Board
Member
Claims
Sun City Anthem
President & Treasurer are Obstructing Association
Reform
Nona Tobin continues to fight "City Hall" and Anthem Opinions believes you should be aware of the tactics used by "the machine" in order to stop any positive changes within the association.
You see, Nona is trying, and the "Fab 4" removal honorees, (Weddle, Waterhouse, in
conjunction with Burch and Nissen)...alongside the "distorted" financial reports of Association
Treasurer, Forrest Quinn, are blocking every attempt she's made, and all to often, in a rude manner.
According to what we've learned, Ms. Tobin was SPECIFICALLY OMITTED from a Board Executive session,
an action that violates NRS
116.
Ms. Tobin has made attempts to submit the following suggestions to Sun City Anthem governance, through motions she intends to
submit for inclusion to the Board agenda on July 27, 2017.
Those motions concerned the
following:
Reinstatement of Code of Conduct
Regulations
Initiation of Unit Owner Legal
Service Committee
Initiation of Unit Owner
Investment & Insurance Committee
Resolving the Restaurant
Issue
She has not only carefully
stated those motions, but provided a detailed explanation as to their
merit.
And unlike her closed-minded fellow board members, she has
submitted the ideas to the community for their
opinion as well.
We have published the first motion,
and intend to publish the last three; however, Director Tobin, sent us
information which in our opinion, clearly shows the
obstructionist attitudes certain members of the Sun City Anthem Board have
exhibited toward her attempts to clean up a CORRUPT
system...
Namely...email
correspondence.
We have that email
correspondence. Read it carefully, and ask yourself this
question:
Do you
support this behavior by Board members and believe it should
continue?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
From: Aletta Waterhouse
Jul 18, 2017 at 5:05 PM
To: Nona Tobin
Cc: Rex Weddle, Art Lindberg , Forrest Quinn , TomNissen, Bob Burch , Sandy Seddon , Lori Martin, Anneliese Gamboa
Cc: Rex Weddle, Art Lindberg , Forrest Quinn , TomNissen, Bob Burch , Sandy Seddon , Lori Martin, Anneliese Gamboa
Nona:
Per the Board Policy Manual, I reviewed with Board President
Weddle your four requests for action items to be placed on the Board Meeting
Agenda for July 27, 2017.
Two of your items will be placed on the agenda
in the following manner:
1)
Restaurant Recommendations:
In the Old Business section of the Agenda will be
an Item entitled "Update on Restaurant Space Sandy Seddon". Sandy will make
her planned presentation and Board members may respond as they desire to her
presentation.
Your document on Restaurant Recommendations will
appear in the Board Book under the Old Business section. I BELIEVE YOU TOLD
ANNELIESE THAT YOU HAVE AN UPDATED VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT TO SUBMIT. PLEASE
VERIFY THAT AND LET US KNOW WHEN IT WILL BE SUBMITTED.
2) Proposal
for a Legal Services Task Force.
This is item 16B, under New Business.
Your other two items, Expansion of FinanceRelated
Committees for Insurance & Investment and Code of Conduct, by the nature of
these proposals, should not start at the Board level. You should instead make a
request of the Board Liaisons to the respective Finance and Covenants Committees
to have the Committees consider these proposals. After the Committees complete
their consideration of these proposals, they will report their recommendations
to the Board for possible action.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
-
From:Nona Tobin
To: Aletta Waterhouse
To: Aletta Waterhouse
Tue,
Jul 18, 2017 at 5:39 PM
I am
waiting for Lori to tell me the source of her information that Five Star Tavern
defaulted on its lease because I based my statement of its profitability on Sun
City Summerlin's most current published financial statements.
I can't put in her
claim unless I verify it.
I will submit an updated version by tomorrow.
Setting up the agenda that way, distorts the issue and prevents a full
and open discussion of the alternatives.
I'm sure Rex or Sandy told you to do it
that way, but I am very disappointed in you nonetheless.
I
disagree with your assertion that this is not something that should start at the
Board level.
Either put the item on the agenda for action as it is written, or
I will change the item related to Insurance and
Investments to be creation of a study team like for Legal Services instead of a
referral to the Finance Committee.
Which way do you want it?
Nona Tobin
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
From: Aletta
Waterhouse
Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 8:35 PM
To: Nona Tobin
Nona
My decision stands.
The substance of your proposal
on Insurance & Investments focuses on these being a subset of Finance
Committee matters and therefore needs to go through the Committee.
I would think
that you would agree with this, given your strong support of Committees as a
means for homeowners to participate in Association matters, something I also
support.
Aletta
- - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - -
From: Nona Tobin
To: Aletta
Waterhouse
Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 9:25 PM
Read Board Policy Manual 6.1.1.
I am putting the item on the agenda pursuant to that
section.
The motion is completely benign and it gives the Board a chance to
approve something I offer, while still kicking the can down the road.
I'm saying
for the BOD to refer it.
You are saying for me to go and ask a single member of
the BOD.
Do you see the problem?
The BOD should refer the matter to the Finance
Committee to get their opinion of whether insurance and investments should be
subsets of the Finance Committee, or if they should be stand alone committees,
or if the Finance committee wants to just amend their charter to incorporate
these items.
Why is this so hard?
I'm trying to get the Board back into the
habit of doing its business in public as is required by law.
Nona Tobin
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-
From: Nona Tobin
Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 2:21 PM
To: Aletta Waterhouse , Anneliese
Gamboa
I revised the
Insurance and investment item .
I got the info from Summerlin about their restaurant since I didn't hear back from Lori.
I'll finish up the corrected version on that one within the hour.
