Nevada Know How
Declared July 20, 2022
| Weight Not Over (oz.) | |
|---|---|
| 1 | $0.60 |
| 2 | 0.84 |
| 3 | 1.08 |
| 3.5 | 1.32 |
Letters (Metered)
| Weight Not Over (oz.) | |
|---|---|
| 1 | $0.57 |
| 2 | 0.81 |
| 3 | 1.05 |
| 3.5 | 1.29 |
| Weight Not Over (oz.) | |
|---|---|
| 1 | $1.20 |
| 2 | 1.44 |
| 3 | 1.68 |
| 4 | 1.92 |
| 5 | 2.16 |
| 6 | 2.40 |
| 7 | 2.64 |
| 8 | 2.88 |
| 9 | 3.12 |
| 10 | 3.36 |
| 11 | 3.60 |
| 12 | 3.84 |
| 13 | 4.08 |
Postcards
| $0.44 |
Hello Everyone,
I would like to take this opportunity as Forrest SCA Mr. Fix-It to explain why I resigned from SCA BOD on 5/12/22.
Circumstances changed very quickly in the last few weeks; and as a result, I would not be able to fulfill my duties as a board member over the next year.
Erlinda and I are currently in the process of selling all properties in SCA and planning to move to join my son Scott, his wife, Kelly, and our three lovely granddaughters.
I want to thank everyone supporting me as a board candidate; all the “thank you” emails I received from residents I have helped as Forrest "SCA Mr. Fix-It", and the seven hundred happy birthday wishes on my 80 birthday.
I will deeply miss all my friends and neighbors I have met over the 15 years living in SCA.
________________________
Sun City Anthem Board 2022
From Forrest Fetherolf...to...Anthem Opinions
Today I received notice from management, current board members have resigned, leaving five openings to be filled by the five candidates.
I am very honored to become a board member to serve our SCA Community as I have been as "Forrest SCA Mr. Fix-It", helping others in the gym, and volunteering.
I want all to know that I am not happy to become a board member by default.
I was looking forward to allowing Sun City Anthem residents to choose their representatives through the election process.
There are many highly qualified residents in SCA to help make our community the best of the best; but at the same time, unfortunately, there are also some individuals preferring to be so negative and derogatory toward candidates, causing some candidates to withdraw or not to run for the board at all.
I know, I have been a victim of vicious attacks with untruths and lies by an undesirable blog owner resident and SCA Corporate Attorney.
However, I have received so much support from many residents to “hang in there.”
I have.
There is no place in our SCA community “for mudslinging” and negativity toward others wanting to become involved in SCA activities.
We are here to enjoy our remaining years of life and share knowledge.
Even though voting now will not choose your favorite candidate(s), voting is necessary to show your support for whom you feel is most qualified and to serve a one year or two-year term.
Regardless of what you decide, I want to thank all the residents that have shown their support for me to serve you as a SCA Board Director, and promise that I will do my best not to disappoint you at any time.
From Marcia Kosterka...to...Anthem Opinions
Forrest,
I know you would have wanted to be voted in by homeowner preference, but you have much to offer with your expertise.
I have watched since 2006, certain past board members display a poor attitude of ignoring input from homeowners and spending money foolishly-homeowner money.
In my opinion, we need new blood on the board and you certainly fit that category.
I have also become aware of one board member who has constantly displayed arrogance, rudeness to homeowners and lying in the past and present.
Since we can vote for up to three candidates, we can limit the term of this individual by not voting for this person.
This way, they will be limited to one year until the next election.
Lastly, you are not a person who expresses yourself with flowery phrases, but a doer and helpful to anyone who needs help with their home.
Candidate Forum & Meet and Greet
March 6 from 2 to 3:30 p.m. (Meet & Greet follows the forum, approx. 3:30 p.m.)
Delaware Room in Anthem Center
Candidate Forum GoToMeeting Information:
Click Candidate Forum to watch online.
Listen on your phone: (866) 899-4679
Access Code: 932-637-461
From Marcia Kosterka...to...Anthem Opinions
Your editorial is well worth reading especially by homeowners who have not lived in SCA as long as many of us.
It is important that new members of our community understand the past.
The best thing to do is to ignore what he says and stay away from him as if he doesn't exist. He cannot stand to be ignored and constantly seeks attention.
Both Richard Pope and Forrest Fetherolf are the type of individuals running for the board that truly deserve your vote.
They will put homeowners best interests first and give them a voice.
From Mary Lee Duley...to... Anthem Opinions
Great editorial!
Sadly the nasty blogger is still alive and spewing his venom!
Sounds like he’s been quiet for a while BUT now wants to TRY to control the elections.
Some things never seem to change, but hopefully folks are smarter and don’t fall for his negatives about candidates.We are relatively new to SCA, since mid 2020. Can someone post a link to some of the blogger's posts. Without seeing what he/she is writing it is hard for me to put things in context.
For the record, I am a huge supporter of Forrest for BOD. I know and respect him.Eltee, please send your email to us and I will be glad to send you a few samples.
From Valerie Lapin...to...Anthem OpinionsExcellent, insightful, honest assessment of the unfortunate reality.From Bernie Horton...Former Chairman of the Sun City Anthem Finance Committee...to...Anthem Opinions
I appreciated your article about that certain blogger who is himself one of the biggest liars I have met in SCA.
I stopped reading his blog when he lied to me about printing information that led me, as Chair, along with five other members of the SCA Finance Committee, to resign after extreme disrespect by the 2019 board President and her minions that were supported by that blogger.
He then went on to endorse her for reelection but fortunately for SCA, she lost.
Richard Pope is a breath of fresh air.
He identified several huge mistakes in our operations and accounting that never were addressed by several boards.
He has given 40 to 80 hours a week working on problems like the Villa neighborhood property issues, finding assets not listed in our reserve funds, and pointing out the unfunded liability of $10-$20 million for Anthem Council to replace irrigation and landscape throughout Anthem.
