Removal Election
Costs
(Part One of
Two)
Folks, this is Part One of a two part series of articles that address some of the recent actions taken by the Sun City Anthem Board in conjunction with a General Manager along with an association attorney, that in our estimation, have been designed to "interfere" with the impending Removal election.
There will be some who say that by
writing what I do, "you don't respect these
people" and before I proceed, my comment to those having that belief is
simply:
I'll respect them when they respect the rest of us.
You don't demand respect, you earn it.
Until that day
occurs...
Much has been written about the supposed cost to hold the upcoming Removal election to rid ourselves of Directors Rex Weddle, Thomas Nissen, Aletta Waterhouse, and Robert Burch...
...from opponents
of the Removal.
Let's look carefully at the
ludicrous sums that have been authorized and supposedly will be expended by a
Board and General Manager so scared of removal success, they will make every
attempt on earth to oppose it...including, but not
limited to, NEEDLESSLY SPENDING ASSOCIATION FUNDS
to create the illusion this is the fault of those who
support the Recall.
In our opinion, even our association
attorney "got into the action" by making a ridiculous statement about the
supposed "tens of thousands of dollars" that will be
spent on a ballot that, according to him and parroted by the
removal opponents, "has little chance of
succeeding", yet another indirect act that was designed to sway the upcoming
vote.
To those individuals, we simply
say...
Those who favor
recall didn't create the high expense...
Those who opposed
it are 100% responsible for doing so.
After researching the matter, the
normal cost of a Board election has been approximately $7,200 to $7,500.
Why would this translate into "tens of thousands of dollars" as the opponents
contend?
Combined
with....
That's why, folks.
What this bunch of free spending
wasteful group has done is authorize an outside CPA firm to certify and count
the ballots.
That's where the BIG BUCKS ARE GOING....plus of course, the "legal beagle's" bank account.
That's where the BIG BUCKS ARE GOING....plus of course, the "legal beagle's" bank account.
...and to boot, if
2,501 ballots are not received (the necessary amount to successfully recall),
they aren't even going to be opened or tabulated.
How's that for getting bang for your bucks, or is it just another technique to stonewall the actual results to the unit owners?
If removal is not successful, shouldn't
this be disclosed to show the number of unit owners who aren't very happy with
things?
What a ruse to undoubtedly save
face...and camouflage the results.
Just more...
Just more...
This time combined with....
But...a question remains that seems to haunts us; a subject that was "conveniently omitted" from the "beagle's oratory" about the high costs, while he and the 6 swooping vultures, seemingly enjoyed justifying Nona's "public execution".
Hiring the CPA firm was not done in an open meeting.
Hmmm...What does that matter?
Let's explain.
Let's explain.
1. Four of
the members of the Board are the "main event" in the removal; and as a
result, must, according to NRS 116, be barred from any action that in any way,
influences the removal election. Hence they should not have been allowed to cast any
vote on this matter.
2.
Nona Tobin is no longer a member of the Board.
3. Only two left to "legitimately" cast a vote.
4. And with
only two left....that means NO
QUORUM.
5. No
quorum means NO legitimate vote !
So, HOW DID THEY
AUTHORIZE IT?
If they did not authorize the action then who decided, Ms. Seddon?
No attorney has any authorization to
decide whether to spend any vast sum without
approval.
So...was this another one of Seddon's
ideas to waste even more of the association funds?
If so, is she actually authorized to
spend "tens of thousands of dollars" on such a
venture ?
And if that be the case, is that what this Board allows and defines as financial "fiduciary responsibility"?
And what about the 836 unit owners who signed the "no
confidence" petition summarizing the NUMEROUS complaints against
her?
Hey "Beagle", does that go in her personnel file and made a part
of her employment records?
Are the voices of 836 unit owners to be conveniently eliminated in some deceptive manner making DOCUMENTED FORMAL complaints meaningless?
Since those petitions have been deemed as "public documents", will they or won't they be included in her employment records ???
The cover letter with the petitions was very specific.
Examining the copy we received, it specifically made that request.
Are the voices of 836 unit owners to be conveniently eliminated in some deceptive manner making DOCUMENTED FORMAL complaints meaningless?
Since those petitions have been deemed as "public documents", will they or won't they be included in her employment records ???
The cover letter with the petitions was very specific.
Examining the copy we received, it specifically made that request.
Every company has to have employee
records, and complaints are normally enclosed for purposes of evaluation and
compensation.
So, what's the deal, Beagle? Or is that going to be another "Ask someone else?" routine you cruelly displayed a week ago when a resident WHO PAYS YOU FEES, asked a legitimate question pertaining to the section of Nevada statutes that applied to embarrassing Nona Tobin?
After all, one of the complaints
against her was:
"Out of control expenditures leading to an
assessment increase in just one year of 10% after a transfer of $600,000 to
reserves. A 10% assessment increase in 2017 seemingly based on a flawed Reserve
Study. Not operating according to Chapter 2 of the Board Policy
Manual."
It's been stated this expensive CPA firm will be billing HOURLY to guarantee an unbiased election.
And, "The Beagle" statement in
recommending to hire a fancy high priced CPA...
