Yesterday it Was OK, but Today it's Not ! Huh ?

Sun City Anthem Board Looked the Other Way 

Regarding "Enrichment" Definition

When it Came to "The Machine"

What's good for the goose, didn't seem to apply to the gander !

I guess it matters who you are when it comes to defining the word "enrichment" as it pertains to one's eligibility to serve on the Sun City Anthem Board. 

Just why would I ask this question?

Well now, not long ago, we had an individual named Bella Meese who served as both President and Secretary of the Sun City Anthem Board; and if I recall, the subject of "enrichment" never seemed to be addressed during her reign as to her eligibility to be a member of the Sun City Anthem Board...

...despite the fact that two members of the Sun City Anthem Board, Rex Weddle & Thomas Nissen (both subject to the removal election), were a part of that same "regime".

While Nona Tobin may have been tossed from the Board for trying to "enrich" herself by keeping a home she was entitled to own as a trustee of the property, for some reason Mrs. Meese's actions never seemed to be of concern.

What were those actions?

Her husband, George Meese, is the publisher of a monthly magazine circulated to all homes in the Sun City Anthem community.

It includes various articles and...advertising, which provides income to him and is wife, that thereby "enriches" them, doesn't it?

Now I am the last person in the world to criticize the capitalistic system, but when that magazine was established, Mrs. Meese was a member of the Sun City Anthem Board, and my guess is that it not only brought revenue to Bella and George Meese,  but also COST the association valued income by losing ads that,  up to that time, had been placed in the association sponsored publication, "The Spirit".

At the same time, it was widely known that Mrs. Meese would greatly utilize The M Resort for a number of Association sponsored functions...

...functions believed to have earned her numerous amenities and points which seemed to have "enriched" her as well.

In spite these actions, no such charge of "enrichment" seemed to have been brought against  her to make her ineligible to remain on the Sun City Anthem Board.

Hmmm...I wonder why that might be  ????

Then again, she was an integral part of "the machine", wasn't she?

Obviously the moral of the story...

It's OK to enrich yourself if you're a member of a political machine, but damned if you wish to reform it !

How hypocritical ! 

How Sun City Anthem..ish !

Still looking for a reason to oppose the removal of those who look the other way...when it's convenient to do so?

Now it's your turn.

How about your opinion ?  

Send us your thoughts to:

scaopinions@gmail.com

1. 
   September 1, 2017 at 4:26 AM

   From A. Orzada...to...Anthem Opinions
   
   Enough said. Excellent point.
   
   The MACHINE continues to operate.
   
   How about putting an end to it?
2. 1. 
      Elizabeth BreierSeptember 1, 2017 at 11:58 AM

      If George Meese never published a periodical (btw - where did he get the SCA mailing list?); if Bella never set foot in the M Casino; if prior SCA Counsel got it all wrong and Nona should not have been allowed to sit on the SCA BOD; it still doesn't make the way Nona was removed appropriately. What kind of way was that to handle her removal? Right before the meeting? BTW - still waiting for my eblast on that one too. Not only did the BOD and SCA Counsel refuse explanation at the meeting, but none has followed. No official notification or explanation to the community and those that voted for Nona. Unprofessional at best. Appears to be retribution for the petitions at it's worst. IF it was an appropriate removal, there would have been far better ways to handle it and the attorney knows that and anyone with a modicum of decency knows that as well. This appears to be just more stirring of the pot to create more divisiveness within the Community. We are tired of living in a "war zone".
   2. 1. 
         September 2, 2017 at 9:17 AM

         From Ruth Gladstein...to...Anthem Opinions
         
         I WANT TO MAKE YOU AWARE THAT YOUR FACTS ABOUT GEORGE MEESE ARE ERRONEOUS.
         
         GEORGE WAS NEVER THE PUBLISHER OF THE VILLAGES OF SUN CITY ANTHEM.
         
         THE MAGAZINE FIRST PUBLISHER WAS ANITA LINDEN AND HER LATE HUSBAND RON.
         
         GEORGE WAS AND IS THE CONTENT COORDINATOR FOR THE MAGAZINE AND HAD NO HAND IN THE CREATION OF THE MAGAZINE.
         
         THANK YOU
      2. 
         Dick ArendtSeptember 2, 2017 at 9:20 AM

         Ruth, I appreciate your clarification, but I believe you omitted one aspect in your comment...compensation, which was the purpose of the article, "enrichment".
         
         Is or was George Meese compensated in any way for his services? Perhaps you might explain to our readers the entire arrangement.  I would think that you, being the publisher of "The Villages of Sun City Anthem" magazine, should be able to provide us that information.
         
         Please respond.
         
         Thank you.
      3. 1. 
            Dick ArendtSeptember 2, 2017 at 9:26 AM

            Ruth, I appreciate your clarification, but I believe you omitted one aspect in your comment...compensation, which was the purpose of the article "enrichment".
            
            Is or was George Meese compensated in any way for his services? Perhaps you might explain to our readers the entire arrangement. I would think that you, being the publisher of "The Villages of Sun City Anthem" magazine, should be able to provide us that information.
            
            Please respond.
            
            Thank you.
         2. 
            September 2, 2017 at 11:10 AM

            From Ruth Gladstein...to...Anthem Opinions
            
            I DO NOT BELIEVE I HAVE TO SHARE MY PERSONAL BUSINESS WITH ANYONE EXCEPT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
            
            I DO NOT WANT TO TAKE SIDES IN YOUR VENDETTA.
            
            I APPRECIATE YOUR OPINION AS WELL AS OTHER OPINIONS AND I AM OLD ENOUGH TO MAKE MY OWN DECISIONS.
         3. 
            Dick ArendtSeptember 2, 2017 at 11:12 AM

            Ruth, thank you again for your response.

            
            

            It was you who brought up the subject, and conveyed a connotation that the subject of the article was inaccurate, when in fact only an incorrect title was the subject of your objection, leaving the impression that the entire article was false.

            
            

            You will note we, unlike another publication, are more than willing to admit to an error when one is made, and we did.

            
            

            But.. your comment raised a further issue, the main topic of the article itself, "enrichment."

            
            

            All we asked was a simple question, "Is he or was he ever compensated?"

            
            

            We asked NO DETAILS.

            
            

            Let me emphatically state, there is NO VENDETTA, and had you said NO, we would have gladly published your response.

            
            

            In the pursuit of TRUTH and FAIRNESS, we merely would like to know if a Board member or a member of her family was compensated; and if so, why the same rules didn't apply to Mrs. Meese as they were against Nona Tobin.

            
            

            I think your answer allowed our readers to correctly "read between the lines".
         4. 1. 
               September 4, 2017 at 8:17 AM

               From Rana Goodman...to...Anthem Opinions
               
               I hate to contradict Ms. Gladstein so early in the morning re: George Meese, but what does she think a "content coordinator" of a magazine or newspaper is, that is the PUBLISHER.
3.