He also found that hundreds of thousands collected from home sales for the "Asset Enhancement Fees" were not going into a separate fund for new community assets.
Instead, they have been used for operating expenses in violation of our governing documents.
He got that changed last year and much more as people will learn during his reelection campaign.
For all our readers:
As we have stated, CREDIBILITY is important to any endorsement.
We ask all to consider these facts as to the importance of that statement.
Mr. Horton was one very dedicated person who volunteered for 3.5 years to help protect the community. One who recruited several CPAs and MBAs and assembled probably the most experienced group of volunteers ever for a Sun City Anthem Finance Committee, all of who resigned because of that blogger's endorsed preference who then bypassed the Finance Committee, to approve, in that committee's estimation, wasting nearly a million dollars alone on the parking lot that did not require replacement.
An Email Send to the Current Sun City Anthem President from a Former Sun City Anthem President
by
Favil West / former Sun City Anthem President
I am, as most residents are, in favor of having a restaurant at SCA. We are not, however, in favor of having a restaurant if there is any kind of assessment associated with the lease.
Having said that, I would be remiss if I failed to provide you with a history of our restaurant, a real history. As a former corporate CEO, President, Sec/Treasurer and first elected resident board member of SCA, as well as an Association developer President of 7 HOAs, and vice chairman of the Nevada Commission for Common Interest Communities and Condominium Hotels I’m sure you can understand my interest in the operations and finances of SCA, the place where I chose to retire.
In 2000, I was appointed, by the board, to the Property and Grounds Committee and became very familiar with the operation of Trumpets, the restaurant at the time. Besides my interest in the P&G committee I was very interested in the finances of SCA. To that end I watched George Gingerelli, arguably the best treasurer SCA has had, run the finance committee. What I noticed was that each month the Association was showing a loss of $10k all of which was attributed to Trumpets.
Upon my election to the Board in May 2001 I dug deeply into the finances of Trumpets and learned that our actual loss was more than $22k per month and climbing. These losses were not calculated on a fully allocated basis.
In August of 2001 I strongly suggested that we shut the restaurant down. Shortly thereafter I was contacted by the President of DW, Nevada Properties, to meet with him. He asked if I was amenable to leasing the restaurant. My answer was yes with the condition that the lease would be inclusive and that the Association would not be responsible for any TI’s and that the lease agreement follow standard lease protocol for restaurant leases.
Subsequently, the Board appointed me to represent the residents on the negotiating team.
Long story short we reached an agreement which resulted in our receiving $10k per month plus a percentage of revenues over a certain amount. The agreement was signed and put in place. Those who had no involvement in the lease, the negotiations, and/or its enforcement will tell you all kinds of stories.
I can scotch those stories by simply saying that the board that followed my service, evicted S&D. S&D then sued SCA for $500K.
SCA lost the suit resulting in SCA paying around $70K, our insurance company paying a significant amount, and DW/P picking up approximately $200+k.
From that point on, a number of operators showed an interest in our facility, one was threatened with a suit if they leased the restaurant. The overarching reason for the failure of the restaurants was the fact that SCA did not give them the “right to quiet enjoyment” but rather were continually micro-managing the operators.
Someone said “stupid is as stupid does” SCA’s handling of the following leases was a perfect example.
SCA actually loaned one of the failing operations approximately $40k.
What I have seen recently is talk by the Association of assessing residents monthly for the operation of the restaurant as well as suggesting that SCA do TI’s. This not the way leases are negotiated. Having successfully negotiated more than $1.5B in contracts, I can state the forgoing from some level of experience.
On completion of golf course clubhouse, I insisted that Trumpets manage both restaurants, further that Buckmans would serve breakfast and lunch with Trumpets serving lunch and dinner.
We operated Buckmans until Revere was sold to Troon.
January 9, 2002 in a series of 3 meetings, DW (Dell Webb) announced that they would not be building any future facilities for the community. At one of those meetings, I was handed a petition with 360 names on it asking that I organize and lead the residents in opposition to the changes in the Anthem Master Plan as proposed by DW.
I appointed a negotiating team made up of 5 residents with leadership roles in the community. As we moved through negotiations, DW announced that they planned to sell the golf course and that they would be entering negotiations and asked for my input.
One of the negotiators I selected for the team was Len Penn who was President of the Men’s Golf Club. I adjourned our negotiations for a day while Len and I wrote the portion of the sales agreement that affected SCA golfers.
That language exists in the agreement to this day. The agreement with Troon ended the management of Buckmans by the Association. Other than common sense there is nothing in the language of the agreement that would preclude Revere from competing with a restaurant in our facility.
My suggestion would be to reach an agreement with Revere which would include Buckmans serving breakfast and lunch and our restaurant serving lunch and dinner.
We should start with minimal lease payment with a % of profits over a certain amount. As is typical of 99% of leases, should there be any TI’s the cost would be incorporated in the lease payments. The keys to the survival of a new lease are the ability of the lessee to cater events without inappropriate restrictions, have “the right to quiet enjoyment”, and finally the Board, its management, and residents must stay out of the operation of the restaurant.
As a sidebar, if you want to ensure the success of the restaurant, we must let them, at their expense, provide gambling.
While I served on the Board, we had 3 surveys, the last of which by over 60% the residents thought we should allow gambling. The only reason MacDonald Ranch has had success with their restaurant is because of gambling and a friendly atmosphere.
I could go on for pages on the history of the successful negotiations we concluded but tell you little about those that followed.
If you wish to learn more, just let me know. I would be happy to meet with you.
Got a comment?
Send it to us at:
From Tony & Angelina Orzada...to...Anthem Opinions
Favil west's excellent piece about the former TRUMPETS RESTAURANT (now closed) which should read by all the residents of SCA, particularly those who WANT A NEW RESTAURANT.
