September 28, 2009 by bobfrank.

If you have not already done so, SCA members need to read (and re-read) Ron Johnson’s recent editorial: “On the Issue of Transparency and the IRS Tax Problem” at
http://www.scaview.org/RevRul70-604.html
and previously reported by Anthem Voice at:
http://www.anthemvoice.org/taxes_issue.html

Ron Johnson reminds us that since 2005, SCA Boards have accumulated almost $5 million of “surplus assessments” (sometimes called ’slush funds’) (1) without returning or crediting it to our members, (2) without paying income taxes, and/or (3) without accurately reporting the action taken on the surpluses in SCA’s income tax returns. This article clearly illustrates (once again) how SCA Presidents, Treasurers, other directors have appeared to conspire to commit various kinds of financial misconduct and/or fraud. We are again reminded to distrust individuals claiming that our volunteers (including the CPAs) are too smart and too experienced to make such huge mistakes. Refusing to conduct any investigative audits in the 10-year history of SCA is a clear signal of potential corruption.

Yes, our community association is over-flowing with surplus cash due to excess assessments for many years. And, yes, the basic community property designs allow our costs of running this community to be below average for Las Vegas. That situation is something to be happy about, and the law requires such lower economies of operation to be reflected in an accurate annual assessment rate. The board is not legally allowed to fix our assessments at “what ever rate the members will tolerate.”

Ron’s article reminds us that it is more clear than ever it is WAY PAST TIME for the board to return all of the HUGE accumulated surpluses to our members. Under the threat of an adverse IRS audit, the board has only just begun to return the surpluses, as required. Note the partial credits offered during the 4th quarters of last year and this year. Those are only token “dues holidays” to gain political advantage for the annual board elections. It is only the start of what has to be done.

Instead of the board, RMI, and the committees desperately searching for new and creative ways to squander the millions of remaining surpluses (as they did on such things as last year’s collapsed shade structure in Independence Center), it is time for the annual assessment rate to be cut back to between $800 and $900–where it should have been set for over 5 years.

The remaining millions of member surpluses must be credited towards future rates and/or allow the full SCA membership to vote on any proposed property improvements. Meanwhile, we remain vulnerable to a very expensive IRS audit because of so many years of past mistakes.

An adverse IRS audit and finding could cost us between $1 and $2 million. Imagine the sick feeling you will get if the board has to wind up wasting our hard-earned money by having to pay off unnecessary income taxes and fines!

Setting a fair and equitable annual assessment rate around $800 for the next year or two will do FAR more to quickly improve our property values in this depressed market than wasting the millions on pet projects sponsored by just a handful of influential individuals. In the long run, open and fair financial management decisions will do FAR more to keep our property values higher than the averages–and attract potential buyers at ABOVE average prices for those who need to sell their homes.

SCA is the best senior home value in Nevada. Our annual dues and financial management policies must be set to the proper level to reflect our superior community property designs and future management potentials.

In the future, don’t let the so-called “unity party” political action committee con you into believing that good management has caused SCA to create so much surpluses. It is obvious that SCA homeowners have been willfully over-charged. Some people might call that a case of theft. Regardless, we should refuse to tolerate it in the future.

Posted in Truth Squad, SCA Board, Community Affairs, Laws & Rules, Operations | Print | No Comments »

September 11, 2009 by Norman McCullough.

Recently, our SCA neighbor, Eunice Bohannon, had some blood pressure stability difficulties, and some inoperable cataract problems that made it difficult to see, so she was no longer able to live alone.

Eunice’s children live in CA and MO and wanted her to join one of them, but she loves Nevada, and she wanted to stay near her friends here in SCA.  So, this is to advise that Eunice recently moved from Sun City Anthem to a new, and very conveniently located, assisted living home:

The Palms At Siena,
2910 W. Horizon Ridge Parkway, Room No. 123
Henderson, NV 89052

This is located just a few blocks West of Eastern on Horizon Ridge. 

Eunice is alert, in good spirits, and hoping that more of her SCA friends can learn where she is now living and will be able to visit and/or write to her. 

In 1998, Eunice and her husband were SCA Pioneers.  They were one of the first couples to purchase and live full time in a Villa home.  Unfortunately, Eunice’s husband passed away shortly after they arrived, but she decided to stay and build her retirement life in SCA during the past decade.

Over the years, Eunice has been particularly helpful in supporting our SCA Villa neighbors. She volunteered hundreds of hours to serve as co-treasurer for handling the mailing costs of the Villa Duplex Doings newsletter.

God bless you Eunice!  We are so proud to be counted among your many friends.

Mary & Norman McCullough

Posted in SCA Board, Community Affairs, Clubs & SIGs, Operations | Print | No Comments »

September 4, 2009 by bobfrank.

David Berman recently said on his blog:

“The comments in the official statement from the Board validate an important point that I made over and over again when I was on the Board and since that time: Collecting anything from S&D would be a near impossibility because, for all practical purposes, they have no assets. And it would have also been a time-consuming and expensive proposition to chase them as individuals.”

Reply:

Thank you Mr. Berman for once again reminding us how you, David Weil, Favil West and the other ‘transition” directors failed to act properly/legally in 2005. But, your self-serving misdirection/spin needs to be corrected.

Your comment is dead wrong. It was never a matter of “impossibility” to act because the S&D Cafe V had no assets to sue.  Suing was never a viable plan of action.

