OSCAR
and
David
Berman
Frauds that Require
Exposure
(Part Two of
Four)
One director (Robert Burch) "supposedly" escaped the removal election by 2 votes; however, an official request was made to the Community Association Manager and General Manager to view WHICH were denied and THE REASONS as to why they were, a right guaranteed by Nevada law, that has yet to be acknowledged by either the Community General Manager and the Association Manager.
In the case of Burch, approximately 110 petition signatures were considered invalid by the CPA firm.
The matter has been discussed with Ombudsman Foger and he has informed the proponents that any activity to stifle such a request should immediately be brought to his personal attention for assistance.
The OSCAR letter further asserts that:
“We have become an enviable success story.”
Really? The people I have
talked to, including the Ombudsman, seem to think our association has some severe
problems. At least one family is selling their home and leaving because of the
turmoil. In addition the publication that listed Sun City Anthem a few years ago as the top retirement community in the United States, now has excluded it from the Top 50.
And again, I ask myself, why not tell the truth?
On page 2 of the OSCAR letter, it states:
“We no
longer have to pay $36,000 per month to a management company.”
Again, that is "politically"
correct; however, we do pay 5 employees a total of
approximately $80,000 per month including benefits.And then, we pay the rest of the expenses.
Self management is not a part of the removal election, but, since it has been brought up by the opponents, we do know that the cost has exceeded what we were told it would be.
So again, why not the full truth?
On page 3 OSCAR represents that:
“There is no malfeasance by these 4 members of the board.”
Perhaps they should examine the
definition of
the word malfeasance. It presents 4 bullet points which in and of themselves, do not make sense.
First:
“The same small number of residents file most of the
complaints.”
That is completely untrue in the
case of this removal. Had that been true, the Ombudsman would not have taken measures as quickly as he did to formally investigate the multiple complaints made by multiple individuals.
It then goes on to state:
“The Ombudsman and the Nevada Real Estate Division have agreed that
our Board has handled each situation correctly in all cases as long as these
directors have been on the Board.”
No such
agreement exists. In fact, the Ombudsman is concerned about the operation of this Board as evidenced by previously referenced documentation.
OSCAR bullet point 3 states unequivocally that:
“There are ZERO open complaints in the Ombudsman’s office.”
That is
false. According to conversations with Ombudsman Foger, there are currently between 10-15 complaints from SCA residents in the Ombudsman's office now, many filed within the past 30 days.
Now let me ask you, the reader, this question:
Do these 4 points make sense?
First, the letter stated a small number of residents file the most complaints.
Then it goes on to say that the Ombudsman and NRED have handled these issues correctly.
Then comes the statement that there are ZERO open complaints.
Finally the OSCAR letter states "the high volume of complaints" from a small number of people.
I ask you again, does this make sense to you?
If as stated, there are a small number of people filing complaints...
...but the authorities agree that this board has handled the issues correctly..
... but there are ZERO open complaints...
...and finally tops it off by stating, the high volume of complaints... causes an increase in legal costs which you must pay for...
...Is that nothing more than a mere series of contradictions?
Is that treating residents like dummies?
Again, why is it so difficult to write the full truth?
Tomorrow: Part
Three
Got a comment?
Send it to us
at:
From a Highlands Village resident...to...Anthem Opinions
Just to let you know that many of us here in Highlands Village and other places have not received our ballots.
I understand that the mailer should have been received last Friday or Saturday and so far it has not been received on Evening Sky, Thoreau, Thatcher, Fieldbrook or Danbury Crossing. Plus friends on Logansport.
Something is very fishy.
How the senders were able to differentiate which homes would and would not receive the letters,, is indeed VERY FISHY. Someone provided the list to the OSCAR people.
In addition, we were informed that an email was sent to Sandy Seddon from a resident asking about ballots being forwarded.
"Coincidentally", the matter was shortly the subject of an article on the Berman blog...
...using almost THE EXACT VERBIAGE.
That pretty much confirms our suspicions that SEDDON IS BERMAN'S MOLE and provides him information not provided to other publications.
Just another example of the CORRUPTION that exists and MUST BE REMOVED.
Could this be where David gets his "research"?