It is more than obvious that many on this Board seem to have forgotten all of those petitions, and the question is simply....
From Allen Weintraub...to...Anthem Opinions
Please do not waste our money again for a new restaurant or a study of this idea that was already voted down.
From Mary Lee Duley...to...Anthem Opinions
I was SHOCKED to see that ONCE AGAIN the board members are bringing up the possibility of a RESTAURANT in SCA.
Information on the five failures is readily available and most are familiar with the total waste of monies for years.
Heaven help SCA. Another boondoggle and waste of funds!!!
At one time they were going to reconfigure the area to a space where ALL could enjoy, not sure what happened there but wasting funds to redo a restaurant/kitchen/etc is absolutely crazy…
BUT…
YOU CAN’T FIX STUPID
…AND THERE SEEMS TO BE A LOT THERE WITH THE SAME OLD MENTALITY. SORRY!!!!
I’m happy to be in Sun City Georgetown where board members and the developer LISTENS TO RESIDENTS AND ACTS ACCORDINGLY. YEAH!
The Sun City Anthem community was completed in 2008. It was a 10 year project. Since 2008 (13 years ago), the restaurant venue has been operational only a few years in total from the various failed attempts. The proponents use the argument that it is mandated for that space to have an eatery, but the precedent has been established for there to be none since the majority of the time the venue has been closed and shuttered. Somehow we have all survived eating everywhere else (including Buckmans Grill right down he street) and home sale prices continue to climb in the community. If someone really needs a $1.00 hot dog - Costco is right down the road on St. Rose. There has been no compliance and only sporadic attempts at compliance over the last 13 years so stop telling us that we MUST have a restaurant, a/k/a boondoggle.
From Robert Latchford...to...Anthem Opinions
With weather more pleasant, the economy opening up slowly, and snowbirds returning, SCA returning is returning to it’s status as a desirable place to call home, rather than the ghost town atmosphere it was forced into.
Still, government mandates exist to a degree, but presumable we are on the upswing.
However, our current BOD is salivating at the chance to begin wasting our dues on the oft failed task of promoting our community with a restaurant.
Wow, are they not aware that idea has already failed on numerous occasions, some at moderate, some at greater cost to homeowners?
To the best of my recall, about 2 years or so ago, after various lessee/tenant operators’ failures, even after almost giving away the keys to the ranch to a group of chain of restaurants, they were kissing the feet of this group (offering no rent unless sales were unattainable, exclusive on food service, and numerous leasehold improvements) until they found these big wheels lacked spokes (money).
They then concluded that a self managed operation was the way to go but they needed help (not psychiatric).
They hired a firm of “experts” to make suggestions.
After paying I believe $10K or more is memory serves me, the only feasible success at that spot wound be sort of self operated beer & burger place, open limited hours.
Besides the predicted operating losses, the expected sales figures would make it unlikely to generate enough to operate at a loss acceptable to the homeowners.
The plan met with great disfavor to the homeowners.
The fact that the location would very unlikely generate enough revenue to make it work, one major issue which possibly would cause homeowners to consider, and could still be a gross negative, is the fact that the closest in the development, being Buckmans at the gold course, which is a necessity to the operation of the course itself.
Without the restaurant, catering and other features it offers, it would fall into disfavor with tourists and locals alike.
A competing restaurant in close proximity could take enough revenue to cause it to close along with the course itself.
If the golf course were too abandon the land, what would replace it?
Low priced houses or condos, shopping, or office space wound cause our property values to tank.
Anyone doubting my logic I suggest you bring up the front page of the 9/30 R-J, where the feature article pictures and text of the former Badlands Golf Course off of Alta Dr in Las Vegas, closed the facility which was surrounded the Queens Ridge development of multimillion homes.
The residents saw the lush fairways go to seed & weed, until the legal ruling allowing a condo development and soon tracts of moderate priced houses fill the space.
From Tony & Angelina Orzada...to...Anthem Opinions
Hi Dan & Rana.
We need another shot at a replacement restaurant for TRUMPETS like we need to open the border to the migrants.
What is wrong with these people (board)? Are they in someone's pocket?
That was common when I was growing up in Chicago many years ago under Dick Daley.
Please use your considerable influence in the SCA community to defeat this abomination.
We moved here in 2001 when TRUMPETS was a great place to go; however all the replacements were poor substitutes which is costing us all $$$$.
We enjoyed your editorial.
Obviously Perlstein is the "Piper of Restaurant fame," knowing all his credentials that amount to a hill of beans. The story of reality should be that if you want a restaurant at the rec center so badly reach in your pocket, along with those that do too and show us how its done...for the 6th time. Seems that the 40 other restaurants now available in the 2-3 miles of the rec center will just shudder in fear that all that revenue will go to the "new" Perlstein's restaurant. As Shark Tank's Kevin O'Leary says, "STOP THE MADNESS!"
I totally agree, Marty. I hope it works out, but if not, let's not forget that "the people spoke" 2 years ago with a solid NO in 1400+ petitions.
If it flops and we loose big time, there are only 2 conclusions that can be drawn; first, THE PEOPLE TOLD THEM SO; and second, THE ENTIRE LOSS IS ON THE MEMBERS OF THE SUN CITY ANTHEM BOARD WHO VOTED TO PROCEED and chose to IGNORE them.
No more excuses, the BUCK STOPS WITH THEM.
(click on the form to enlarge it and then send to to your printer)
From Marcia Kosterka...to...Anthem Opinions
I find this article not only pertinent in this time that we live, but clearly a warning that must be conveyed to the new people who have moved to Sun City Anthem and do not know anything about the past and current problems which has plagued our community for over a decade.
Part of the problem is that people in general, have moved to our state, city, and Sun City Anthem to retire and enjoy the rest of their lives participating in what makes them happy.
They do not want to become involved as a volunteer which would alter their perceived new lifestyle.
