Archive for April 2010
What Can We REALLY DO About the Mining Lease Problem?
April 29, 2010 by admin.
We have been asked frequently, what can residents of the Anthem, 7 Hills, Inspirada, Southern Hills, etc. really do to help our communities and ourselves to permanently prevent mining in the do-nut hole site? So, here is another shot at trying to explain this complex situation. This not a repeat of other posts. We have added some more details and suggestions not previously posted.
Last year, I teamed with mining project team leaders George Meese and Martin Charney to help on the effort to kill the do-nut hole mining threat. Marcia Kosterka was not involved in this initiative as she did not have the career experience, personal contacts, or skills to be helpful on that initiative. At this time, everyone needs to focus more on pulling together to achieving the objective, and much less on who gets what credit.
The desired result of that initiative was to have a member of Congress insert a relatively minor amendment to a law to reverse the exception that permitted mining in that 1-square mile/do-nut hole area. Since I had been serving as a member of Senator Ensign’s Veterans Advisory Group for a number of years, I was asked to see if Ensign’s staff could agree to help solve the problem. Unfortunately, it soon became clear the desired action through Ensign’s staff was not likely at that time, and I reported this back to the project team. So, the team proceeded to investigate other channels.
Since that time, we have all learned much more about the complexity of this project. Kay and I and others have become firmly convinced that only Senator Reid can lead the effort to make this do-nut hole go away. This 640-acre exception to the Sloan Canyon preservation area only exists because of Reid’s actions of many years ago before Anthem and Inspirada master plans were finalized. And, as long as Senator Reid is serving as Senate Majority Leader in Congress, only he can initiate the required action. So, what must be done to stimulate Senator Reid to act now?
An important factor learned early in the process was that this particular mining site would not be easy to eliminate because it contained unusually high quality raw materials considered important to the types of high-stressed concrete needed for future high-rise construction (such as casinos and condos) in the Las Vegas areas. While the future needs for such high-rise buildings are uncertain, to avoid a protracted power struggle with the mining and developer communities, an influential member of Congress and BLM representatives would have to meet with the mining industry representatives to negotiate a trade-off for removing the do-nut hole mine. If such an important (highly profitable) site is to be lost forever to the involved industries, they have reasonable expectations of seeing one or more other important NV mining sites being released as compensation.
In short, it will take a coordinated, bipartisan effort by Reid, Ensign, Titus and Heller to make this finally happen. This winds up being a major business decision facing these members of Congress. It is not a simple matter of granting mercy to our seniors and other residents, and we all need to appreciate the issues and high stakes involved.
Meanwhile, Kay and I and others believe that Senator Reid can be convinced it is in his best interests to lead the effort to do as we all have been requesting for two years. He has had plenty of time to act, and it is reasonable to insist that he get on with doing his job as the NV and Senate Leader in Congress.
Senator Reid should be motivated during this hot re-election time to actually do things to protect the air quality over Sloan Canyon and other Southern Nevada areas, and to deal with major health and water conservation matters. So, the question is what will it take to convince him to move now, rather than make more promises and wait until after the election? And, what will it take to get Senator Ensign and other Congressional Delegation members Titus, Berkley and Heller to cooperate and provide full bipartisan support to Reid to make this mining lease option get terminated in 2010? We do not want to have a partisan stalemate. So, it worries Kay and I to hear Senator Reid’s staff is thinking about a new bill rather than to amend the old one. A new bill takes a lot more time and effort, and it would doom the completed action for at least a year or two.
In addition, we need to convince our current members of Congress to write to BLM and advise them to take this lease option off the table. BLM needs to be told that it is the intent of all members of the NV Congressional Delegation to quickly amend the legislation and terminate the do-nut hole leasing option. That correspondence should work to kill the current EIS work and other unnecessary BLM activities on this particular leasing option.
In the meantime, none of us should place blind trust in Senator Reid, or any other member of our Congressional Delegation. Our position should be that this mine option simply must be killed before the November election. If Reid and others of our Congressional Delegation are not around next year, whoever replaces them may find it very difficult to move quickly enough to terminate BLM’s leasing authority. And, the current members of our Congressional Delegation are more highly motivated to act decisively during the next 6 months than they have ever been–or ever will be.
Based on our extensive government contracting experiences, Kay and I believe that if a lease is ever granted, it is unlikely to get revoked. So, we feel justified to open up the dialog to better inform our members on more of the specific details (instead of relying on secret backroom deals) so we all can act in our own best interests. We are confident this highly focused effort on the NV Congressional Delegation during the next few months will greatly help to achieve the desired results. It cannot hurt the project group’s work for individual voters to act in their best interests.
