premises of Sun City Anthem.
2. a voting machine counter that mysteriously MALFUNCTIONED.
.......and, exactly HOW MUCH would this lawsuit cost us? The article in the Spirit states: "Therefore, the Association is not paying the law firm unless the attorney is successful in obtaining funds in this matter for the association"
Smoke and Mirrors: IF the attorney IS '...successful in obtaining funds in this matter...' HOW MUCH OF A CUT DO THE ATTORNEYS GET? HOW MUCH IS LEFT TO REPAY US?....AND if you read the fine-print, if we lose (a very definite possibility considering Pulte's history in such lawsuits) WE MAY HAVE TO PAY PULTE'S LEGAL COSTS. Either way, WE will have to pay someone AND we will NEVER see the entire Liberty Center repair amount returned to us
The proposed lawsuit is a classic "Throwing good money after bad"
At best, the Board's obvious push for this lawsuit reflects a convenient interpretation of Nevada Law and our CCR'S....at worst it reflects some unknown nefarious reason(s) which will never be revealed
A neighbor went to Ms. Seddon's office asking how she could change her vote since she had changed her mind and was told she could not change it once her vote had been submitted.
After reading the response from Association President, Rex Weddle, it appears that there is conflict between NRS 116, Sun City Anthem CCRs, and the December, 2016 issue of the Spirit magazine.
ReplyDelete....conflict that requires CLARIFICATION.
NRS 116
Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, the association may commence a civil action only upon a vote or written agreement of the owners of units to which at least a majority of the votes of the members of the association are allocated.
Sun City Anthem CCRs
Such action shall require the vote of owners of 75% of the total number of lots in the Association or Neighborhood Association, as appropriate.
Spirit Magazine (December, 2016 issue) Page 14
"The statue indicates that a minimum of 50% of ALL SCA homeowners cast a vote in favor to ratify the lawsuit and the BOD's decision. This means that 50% of the homeowners need to submit their vote."
So, which is it?
Note the Spirit claims that all that is needed to go forth with the Pulte law suit is a simple majority of those who cast a ballot...
...as long as at least 50% + 1 unit owners vote. (3573).
If the 'rules" shown in the Spirit Magazine are those that are used, this appears to violate BOTH NRS116 and Sun City Anthem CCRs.
In addition, the Spirit article did NOT PROVIDE any opportunity in which to have any CON statements made, another VIOLATION of NRS 116 that requires equal space for both sides of the argument.
It was previously noted that an EBLAST (not all people receive them) sent on November 11, 2016 stated that any CON arguments be submitted no later than November 9, 2016...
...two days AFTER THE CLOSE of opportunity to have them published, hence no CON arguments in neither the Spirit nor the letter from the Law Firm.
The Spirit article also DID NOT STATE that any SELLERS OF SCA home sales MUST DISCLOSE ANY PENDING LEGAL ACTION brought by Sun City Anthem.
Mr. Weddle, in my opinion, in order to "sell" this law suit, has both INTERPRETED THE LAW IN A BIASED MANNER, VIOLATED BOTH NRS 116 and SCA CCRs and allowed a BIASED POSTING in the Community Sponsored Magazine, The Spirit.
In my FURTHER opinion and that of many others in Sun City Anthem, that this Board and management have UNDULY made a BIASED ATTEMPT to obtain approval for a civil action.
The "trust factor" of this decision has been severely violated, and as a result, I personally cannot in any way support this civil action.
We have made numerous attempts to obtain the "full story" in order to arrive at an intelligent decision, yet the actions of Board and Association Management have ONLY provided information THEY WANTED YOU TO HEAR.
We have also found out that if you previously voted, and wish to CHANGE YOUR VOTE, YOU CAN DO SO.
Simply go the Administration Office in Anthem Center, and request a new ballot.
Also, ASK THEM to obtain the original ballot you cast, and HAVE THE INDIVIDUAL AT THE ADMINISTRATION DESK VOID THAT UNOPENED BALLOT.
I would also suggest YOUR PHYSICALLY WATCHING THE INDIVIDUAL VOIDING THE INCORRECT BALLOT....
...in lieu of the questionable 2016 Board of Directors election results THAT INCLUDED:
1. the many questions that remained after a number of unit owner ballots were supposedly misplaced and left the premises of Sun City Anthem.
2. a voting machine counter that mysteriously MALFUNCTIONED.
.......and, exactly HOW MUCH would this lawsuit cost us? The article in the Spirit states: "Therefore, the Association is not paying the law firm unless the attorney is successful in obtaining funds in this matter for the association"
ReplyDeleteSmoke and Mirrors: IF the attorney IS '...successful in obtaining funds in this matter...' HOW MUCH OF A CUT DO THE ATTORNEYS GET? HOW MUCH IS LEFT TO REPAY US?....AND if you read the fine-print, if we lose (a very definite possibility considering Pulte's history in such lawsuits) WE MAY HAVE TO PAY PULTE'S LEGAL COSTS. Either way, WE will have to pay someone AND we will NEVER see the entire Liberty Center repair amount returned to us
The proposed lawsuit is a classic "Throwing good money after bad"
At best, the Board's obvious push for this lawsuit reflects a convenient interpretation of Nevada Law and our CCR'S....at worst it reflects some unknown nefarious reason(s) which will never be revealed
From Rana Goodman...to...Anthem Opinions
ReplyDeleteA neighbor went to Ms. Seddon's office asking how she could change her vote since she had changed her mind and was told she could not change it once her vote had been submitted.
I received information from a member of the Board of Directors that a vote could be changed in the way the article signified.
ReplyDeleteI suggest you get your neighbor get her information IN WRITING from the individual who gave her that information....
...as I did.