There are several things we can do to inform those who know nothing about our rather sordid history in our community.
1. Those of us whom have lived here and witnessed some of the blatant acts against homeowners, coupled with repeatedly poor decisions adversely affecting us, should make a strong effort to inform new owners.
2. Make a concerted effort to meet any new owners in your neighborhood, welcome them and offer to help them with any questions they may have. A perfect place is the mailbox where you obtain your mail. Often, you will see new faces there.
3. Print copies of this article and offer them a copy to read saying that it is imperative that they read it. Offer them the chance to contact you once they have read this article with any questions or comments they might have.
4. There needs to be a better method for homeowners to vet any potential person to be hired for a staff position as well as any homeowner who wants to become a board member or head of a standing committee.
All it takes is a little time and investigation on all our parts and let others know what you have discovered.
Those of us who are sick and tired of the “few in charge", who continue to make costly and stupid decisions and treat homeowners with indifference, continual secretiveness, rudeness and look at us as their own personal bank account, need to legally rebel and our motto should become, “Enough Is Enough!”
Announcement of Resignation of SCA
Accounting Director
by
James Mayfield, CPA & Former Sun City Anthem Vice President
On Wednesday, September 1, 2121 Ms. Sandy Seddon, Sun City Anthem Chief Operating Officer, issued a statement announcing the immediate resignation of Accounting Director, Rob Cunningham.
Because privacy laws prevent the COO or the Board from discussing the reasons for his abrupt departure, details weren’t presented. This initial communication represented an appropriate, timely communication to SCA homeowners of a significant event in the accounting management of SCA.
The only deficiency was its failure to state that existing organization structures, resources, and processes would be used by the COO, the Board, and the Finance Committee to review issues related to his abrupt departure and future management of SCA accounting operations.
Unfortunately, a poorly conceived second communication about the departure of Mr. Cunningham was issued by Ms. Seddon and the Board on Friday, September 3. The purposes of this article are to scrutinize the deficiencies of the second communication and the attitude toward SCA homeowners by the COO and Board reflected therein.
Overreaction to Alleged Rumors
The September 3 message stated that “the Sun City Rumor Mill has been quite active” and the Board and COO felt it is necessary to “put an end to the rumors”.
The Board and management are obligated to use established processes and resources to investigate homeowners’ concerns, determine their creditability, and report on the results of their investigations, as appropriate.
However, prematurely released communications with a pejorative tone, inaccurate information. and shallow analysis do not convey that either the COO or the Board “do not take Rob’s departure lightly”.
Pejorative Tone
Referring to discussions within the community as the “Sun City Anthem Rumor Mill” displays a disrespectful attitude by the COO and the Board toward discussion by homeowners about the operation of their HOA--particularly accounting operations—and an attempt to marginalize homeowner concerns. In light of frequent, abrupt turnover in SCA accounting management, recent disputes with the Finance Committee, and minimum accounting training or experience by the COO, homeowner concerns should be recognized as founded and appropriate.
Inaccurate Representation of The Results of the Annual Audit
In order to deflect questions about the possibility of financial problems as the reason for the abrupt resignation of a highly qualified Director of Accounting, the September 3 communication states that “As a matter of fact, in December 2020, an independent financial audit by Porter and Lasiewicz, CPAs, reported the Association is on solid financial ground.”
The fact is that SCA received an unqualified opinion on the prior years’ financial reports by a highly respected CPA firm.
However, their unqualified opinion isn’t an opinion on the present or future financial position of SCA.
An unqualified auditors’ opinion indicates that the auditors are satisfied that SCA’s accounting practices and reports for the period being audited comply with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and applicable laws.
Their opinion also states that audited financial reports are fairly presented and free from material misstatements.
The misrepresentation of the auditors’ opinion only demonstrates a hastily conceived response to legitimate concerns about the abrupt departure of the Director of Accounting.
Irrelevant and Incorrect Representation
The September 3 communication ends with the irrelevant statement that “The Board is also confident Association Management is doing what needs to be done to ensure Sun City Anthem remains a vibrant community”.
The statement has nothing to do with the questions being raised about the stability of the accounting operation and accounting management at SCA.
Furthermore, unless all of the Board members were contacted and allowed to review and have input into communication, it is a misstatement to assert that the communication is from the entire Board.
I have always found Mr. Mayfield so intuitive on the lunacy that comes with a functioning board. He has invariably proved his intuition and shown us he was correct. It's time to "seriously" vet these positions to reduce the problems we seem to face, and sadly we consistently do.
Thank you Mr. Mayfield.
From Linda Baum to Anthem Opinions
What is the status of the COO’s contract with SCA? Is it coming up for review?
Linda,
From past records, the Seddon 3 year contract comes due in May, 2022. I believe the current Board is fully aware of this and her past performance is being highly studied and evaluated.
If you have comments or suggestions, I would suggest you contact the Board with your comments.
September 8, 2021
I am writing to express my thoughts regarding the “article” posted by J. Mayfield. First, I would like to suggest to the “Host” of Anthem Today and Anthem Opinion, that these sites are for information expressed in a cordial manner. These are not places for hostile presentations. My view is that J. Mayfield’s presentation is in fact hostile and has little substance.
Before I begin, I want to make it clear, in my opinion J. Mayfield has no credibility and lacks the character to present these facts in an objective manner. I suggest this for the following reason, a while back J. Mayfield approached “Dick” to publish his article I believe on the restaurant, though the topic isn’t relevant. “Dick” indicated he would not publish the article for his reason alone.
Thereafter, J. Mayfield presented it to the Berman Blog, it was published there, and with it was a declaration by Berman that unlike “Dick” he never refuses to publish articles even if he disagrees with them and so on. “Dick” and J. Mayfield and I knew that was not true. In fact, J. Mayfield told “Dick” that Berman has refused to publish several articles in the past. “Dick” implored J. Mayfield to set the record straight, he refused. There is more of this situation, and it doesn’t get any better for Berman or J. Mayfield. I will leave it there for now.