This is a high-stakes political activity. If you truly care about the outcome, you cannot rest easy until it is truly “fixed”. Your vote in November will never be more important that it is right now! Get involved now with all of our Congressional Delegation, and stay involved till the BLM leasing authority for the do-nut hole is terminated!
Bob & Kay Frank
Posted in kay_frank, 2010 Campaign, SCA Board, Laws & Rules, Operations | Print | No Comments »
Solution For The Open Pit Mining Fiasco?
April 27, 2010 by admin.
(The following is in response to some hateful, personal attacks on the SCA-HOA message board.)
Spinning the topic into personal attacks will not make the facts go away. Action by SCA members is needed-now. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, and to express them without receiving hateful, personal attacks.
The Sloan Canyon mining lease option issue was consciously caused by our elected officials. Research has shown it was not an accident, and not due to ignorance. The officials knew the high risks of allowing the do-nut hole near residential developments, but they did it anyway.
So, those elected officials must be held responsible for killing it–now. The plan to bow down and try to beg BLM for mercy to make it go away has not done the job. All it has done is stretch out the EIS process by at least another year. It should be clear by now that smoozing with BLM is a waste of time. It will not get the job done. Only the senior elected Congressional members can resolve the issue.
The Tea Party Movement has shown us that when we need our officials to fairly represent us, the people have the right to tell them what we need, and to expect them to deliver.
Why would we tell anyone else —in this case to remove the do-nut hole leasing option that can only be done by our elected officials who work for us and represent our interests.
We are asking and suggesting to everyone that wants the do-nut hole removed permanently via the appropriate legislation, to inform their elected representatives-now. They have to listen to voters, if enough of them care to put the right pressure on our members of Congress.
Responding to the wrong and unfair personal attacks from the posters above would be a waste of everyone’s time. Let’s stick to the issue, and make the mine option go away.
Kay and Bob Frank
Posted in kay_frank, 2010 Campaign, SCA Board, Operations, News! | Print | 1 Comment »
Board President Has Meltdown in April Board Meeting
April 25, 2010 by bobfrank.
Here is a digital audio clip from the April Board of Directors Emergency Meeting where Board President Jack Troia suffered a monumental meltdown. troia_misconduct.mp3
Mr. Troia blew up when asked to acknowledge that the Board really did not have a written legal opinion (as he had previously claimed) to allow secret, exclusive, early voting for Unity Party friends.
Such a major change in the election rules are required by NV Statutes and SCA governing rules to be equitably implemented with reasonable notification of all SCA members before they could be implemented. Mr. Troia was denying those facts, and he can be heard becoming highly abusive when required to admit such an aggrevious violation of law.
This is a classic example of how Unity group members refuse to admit mistakes and get furious if anyone dares to challenge them when they are caught lying.
Unity people believe they have been elected to a special, superior class of membership where they do not have to answer to anyone for anything they do with our hard-earned money. We must elect independent board members in the future or suffer the consequences of the dictatorship Unity has implemented.
Posted in 2010 Campaign, Truth Squad, SCA Board, News! | Print | No Comments »
What Is The Mining Issue Status?
April 24, 2010 by kayfrank.
Could someone please summarize the results of the discussions with Senator Reid’s Sara Moffat when she visited SCA last week? I was away and could not attend.
I hope that someone emphasized to Ms. Moffat the urgent point the we need Senator Reid to use his special powers in the Congress to:
(1) Immediately sponsor a short legislative amendment of a line or two that cancels the special, 1-mile-square exemption to the Sloan Canyon preservation acts to allow mining in that designated area.
(2) Negotiate with the appropriate mining interests to grant access to an alternative mining area to replace the current interests the mining industry has in the Sloan Canyon area in question.
If those two actions were done immediately, BLM would no longer have any authority to do mining in that area, the whole EIS process goes away, and we would no longer have to continue to worry about whether it might EVER get approved, or not. This would be a win-win solution since our people get what we urgently desire for our health and lifestyle, and the mining industry gets something in return.
It is in Senator Reid’s hands to quickly make this problem go away. And, during this election period, we voters have our best opportunity to achieve our goal.
So, we all need to pull together and focus on the path of least resistance to permanently solve this very serious health and environmental problem. As long as BLM has the legislative authority to lease the Sloan Canyon mining area, we will be at high risk of the Washington DC BLM headquarters making a political deal with the mining industry that we can not tolerate.
If Senator Reid is unwilling to take this direct action for our Anthem communities, we will know that he has unresolvable conflicts of interest with the mining industry that are more important to him than (1) human health and safety, (2) massive/unacceptable consumption of underground water for 30 years, (3) decades of unacceptable degradation to the air quality in the Henderson and Las Vegas areas, (4) dust and noise contamination in the Sloan Canyon Preserve, and (5) seriously degraded personal and business property values within a 10-mile area.