The board action should have blocked access to the SCA premises until full compliance with the lease and receipt of all monies owed each month. The lessee’s huge (multi-million) catering revenues in 2005-2006 would have driven the lessee to pay promptly–if the board collection actions were handled professionally and promptly.

So, it is now even more obvious that David Berman and his fellow 2005 directors willfully failed to use the great power they had under NRS 116.3105 to block access to our SCA premises when the company failed to pay all it owed.

If necessary, the board could have terminated the Del Webb lease and avoided all of the subsequent years of negotiation and litigation. With 2 former attorneys sitting on the board, the 2005 board had no valid excuses for tolerating such lessee misconduct and for not using NRS 116.3105.

That law was the precise hammer needed to force 100% compliance with SCA requirements. Pushing for a law suit instead of enforcing the lease proves how shallow the thinking was of David Berman’s minority group.  And, “negotiating” with the defaulted lessee for different terms and conditions when the board had the power to enforce contract compliance suggests corrupt board behavior and defective legal advice.

See this link for details on the NRS 116.3105 provisions.
http://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-116.html#NRS116Sec3105

It has been clear for many years that Del Webb’s 2002 lease could have been terminated and replaced with a lease/lessee that honored the community’s interests.  And, even if a new lease was signed with the previous company, the terms and conditions could have made it clear that all complaints prior to transition had to be placed against Del Webb/Pulte, and that all rent, utilities, and revenue shares must be paid on time or the lessee would be locked out of the premises until full payment was received.

Since enforcing the lease was the obviously correct course of action, why was it not implemented?  Being informed of that “inconvenient truth” was the key reason for Board President’s Favil West’s vicious retaliation against our Business Development Club in 2006.  For daring to try to help the board, we were forced to pay $15,000 in legal fees to defend our club rights to exist and to protect our member rights to openly express our opinions about community business affairs.

David Weil, Kay Dwyer, Bob Berman, Lanie Berg and Dea McDonald (the ethically-challenged Del Webb/Pulte Vice President and previous SCA Board President) played truly shameful roles in that nasty case of fraud and abuse of the trumpets lease administration.  They should be held accountable for such gross negligence.

The board’s hateful actions in 2006 to crush the Business Development Club’s well-meaning efforts to help it solve the trumpets lease problems led to many subsequent investigations and discoveries of so much more of the board’s past misconduct. Those unfair and unjustified board actions in 2006 have generated the disharmony, increasing acrimony and demands for competent board management by so many members in 2008 and 2009.

For those who do not know it, it was obvious from the 2002 start to (2002-2005 Board Treasurer) Favil West that the “S&D Cafe V” was a totally new company and it was only one of many shell companies owned and operated by the two principals. It was always known to the board that the S&D Cafe V company had no assets, no money, no business property (not even Point of Sale equipment), no other contracts, and no previous business record.

It was also known to the 2005-2007 boards that the lessee owners never changed that no-assets situation.  2002-2007 revenues, profits, and acquired property was illegally channeled through the many other companies they owned. Even though such actions were expressly prohibited under the lease, it appears that none of the Boards or CAMs ever did anything to correct the major law and lease violations.  Why not?

But, now the amazingly damning history of board mismanagement on the trumpets lease is a matter of public records.  No doubt the embarrassing facts were important elements leading to the association accepting the highly unfavorable settlement.  A court hearing with depositions and contentious testimony revealing all of the past board mismanagement might have proven really embarrassing and personally damaging to the past and present directors.  A bad settlement was probably the self-centered/preferred option for most directors.

Meanwhile, our homeowners lost close to a million dollars from that negligent management.  Did you not also find it to be truly insulting for the board announcement to claim it was “pleased to announce” the bad results!  No wonder Roz Berman was suddenly embarrassed last week and quickly swapped positions with VP Troia.  But, was it wise for her to stay on the board and remain vulnerable to full disclosures of the facts on this and other past mismanagement?

When you really think about it, no competent director, association attorney, auditor or CAM would have allowed the lessee to continue to have access to the property if they were 30 days late for payments–much less 30 months! The open business records on this matter proves gross negligence by the Board, Finance Committees, and the Community Managers.  (And, by the way, Roz Berman’s new trumpets lessee appears to be yet another shell company–a start up with no previous business record or assets.)

Allowing a shell company like S&D Cafe V to get so many months behind in 2005-2007 for hundreds of thousands of dollars of rent and catering revenue shares was about as dumb (or corrupt) a business policy as can be imagined. Since we know that people like Favil West, David Weil, David Berman, Bob Berman and the other Directors and Finance Committee members were not stupid, what valid reasons could they have for such sustained financial misconduct and outright management failures involving losses of hundreds of thousands of dollars? Why has no involved director or CAM members had the courage or honor to explain?  Perhaps there are no reasonable, logical or honorable explainations?

With such obvious corruption in plain sight, how should the directors, finance committee members (and their subsequent directors/unity party friends) who have helped to cover up such a million-dollar misconduct be held accountable? Should they continue to get away with such million-dollar losses of our resources? If no one is punished, should we not expect it to happen again?

Contact me if you share  outrage over the “settlement” or want more information and/or wish to participate in an “accountability team”.    <bobfrank@cox.net>

Posted in SCA Board, Community Affairs, Operations | Print | 2 Comments »