... was to avoid
the recall proponents saying the ballot counters had cheated on the
count and that without the HIGH PRICED CPA, was often
followed by a lawsuit against the association by
those who favored
removal.
Where does this guy come up with this
stuff?
Remember
folks...
He doesn't walk on water; he's not God,
and certainly this guy's advice is questionable at best.
Remember phone booths and what used to
hang from them?
And do you know what happens when you drop one?
It normally will open to ATTORNEY.
That's how many of these individuals exist to make our lives "heavenly", and in many cases, aren't worth the price of the free phone book.
That's how many of these individuals exist to make our lives "heavenly", and in many cases, aren't worth the price of the free phone book.
Actually, we believe his actions and recommendation were unsubstantiated opinions from a guy who demonstrated he's merely HIGH PRICED HIRED HELP and a number of his comments made
are, well...
...a total
CROCK !
And tomorrow, in Part Two, we'll explain why we believe Beagle and his litter should
instead, bark at the moon with such comments...along
with some measures that, if taken, would reduce costs to those normally associated with Board
elections.
Got a Comment?
Send it to us
at:
And, as usual, begins such criticism with normal insults which have become the trademark of a publication that continues along a path to deceive the public.
Though critical of the removal, his "beloved" General Manager and Board, have not even had the courage and common decency to expose the community to the fact that the removal process even exists, much less publish the contents of the petitions and/or "no confidence".
Sun City Anthem has been in possession of the signed Board petitions since August 10, 2015 and STILL the community awaits the FORMAL ANNOUNCEMENT.
Since August 15, 2015, Sun City Anthem has been in possession of the "no confidence" petitions against Sandy Seddon, and STILL the community awaits that FORMAL ANNOUNCEMENT.
Yet...it was more than obvious they were well aware it existed: a damning report by the Sun City Anthem Treasurer was sent out to the community on official association letterhead, and the contents where DISTRIBUTED by an SCA employee asking Club presidents to forward to their members, and was PUBLICLY POSTED on the Sun City Anthem official bulletin board in Anthem Center.
This topic was discussed in an Election Committee meeting; and an attorney was consulted and called in to provide a BIASED opinion and EXPENSIVE recommendation.
Now, I ask any person that is capable of intelligent thought, is there anyone who actually believes any of these contrived "backdoor" activities weren't a set-up to adversely affect obtaining the necessary petitions, and upon obtaining them, coming up with another set-up by sending in the "legal beagle" to provide an opinion that was intended to do the same?
Yes indeed, this Board, GM, her employee, and a high priced Legal Beagle have all figured out a way to make this thing as expensive as possible, for one reason...
...shifting their guilt to those who made the community aware of their disturbing deeds, and the evidence is so apparent, those who opposed the removal are FULLY RESPONSIBLE for all of this and the HIGH COSTS associated with it.
It continues to amaze me that there is this attempt to "blame" the petition signers for the recall election. At no time in the conversation from the Board, GM, or the other blogs is there the slightest acceptance of responsibility for the petitions. Do those people really think that over a third of the folks who actually vote in the elections just decided on a whim to have a petition? Do they really feel, without letting the folks see the text of the petitions, that there is no issue to be had with the recall candidates and the GM? Does not a sign of one of them want to hear and speak to the huge amount of people who DO feel a recall is in order?
As they say:
"What Greater Authority is There than Ignorance?"
If I recall correctly, the decision to increase our HOA dues by 10% was decided BEFORE Nona took her place on the board. I cannot find the letter of that notification, hopefully you have access to the date of the information.
The information about the high cost of the removal keeps coming up from Berman's blog,
I guess the high cost of interviewing candidates at the M in a suite was okay; the cost of the BUS for Hilary Clinton's speech was also okay, because it was never brought up again.
These costs were never approved by the community, only the board members involved.
As I see it, the name calling comes from their side; the sneaky behavior involving OUR money also comes from them.
I personally am tired of this behavior both by Berman and the Board.
They seem to have forgotten how they got there and why they are there.
Actually Berman has taken his role on all by himself.
Yes indeed, your recall of the past is 100% on the money. The 10% increase in HOA dues became effective January 1, 2017, a few months before Nona Tobin was elected.
No one can doubt the main opponent isn't in the pocket of the current administration, and the comments he receives are almost entirely from individuals who don't even use a real name, which in many circles is looked on as being unworthy of credibility.
You are so right in your comments.
Anything critical of the Board or Seddon is NEVER published there because he's the architect of the "machine."
He is what he is, always was, and always will be, and as the years pass, it appears that people see him for the destructive force he's been.
What happened to his law practice in 1991 was indicative of his future behavior, and he certainly is the perfect example of the saying "you can't teach an old dog new tricks".
I've come to the conclusion that fighting with such an individual with that past, is a waste of time. As I said, it speaks for itself, and gives a pretty good indication of those who would support his beliefs.
What counts is getting rid of the four who have allowed the havoc to prevail. That's all that matters, and we have MANY additional facts to come as the ballots are in the process of preparation.
Where the removal proponents have concentrated on WHAT the issues entail, the opponents always avoid them and instead concentrate on those who bring them to the attention of the owners.