Posted in 2010 Campaign, kay_frank, SCA Board, Community Affairs, Safety, News! | Print | No Comments »
Election Committee Failing To Offer Equitable Treatment
April 23, 2010 by kayfrank.
Unfortunately, the Election Committee and Board has not yet responded to my respectful request to replace my candidate flyer with a revised version for the second ballot mailing. This is a very worrisome sign of bias against independent candidates. Here is one of the items of correspondence that I have submitted today for action.
—————-
“Action For: Election Committee, SCA Board of Directors, and SCA Community Manager
Attached are my original flyer files (color and greytone versions) sent to you on Feb 11, 2010, and my replacement flyer (color and BW versions) sent to you on April 16.
They are all in PDF format which supposedly can not be corrupted. You can see that the files sent to you were in perfect condition. But, as the fatally flawed ballot package proved, some one or some thing caused my flyer to be corrupted in the center of the first page. How did an even minor change/flaw happen?
I hereby request an investigation into exactly when, and under whose responsibility, the original flyer was damaged. We need to know this information because I am sure we all want to be assured it will never happen again in future election cycles. Once campaign material is committed to final copy, the Election Committee and CAM are legally required to protect such very high value materials from loss and/or corruption. The fact that even small amounts of corruption can creep into such an archival record is quite alarming.
Attached is my replacement flyer (color and greytone versions). I must insist that my replacement flyer be included in the second ballot package mailing this month since (1) the whole ballot package is being done anyway, (2) my flyer was mysteriously corrupted in the first ballot package, (3) the facts are correct, (4) my personal opinions are “not defamatory, libelous or profane” and (5) NRS does not allow the association to prohibit or to interfere with this type of reasonable request because:
NRS 116.31034.12 “An association shall not adopt any rule or regulation that has the effect of prohibiting or unreasonably interfering with a candidate in the candidate’s campaign for election as a member of the executive board, except that the candidate’s campaign may be limited to 90 days before the date that ballots are required to be returned to the association. A candidate may request that the secretary or other officer specified in the bylaws of the association send, 30 days before the date of the election and at the association’s expense, to the mailing address of each unit within the common-interest community or to any other mailing address designated in writing by the unit’s owner a candidate informational statement. The candidate informational statement:
(a) Must be no longer than a single, typed page;
(b) Must not contain any defamatory, libelous or profane information; and
(c) May be sent with the secret ballot mailed pursuant to subsection 11 or in a separate mailing.”
Of course, although Statutes limit the association’s responsibility to distribute a “candidate informational statement” to 1 page, it was SCA’s previously stated policy in 2010 to include 2 pages per candidate. The Real Estate Division Compliance Section has advised me that 2 pages are acceptable as long as all candidates are rigorously treated equitably.
Of course, I have no objection if you decide to offer all candidates an equal opportunity to submit revised flyers for this second ballot package. But, under the extremely tight 2-week re-voting period, it is essential that my revised flyer be included in the second ballot package, and not be mailed separately–as authorized by statute.
Please initiate your completed action promptly and confirm that my revised flyer will be included in the second ballot package mailings. Your revised voting deadlines might need to be revised once again if you continue to delay in honoring my respectful request per NRS 116.31034 and NRS 116.31175.
I am confident we all understand that the SCA board election process can be subject to many kinds of external reviews and possible revisions to ensure fairness and equitable treatment of all candidates. Let’s pull together, treat people equitably, and get the ballot and voting process done exactly right–this time around.
Sincerely,
(signed)
Kay Frank
SCA Board Candidate for 2010
702-280-2780 or 702-505-9959
kayfrank@cox.net
kay_frank_flyer_16apr2010.pdf
Posted in kay_frank, 2010 Campaign, Truth Squad, SCA Board, Operations | Print | No Comments »
More False Claims on DAB’s Blog?
April 23, 2010 by Norman McCullough.
David A. Berman (DAB) falsely reported the following on his BLOG site–regarding yesterdays (April 22) BOD meeting;
(Quote); In a related matter, resident Norman McCullough asked if residents were going to be informed about the causes of the first, mishandled effort to conduct the election. President Troia said the matter is going to be looked into. (Un-Quote)
He lied–once again. What I said to the Board was ;
(Quote) I attended the Emergency Meeting held a few days ago when it was decided to Redo the entire election process, and I distinctly recall Jack Troia saying that the matter would be discussed AT THE NEXT BOARD MEETING. Why do we not have an answer to who is at fault, and when are the residents going to get the facts about what happened and why? (Un-Quote)
I said this at the end of the meeting because after promising that the matter would be openly discussed, not a word of explanation came from our “Unity” board members.