I will try to be brief regarding this inane article presented by J. Mayfield. I will not address the misspellings or grammatical errors, yet this article has little merit. Interestingly, I presume J. Mayfield is writing this as his opinion and thoughts. To further describe his article, I simply use his own words that better fit his nonsense. For reasons unknown he wrote this article without facts and knowledge other than speculation. His article is presented with a “pejorative tone, inaccurate information and shallow analysis”.
A Rumor Mill is simply unverified information, absolutely nothing wrong with stating a fact. For several days I had heard rumors, (these were not alleged rumors) that is simply what people do.
The arrogance of J. Mayfield to suggest what are COO and the Board should do as to the “process” is laughable. This following sentence he wrote just confounds, “The purposes of this article are to scrutinize the deficiencies of the second communication and the attitude toward SCA homeowners………”
Abrupt departures by the recent resignations of Finance management; Of course, J. Mayfield has no knowledge of the circumstances regarding the resignations. The prior so-called CFO was incompetent and no need to discuss his departure. Thereafter he suggests the recent departure of the Director of Accounting, who he indicates was a “Highly Qualified” Director of Accounting. What is the basis for this statement, again he has no knowledge of the circumstances? I currently operate 3 businesses and I have had many employees leave abruptly for many different reasons.Final Part of Response.
Finally, J. Mayfield comments regarding an “Audit” and that it doesn’t reflect any financial health of a company, a few thoughts to consider.
1. Many investors will not invest in places like China because they cannot rely on the Audits of those companies to determine their financial health.
2. Many investors make investment decisions in USA based on the Audited Reports and managements thoughts about the future.
3. Auditors must disclose if there are any material asserted or unasserted claims and adjust accordingly. That none are present in SCA last Audit is positive.
4. Auditors must review subsequent events, that fall into the next year to determine there are no issues. That none were present in the last Audit is positive.
5. Auditors generally must disclose or resign if there is a “going concern” issue. This means if the entity in their opinion cannot survive in the next year or so. That this was not an issue in the last Audit is a positive.
6. There are many other examples of what an Audit reflects and tells you about an entity, for now I am bored and done.
I could address other aspects of his article, but frankly I have spent more time than it deserves.
If anyone wants more information as to my initial “story” or greater explanation as to Audits terms and related, I will be happy to provide via a private email.
I apologize to anyone who has expended the time to read the J. Mayfield article and this response. There are so many better and positive things to be doing.
Peter Brown, CPAFrom Pat Slavick...to...Anthem Opinions
I APPLAUD JAMES, RANA, AND ALL THE CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS LATEST ARTICLE……EVERY WORD JUST ECHOES HOW VERY STRONGLY I FEEL ABOUT THE COMMUNITY’S LEADERSHIP, I.E. THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY,THE “SECOND CLASS” ROLE RESIDENTS SEEMS TO OCCUPY IN TODAY’S ENVIRONMENT, BUT THE CROWNING BLOW WAS THE EDICT ABOUT LIBERTY CENTER HOURS ALLOCATED TO PRIVATE TRAINING .
I COULD NOT BELIEVE WHAT I WAS READING.
SO THANKS TO EACH OF YOU FOR DOING SUCH A GREAT JOB AND OVERVIEW.
_____________________
Sun City Anthem Logic: A Lesson in Money Management Without Residents in Mind
Our guru leaders need to have a discussion with Ms. CEO and explain that residents own the joint...
From Elizabeth Breier...to...Anthem Opinions
The opening line of the E blast, “....we moved forward with offering SCA residents more opportunities.”
I often wonder who is “we“?
Is it the board?
It doesn’t say the “board moved forward..... “.
Why do I get the feeling that management is running Sun City Anthem rather than them working for us?
I feel we are seen as their subjects.
Everything about our use of any of the facilities here is up to “management“ the “we“ in all the E-blasts and notifications we receive.
I finally came to the point where I gave up and decided not to use any of the facilities here.
I belong to a private gym and I entertain in my home or go to my friends’ homes but I don’t use any other facilities.
So sad :-(
From Rana Goodman (former Secretary and President of Sun City Anthem)...to...Anthem Opinions
The board has a Secretary, why isn't she responding to emails?
I ALWAYS ANSWERED RESIDENTS when I was on the Board and copied the rest of the boards and CEO on those emails.
This is so rude to just turn it over to her to deal with.
From Nelson Orth...to...Anthem Opinions
FYI all Station Casinos opened at 100% capacity yesterday.
From Elizabeth Breier...to...Anthem Opinions
Before joining a private gym and getting my own trainer, I had trained with someone in Sun City Anthem.
When my trainer wanted me to use a piece of equipment that a resident was on, we had to find something else to use.
When we were upstairs by the track in Anthem Center and found a small corner to use and residents came along and crowded us, we accommodated them and somehow we all “managed“.
Why now is this different?
I paid good money and had to work around everybody else.
Now it seems those who pay for a trainer get the entire Liberty Center exercise room all morning- the prime time for folks to exercise!
Again, Management makes decisions without consulting the residents for suggestions.
This has been a problem from day one since we started with self management.
From Jill Shapiro...to...Anthem Opinions
Once we are at 100% capacity, I think the requirement to make reservations in advance should be abolished.
We are paying monthly dues as well as additional fees to attend exercise classes.
We should have the freedom to decide if and when we want to go to a class, without having to go online or call up to make a reservation or cancel a reservation.
I understand that for certain classes such as warm water, it is needed because of limited space.