I got the info from Summerlin about their restaurant since I didn't hear back from Lori.
I'll finish up the corrected version on that one within the hour.
Nona Tobin
- - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
Aletta Waterhouse
To: Nona Tobin
Nona:
You have two options on this item, as it is not at
the point for Board action.
As previously suggested, you can work through the
Finance Committee liaison and submit this proposal to them for consideration.
Or
it can be added to the Board Meeting Agenda as a discussion item, with no action
to be taken, since this is an entirely new proposal and should have complete
vetting. If you select the latter, then please change your document to remove
the motion.
Aletta
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-
Nona Tobin
Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 5:40 PM
To: Aletta Waterhouse
Cc: Anneliese Gamboa , Rex Weddle
All it does is set up a group to look at the idea.
It says the groups will work closely with the Finance Committee. The whole idea
is for the full and complete vetting to get done by interested residents in
conjunction with the Finance Committee.
I don't know what "vetting" is needed to make a
referral which is what I did the first time or to create a study group which is
what I did to try to accommodate your concerns.
Given that the Board Policy Manual states:
6.1.1 A. Agenda schedule.
"Directors place items on the agenda by notifying the President and
Secretary by Monday 10 days prior to the meeting."
I met this requirement.
6.1.1 Agenda contents.
"The support of three
Directors will be necessary to place a motion inconsistent with Board Policy on
the agenda."
(Forming work groups is consistent with Board policy so this is not
a factor).
" A single Director may have any other item, including a motion to
amend Board Policy, placed on the agenda."
I am choosing to have my new motion to be on the
Agenda as an action item.
What is the harm?
Some poor soul has to second it on
the motion chart, and then you can all vote against it if you choose.
I really
think you guys are going out of your way to make things difficult for me. And to
what end?
Do you think I am violating my fiduciary duty by spending many hours
crafting these proposals?
Do you in your heart of hearts really think you are
acting in the best interests of the association by refusing to give my reasoned
proposals a fair hearing and public vote just because I made them?
Nona Tobin
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-
Aletta Waterhouse Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 6:41 PM
To: Nona Tobin
Cc: Anneliese Gamboa , Rex Weddle
Cc: Anneliese Gamboa , Rex Weddle
Nona:
I'm not preventing your proposals from having a fair
hearing. In fact, the proposal to have this referred to the Finance Committee,
where some of the volunteer expertise resides, allows for multiple hearings on
this, first at their level, and then at the Board level no matter what the
Finance Committee recommendation is.
You know your two choices.
Please select one &
let us know by 7:30 pm.
Aletta
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-
This is what a member of the Sun City Anthem Board
of Directors goes through to better a community.
Who would have an objection to anything so valuable as
the establishment of a resident committee to analyze and make insurance and
investment recommendations?
Obviously bureaucrats....Rex
Weddle and Aletta Watherhouse...
... whose actions must be eliminated...
...by removal.
If you know of anyone who has not yet signed the
removal petitions, contact the Petition coordinator, Robert N. at:
Got a comment? Send it to us at:
Nona Tobin was elected for many reasons. One was to represent the people.
To bring new ideas and refresh some of the older principles that just make sense.
It appears that Rex Weddle thinks he is just smarter than everyone else.
Nona brings new motions to the board and cannot get them added the agenda for discussion and vote.
Aletta seems to be his sidekick and agree with everything that King Rex says.
Rex does not represent me.
Do you trust his decisions to mold the future of SCA?
That is why the recall petition is so important.
I would hope that every person that agrees with this would find one additional friend or neighbor to sign the petition for a recall vote.
Rex and his band of followers need to clearly get this message.
The recall petition is that message.
The draft Board book was released yesterday, but you probably haven't seen it.
1. My action item on the code of conduct policy is not on the agenda at all because it was blocked by Rex and Aletta. I am going to review it and add a Code of Ethics sample (attached) that I got from the free and public NRED "HOA Boards and Ethics" training that the Board is refusing to take because they have chosen instead to PAY attorney Clarkson and exclude homeowners from participating to train the Board (next Tuesday, 1 PM, in the Greene Room). I questioned the legality and the common sense of doing this, but Rex told me I didn't have to come to their training; that I could get trained on my own.
2. My action item on study on setting up resident advisory committees for insurance/risk management and investments was also blocked as i told you all yesterday. What i didn't mention how this is part of a much bigger strategy on the part of Rex et al and the GM to disempower committees under the mistaken belief that abdicating more power to Sandy Seddon and silencing the diverse voices in the community is somehow better for the community. We have really smart people living here who are willing to use their expertise to do really boring tasks to see why our insurance claims are so high. Why not let them?
Why would it be better for us to pay staff to do work that residents with greater expertise have offered to do for free?
An except from Rex's May President's report in the Spirit describes the wrong-headed direction of disempowering committees/service groups I am trying to get the Board to reverse. We should be creating more opportunities for residents to be involved, not just to save the association money, but to create a sense of belonging, connection and purpose, and to contribute to keeping SCA a great place to live.
Just having a couple of Board members decide the fate of committees by asking the GM how it should be is not as good a method as involving the owners to give them a say in how they want the organization to function.
The recent issue over the security patrol's first aid kits exemplifies why I am opposed to management taking charge of the service groups without appropriate oversight.
Next, really will be the restaurant item!
It never ceases to amaze me how this Board carefully follows (or interprets) the regulations TO THEIR BENEFIT.
This behavior is outrageous.
Nona is trying hard to make our community better, and Rex and Aletta are vindictive and abusive in trying to block her. That is tragic.
Wow do we need a removal election.