So as the businessman that you would have others believe you are, how could Del Webb/Pulte sell “SCA” courses? Besides, would you really like to have those albatrosses around our neck? On one hand you talk of waste by the board, and you would want golf courses? Ask the home owners in McDonald Ranch and Summerlin what golf course ownership means to them.

You state: “…The higher unit prices, smaller lot sizes, and higher density of homes built in Shadow Canyon and Desert Sky….” Once again, you are wrong. Here is what I found on the County Assessor’s web site: 1). Bliss Corner (Desert Sky) .20 acres, 2). Bliss Corner (Desert Sky) .20 acres, 3) Freedom Hills (Valley View) .18 acres, 4) Freedom Hills (Valley View) .18 acres, 5) Freedom Hills (Valley View) .15 acres, 6) Downeyville (Mountain View) .17 acres, and at 2374 Sandstone Cliffs (Black Mountain) .22 acres!

You state: “…above history of gross misconduct by Pulte and SCA boards and RMI that allowed such a series of fraudulent actions against the SCA homeowners,…” You have used a series of untruths and exaggerations to justify a charge of “gross misconduct” and “fraudulent actions.”
You state: “…for a one-of-a-kind, very high-risk facility that is a true research and development project. It will be the first of its (sic) kind in a HOA in Nevada and maybe the first in the Nation….). Maybe for a HOA, but the following statement is an excerpt from http://fitnessbusinesspro.com/mag/campus_leeders/
“…In the past seven years, more than 8,000 new buildings have registered for Leadership in Energy Efficient Design (LEED) certification, and the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), which awards LEED certifications, has awarded the certification to 1,059 of those buildings. About 7 percent of those projects are for colleges and universities, according to the USGBC, a nonprofit organization with 11,500 member organizations….”

It has taken a while to respond to this and the Board of Directors have already approved the document and instructed Del Webb/Pulte to continue with construction. See you at the Ground Breaking ceremony.

It is commonplace for developers to stack and/or influence the elections to HOA boards by directors who are friendly to the developer’s interests. We can see this happend in SCA since 2005. Not one single, important issue has been resolved to SCA’s benefit. Not one!

In my opinion, that disasterous record proves we have been poorly served by our directors, CAMs and our developer-selected lead attorney. Remember that our attorney, John Leach, was selected by Del Webb at the early stage of this association. It is up to you to conclude whether that losing record is due to negligence or misconduct. Either way, the members have lost the millions to the developer, and it is us who will have to make up for the losses to our association in the future. The directors and developer are close to moving on to other things, and leave us holding the bag.

Finally, if the board never asks for any of the money due, without a forensic audit, we will be wasting our critical time and money and continue to be serving the developer’s interests. Without the proof of financial mismanagement from a forensic audit, the SCA claims are not likely to be provable in court against the massive legal resources available to Pulte.

If you have any doubt about the above, just ask the board to report on its successes against Pulte since 2005. What disputes have they had, and what have the boards accomplished? While you are asking, bring up the Co-Gen Plant money, the trumpets lease failure, and the RecCtr 3 failure. You probably will be staggered by the BS that comes out.

Why do I say these things? It is my job to protect the interests of the community–not the developer. Knowing that we re losing millions of dollars due to willful misconduct by my fellow board members is not something I can accept.

Most of our 7,144 homeowners are ignorant of the financial facts, and I have the legal duty to keep trying to educate members so they can excute the only true power in HOAs–membership votes. All of the misbehaving directors could be removed by a vote within 90 days if a removal election was requested by at least 10% of the members. In addition, four directors will be up for re-election or replacement at the next board election in April 2009. We will continue to get what we tolerate.

Bob Frank
SCA Director

You asked ;

“How could the 2005 board members Favil West, David Berman, Bob Berman, Bob Sansing, Lyndal Ruiz, and David Weil allow Dea McDonald and Pulte to get away with not paying the $1.4 million Co-Generation funds in 2005? And, even when they struck such a bad deal, why did they not execute a written amendment for the changes? “

One can also ask; “Why those board members allowed Del Webb to under-fund the reserves of the association AND the Villa’s?

One can also ask; “Why those board members did not INSIST on an independent audit BEFORE the transition negotiations were concluded and the funds were turned over to the resident controlled association?

One can also ask; Why those board members did not ask the associations attorney to oversee the negotiations (or why they were not advised by RMI or the associations attorney to do so)?

One can also ask; Why those board members did not ask the reserve specialist to INCLUDE the most important date in the history of any HOA – (THE DATE OF TRANSITION), when they ordered the replacement reserve study for the one rejected by the board.

One can also ask; Why those board members (after receiving the reserve study used for the 2007 budget), that indicated SEVERE SHORTAGES in the association’s reserves, and the neighborhood reserves, they did not immediately ask Del Webb for compensation instead of passing the burden of funding on to the members of this community.

One can also ask; —- But they won’t answer.