To say I was appalled when I read the restrictions concerning access to Liberty Center would be an understatement. I applaud RANA Goodman and Vegas Voice for their excellent reporting of the facts and insight into our current Board Members and Management overreaching decisions and actions. Maybe they need to reduce our HOA dues commensurate with facilities being unavailable to residents!! Financial Planners are legally held to binding fiduciary responsibilities to their clients .....I draw the parallel to SCA Board Members /Management’s responsibility to residents.
_____________________
Remember April 1st
Rule
Got a comment?
Send it to us at:
From Buddy Greenfield...to...Anthem Opinions
Our board candidates talked of:
1. replacing our association attorney
2. reining in or replacing our community CEO/Manager.
3. Transparency
WHAT HAPPENED????
From Beach Kid...to... Anthem Opinions
Why can other Sun City's not apply these rules? .
They voted BLM out and said this is not in our community, call them.
Georgetown Texas Sun City.
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors (“Board”) of Sun City Anthem Community Association, Inc. (“Association”) is authorized under the Third Amended and Restated Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for Sun City Anthem (“CC&Rs”) recorded on May 20, 2008 in the Official Records of the Office of the County Recorder of Clark County, Nevada as Instrument No. 20080520-0004342 and the Third Amended and the Restated By-Laws of Sun City Anthem Community Association, Inc. (“Bylaws”) to promulgate rules and regulations and to enforce the Association’s governing documents pursuant to NRS 116.3102, 116.31031, NRS 116.31065, 116.31184, and 116.4117; CC&Rs §§ 3.3(a), 3.6(h), 7.4; Bylaws §§ 3.17, 3.18(f), and 3.26; and:
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has consulted with legal counsel retained in order to confirm that Formal Complaint Submission Policy adopted pursuant to this Resolution complies with Federal law (42 U.S.C. §§ 3601 et seq.), Nevada law (NRS 116.001 et seq.), and the Association’s CC&Rs; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has obtained the opinion of legal counsel that the adoption and imposition of the Formal Complaint Submission Policy proposed by this Resolution conforms to the requirements for rules adopted by community associations pursuant to NRS 116.31065; and
WHEREAS, the rules and regulations of the Formal Complaint Submission Policy are in addition to the rules and regulations previously established by the Association, but should a rule or regulation previously adopted by the Association conflict with the rules and regulations provided in the Formal Complaint Submission Policy, that rule shall be deemed and read to conform to and/or be superseded by the rules provided within the Formal Complaint Submission Policy and
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, that the Board of Directors of the Association adopts the following Formal Complaint Submission Policy as specifically set forth herein:
1. Complaints Against Others Must Be Formally Submitted via Physical or Electronic Complaint Forms Available from Management:
An aggrieved party must utilize the physical or electronic complaint forms available from management in order to properly submit a complaint against another individual. Complaints may be made against owners, residents, guests, invitees, board members, committee members, officers, staff members, or any other person associated with or entering the community.
2. Association Management Shall Distribute Formally Submitted Complaints to the Proper Party for Action:
Following receipt of a properly submitted complaint, Association Management shall distribute the complaint to the appropriate committee or personnel, which may include, but is not limited to, the architectural committee, covenants enforcement committee, human resources, community lifestyle committee, and/or the Board of Directors for action.
3. Review, Investigation, and Processing of Complaints Shall Occur in Accordance with Policies Applicable to the Complaint:
Following receipt of a formally submitted complaint the assigned party shall, where appropriate and in a manner commensurate with the nature of the complaint, review, investigate, and process the complaint in accordance with the policies and procedures applicable to the complaint at issue.
4. Harassment, Discrimination, and Improper Complaints Must be Delivered to Management for Board Action:
In the event a party receives a complaint that:
(1) may be construed as having been submitted for the purpose of harassing or discriminating against the individual that is the subject of the complaint;
(2) claims harassment or discrimination by an individual;
(3) was not submitted in compliance with the Formal Complaint Submission Policy;
(4) was not submitted in compliance with applicable committee, club, or other rules; or
(5) was otherwise not properly before the applicable committee, club, or body, then the party must promptly return/deliver the complaint to Association management.
Further, the party that received the complaint shall take no action on the complaint other than delivering it to Association management.
5. Confidentiality of Complaints:
Pursuant to NRS 116.31175, information about other units’ owners is confidential. Complaints, and information received or created in relation to complaints, shall be treated in a confidential manner by all parties addressing complaints. However, it should be noted that information relating to complaints may be subject to discovery or disclosure in a legal action or under subpoena.
6. Anonymous Complaints Automatically Rejected: Individuals submitting complaints must identify themselves on the complaint.
Anonymous complaints will be automatically rejected and shall not be subject to review, investigation, or further processing.
Complaints received by individuals who assert that they are submitting the complaint on behalf of the actual aggrieved party shall be deemed anonymous complaints as the aggrieved party is required to submit the complaint under this rule.
7. No Action Shall Be Taken Upon Improperly Submitted Complaints:
No action shall be taken upon a complaint against an individual that is not submitted in accordance with this policy.
8. Policy Does Not Apply to Service Complaints:
This policy does not apply to service related complaints that may be submitted to Association management requesting the Association address outstanding service concerns and are not alleging events of noncompliance against any particular individual.
(Ex: the pool tables need new felt, the locker room needs to be cleaned, there should be more exercise classes available, etc.).
EFFECTIVE DATE, in accordance with NRS 116.12065 and NRS 116.31068, the secretary or another officer of the Association shall cause this Resolution to be either hand delivered or mailed, via United States mail, to the physical or electronic mailing address of each Unit, or to any other mailing or electronic address designated in writing by the Unit’s Owner, within thirty (30) days of the date of execution below. Said Resolution shall be effective thirty (30) days after the date of such hand-delivery or mailing, which may be proven by a proof of mailing and/or delivery retained in the Association’s records.
INCORPORATION INTO OMNIBUS RULE DOCUMENT, subsequent to and in accordance with this Resolution, the Association may incorporate the rules and regulations established within this Resolution into a single, omnibus document containing other rules and regulations for the Association. The language of the Resolution must be incorporated into such an omnibus document in the same manner as it is set forth herein. Incorporation of the language of this Resolution into an omnibus document shall be considered a courtesy or convenience to residents and shall in no way be construed to require the delivery or mailing of identical rules for the rules set forth herein to remain effective. The rules established by this Resolution shall be effective and remain effective from the date set forth herein until such time as they may be amended, abolished, changed, or otherwise eliminated by the Association’s Board of Directors.
RESOLUTION TO CONFORM WITH NRS 116, this resolution was drafted in conformance with Nevada and Federal law, including, but not limited to, Chapter One-Hundred Sixteen of the Nevada Revised Statutes, as of the date of execution of this document. Further, pursuant to this statement of conformance within this Resolution and NRS 116.1206, this Resolution and the rules and regulations established hereby shall be deemed and read to conform to and/or be superseded by Chapter One-Hundred Sixteen of the Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS 116.001 et seq.) and any future amendments to such Chapter, and no amendment to this Resolution shall be necessary for such conformance.
A day after the Nevada Secretary of State’s office confirmed an investigation into numerous election integrity violations, Democrats in the State Legislature submitted a bill making permanent the controversial practice of sending mail-in ballots to all voters.
Additionally, the bill permanently legalizes the practice of ballot harvesting with no new remedies to curb fraud and/or abuse.
WHAT ASSEMBLY BILL-321 WILL DO:
1. Distributes to each active registered voter in the county a mail ballot for every election without individual voter request or consent.
2. Makes ballot harvesting permanent.
3 Mail ballots that are not postmarked can be received three days after election day and still be counted.
4. Allows for people to help fill out the ballot for certain voters as long as a written statement is provided.
Under the bill, a voter who is unable to read or write can have someone mark the ballot for them if they sign a written statement allowing someone to help them.
The bill provides no mechanism for verification that the voter’s intent was accurately carried out.
5. Fails to address any election integrity concerns from the last election.
Read the entire bill:
https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/NELIS/REL/81st2021/Bill/7842/Text
Do you have an opinion of this pending legislation?
Send your comments to us, then send your thoughts to those who will shortly decide its passage.
The legislators and their email addresses can be obtained by merely clicking on the link below each name.
DEMOCRATS:
Assemblywoman Brittany Miller
Brittney.Miller@asm.state.nv.us
Assemblywoman Sandra Jauregui
Sandra.Jauregui@asm.state.nv.us
Speaker Jason Frierson
Jason.Frierson@asm.state.nv.us
Assemblywoman Cecelia Gonzalez
Cecelia.Gonzalez@asm.state.nv.us
Assemblywoman Danielle Monroe-Moreno
Daniele.MonroeMoreno@asm.state.nv.us
Assemblywoman Clara Thomas
Assemblyman Selena Torres
REPUBLICANS:
Assemblywoman Jill Dickman
Assemblyman Glen Leavitt
Assemblyman Andy Matthews
Assemblyman Richard McArthur
Richard.McArthur@asm.state.nv.us
____________________
Here are the eight major provisions of this bill that would dramatically change the American voting system.
1. It would state voter ID laws that require a voter to authenticate his 321or her identity.
It would force states to allow anyone to vote who simply signs a form saying that they are who they claim they are.
When combined with the mandate that states implement same-day voter registration, it means one could walk into any polling place on Election Day, register under the name John Smith, sign a form claiming you really are John Smith, cast a ballot, and walk out.
Not only would election officials have no way of preventing that or verifying that you not really John Smith, one could repeat this at as many polling places as I can get to.
2. It would make absentee ballots even more insecure than they already are.
Not only could states not apply any ID requirement to absentee ballots, they could not enforce any witness signature or notarization requirement.
States that wisely ban candidates, campaign staffers, party activists, and political operatives from handling or delivering absentee ballots would see that ban voided.
HR 1 would require states to give access to absentee ballots to third-party strangers who may have a stake in the outcome of the election.
All states also have to create permanent absentee ballot lists for anyone who wants to vote entirely by mail in all elections and mail absentee ballot request forms to all registered voters, a real problem given how inaccurate state voter registration rolls are.
3. It would worsen the problem of inaccurate registration rolls, which are full of people who have died, moved away, are ineligible felons or noncitizens, or are registered more than once.
HR-1 severely restricts the ability of states to take the basic steps necessary to maintain the accuracy of their voter rolls, such as comparing their lists with those of other states or using the U.S. Postal Service’s National Change of Address System to find individuals who have moved.
4. It would take away a person's ability to decide whether you want to register to vote.
Instead, it requires states to automatically register individuals who interact with state agencies such as the Department of Motor Vehicles and welfare offices, as well as numerous federal agencies.
This will not only lead to multiple registrations of individuals in the same and multiple states, but the registration of undocumented and other ineligible individuals.
5. It would force states to allow online registration, opening up the voter registration system to massive fraud by hackers and cyber criminals.
It also severely restricts the ability of state officials to reject a voter registration application, even when it is rejected because the official thinks the individual is ineligible to vote.
6. It imposes onerous new regulatory restrictions on political speech and activity, including online and policy-related speech, by candidates, citizens, civic groups, unions, corporations, and nonprofit organizations.
The disclosure provisions that apply to membership organizations like the National Rifle Association, Citizens for Life, and other organizations that Americans of all political stripes join to multiply their voices on important issues could likely subject donors to intimidation and harassment.
It is the modern equivalent of the donor disclosure requirements that state governments tried to impose on civil rights organizations in the 1950s—requirements the Supreme Court deemed unconstitutional.
7. It would authorize the IRS to investigate and consider the political and policy positions of nonprofit organizations when they apply for tax-exempt status.
This would enable the political party in control of the White House (and thus the IRS) to use the IRS to go after anyone criticizing it or its policies.
8. It would set up a public funding program for candidates running for Congress.
This would force taxpayers to subsidize the political campaigns of individuals they may vehemently disagree with and wouldn’t vote for in a million years.
Got a comment? What are your thoughts on this proposed legislation?
Tomorrow, we will discuss the provisions of a Nevada bill AB321, a bill currently in the Nevada legislation that also promotes this federal legislation.
Send them to us at:
From Marty Winger...to...Anthem Opinions
This has been going on for, well, YEARS!
Just when and what will it take to get it off the table rather than keep kicking it down the road?
OMG...does anyone have the guts to make a commitment and finally finish it?
Speak up someone...who is in the position to do it, or just move aside and say, "I can't do this."
Enough please.
____________________
SCA-BOD Not Taking Care of Business
by
Rana Goodman / Anthem Today
When leaving SCA for any reason, my usual route is down Anthem Parkway, each time I leave for whatever reason I can feel my blood pressure rise. No, not because of my fellow driver’s behavior, but due to the look of our beautiful community.
I know I am not the only resident to have issues with the way Anthem Council manages the landscaping work done in maintaining the look of this community.
In case you were not aware, SCA contributes more than any of the other communities up on this hill, like Solara, Anthem Highlands, and others the amount, $633,000 per year, and in 2021 it goes up $100 more.
Next time you are on Anthem Parkway, have a look at the large barren spaces between floral plantings. Take a look at the trees all the way down and especially as you return past the entry waterfall..
Limbs are dead or broken, some leaning far out of the natural growth pattern.
Considering that the landscape company has received the contract year after year.
It seems our board feels since Art Schutz is the SCA representative they don’t need to pay much attention; however since they are watching over the dollars spent from our assessments, one would think they need to start asking questions and insisting that the landscape be maintained in a fashion befitting the amount of funds spent.
Since the summer, the Board and management have less distraction because of the activity center shutdowns. One would think they would use this time to do things like clean up the SCA website and get things accomplished around the community.
At one time the Jim Coleman issue was the excuse for being distracted from taking care of things.
Now what is the excuse?
On 12/27/2020 the other blogger posted the annual report written by the SCA board president, Richard Pope.
He has made it look like the board has been very busy but now there are a few glaring omissions, for example “pushed a number of facility projects thru, and created the Restaurant, Strategic Planning task forces, which are both currently on hold”.
What about the committee formed to create a survey that the prior board promised residents they would be receiving this year?
Then he wrote, further down in the report, ” the Board met with representatives of SODEXO, to learn more about what they might be able to offer SCA.
They are coming back out later this month to evaluate SCA’s kitchen, restaurant, and bar areas and will be preparing a fully informed proposal for the Board to review.”
The whole idea of the survey was because the last one sent out regarding the restaurant was basically a YES or NO, do the owners want a restaurant.
Many of the owners in SCA wrote into the board at the time that they would only be interested in a restaurant if there was no subsidy.
The prior board pledged a new survey would go out before a “self managed” restaurant was opened giving owners facts and figures about the costs of licensing, and running the place.
We still have not had a voice in wanting or not wanting the restaurant reopened... I think it will be interesting to see if they intend to give us facts and figures of cost to we owners even if the Sodexo deal became a reality.
And by the way, it would be nice, should that happen, if the board send a BIG THANK YOU to resident and prior restaurant owner, Frank Lewis, for passing along that connection to me.
____________________
Technically a Corp...but...Still an HOA
In his annual SCA president’s report, Richard Pope spoke quite a bit about our board wanting to redefine the way the board functions; they want it to run like any large corporation…
For example, they are rethinking the need for board members to be liaisons to volunteer committees and basically, as I understand it, run SCA as a corporate board. The problem with that the “shareholders", that is you, me and 7,142 (not counting you and me), are only being told what has been decided without any chance to weigh in.
Connecting with we “shareholders” seems to have been cut out of the equation….
What happened to that particular board’s pledge, while running for office, of TRANSPARENCY?
It sounds to me that they have retreated back to “telling us” if indeed we are granted knowing, what has been decided, take it or leave it.
I’m so disappointed since I truly believed this group meant what they promised… It makes me think of some of my father’s edicts when he was in a foul mood and I dared to ask why.
The response was always, “yours is not to reason why, your is to do as you are told”… WOW!
Are they really cutting off board participation with we owners?
Are we only allowed to communicate with management?
Because that is exactly what it sounds like to me!
___________________
with no doubt, they'll use the "COVID-19 Excuse" to justify their actions
ReplyDeleteI found the Board Presidents’ message confusing in his vague comments regarding how he envisions realignment of responsibility and the lack of action on important issues disappointing. On the one hand they have put a hold on the restaurant committee and yet apparently they’re moving forward with the restaurant. So much for a survey of the residents to get an idea of what the community wants or what makes the most fiscal sense. It’s difficult to believe that in these economic times with so many restaurants shut down that under any circumstances our community would consider opening yet another restaurant that people can only use at 25% capacity by reservation only. Restaurants in the past have not survived at full capacity so this becomes a joke.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the ACC, I don’t see that Sun City Anthem has ever taken an interest in how the residents’ money is spent in our contribution to that group. Has there ever been an audit? Is it made public? Don’t we have a right to know how money is being spent? What qualifications do Orlov and Schuetz possess that we are leaving everything in their hands?
It’s very difficult to have much confidence in a board or a board president that asks residents to submit their application to fill an empty seat and after the vetting process decide that they didn’t want to be bothered because “there isn’t enough time“ to acclimate that potential new board member.
They look like a bunch of fickle teenagers and puts into question their ability to run an entire community.
There are some people that just can talk a good game but it’s just a lot of smoke and hot air. They feel good because they puff themselves up.
You are right Rana - so much for the transparency!!!!!!!
RIGHT ON LIZ................
ReplyDelete