So much for transparency — Is this going to be yet ANOTHER cover up by the “Unity” gang?
Norm McCullough
Posted in 2010 Campaign, SCA Board, Community Affairs, Operations | Print | No Comments »
“HELL NO” On So-Called “Rewards” Scheme At April 22 Board Mtg!
April 21, 2010 by admin.
(Posted with permission from the SCA-HOA web site.)
“Date: 4/21/2010
To: SCA Board of Directors
From: Steve Shubitz – Former member of WAG
RE: Proposal to SCA by Rewards Marketing & Sales, LLC - Jim Kaufman - Managing Partner
Thank you all for your service to SCA. This proposal should have been declined at the Committee Level. Please reject this proposal for the following reasons:
1. Engaging in a relationship with a Mom and Pop start up in the middle of the RECESSION which Nevada is experiencing is far too risky. Subject LLC was only formed a few months ago. Subject business uses a home in SCA for its business address which may violate our CC and Rs. Subject business has no salaried employees and no third parties/investors appear as partners in the LLC records which are held by the state of Nevada.
2. ANY resident of SCA may go DIRECTLY to http://www.ebates.com/ and sign up for free. Subsequent purchases result in cash back of around 4% (average) directly to the SCA resident. Compare that to the unaudited 1% revenue share on the table. The price of the goods can even be reduced further via the use of third party coupon sites.
3. The Henderson/Las Vegas area already has numerous discount coupons available to any resident. Some appear in the print media and some are sold in a coupon book. This market is already saturated and unlikely to engage a Mom and Pop start up doing business from their home.
4. The revenue projections in the proposal are false and may best be described as pie in the sky. The SCA Web Site is only used by around 4% of our residents. The majority of our residents are best described as computer challenged and do not engage in the same level of online purchasing as those individuals in their 30s or 40s.
5. The allegation that this relationship does not cost SCA any money is false. The ebates part of the deal cost every resident at least 3% (average) of the purchase price. Who will audit the rev share? That takes time and effort. WAG is acutely aware of better ways to monetize sca-hoa.org which basically involves the SALE of advertising space to Realtors and other target markets. This produces revenue at the front end which is easily traceable. Forming a quasi ‘partnership’ which implies an ‘endorsement’ of RMS has the potential to ‘taint’ every single SCA Communication channel in the event of the ‘failure’ of a Mom and Pop start up which is in fact highly likely in our current financial climate.
Respectfully submitted,
Steve Shubitz
NOTE: I probably can’t make the meeting on 4/22. Don’t hesitate to use my researched thoughts as a foundation for your own comments if you concur.”
Posted in 2010 Campaign, Truth Squad, SCA Board, Community Affairs, News! | Print | 3 Comments »
New Law Requires Board to Publish Opposing Views
April 20, 2010 by kayfrank.
In accordance with Nevada Revised Statutes, board candidates and unit owners are entitled to publish their opposing views in association media channels and at no cost to the members.
And, for the first time in SCA history, I have exercised those rights on April 16, 2010 (See Below Attachments).
Included are my April 16, 2010 letter to the Board, my prepared statement to members to be included in the revised ballot package for distribution before May 1, 2010, and my revised candidate flyer.
It could be critical to the election success, and to the future of this association, if the board refuses to honor my reasonable and lawful requests.
Meanwhile, it could be useful if other candidates and SCA homeowners would review the details of NRS 116.3103 and NRS116.311 75. It seems clear that board candidates and other unit owners are entitled to publish their opposing views to the board’s policies.
The law appears to not limit the available channels for opposing views to just the magazine. For example, recent board decisions to prohibit the use of Ch99 resources for campaign purposes would appear to be incorrect, if not unlawful.
For probably obvious reasons, the Directors and CAM have not previously explained these new, lawful ways to openly debate matters of broad community interest.
List of my recent correspondence with the Board of Directors:
kay_frank_ltr2_bod_16apr2010.pdf
kayfrank_ballot-statement.pdf
kay_frank_flyer_16apr2010.pdf
Kay Frank, 2010 Independent Candidate for the Board
Posted in Other | Print | No Comments »
Board President Admits Law Violation in “Spirit”?
April 18, 2010 by admin.
If you read Jack Troia’s Board President’s Report in the April Spirit Magazine, you will see that he admits:
1. He failed to get a WRITTEN legal opinion before deciding to sole-source the RMI contract,
2. He wasted the year’s time needed to compete the contract, and the board wasted two years time by not making quarterly changes in the agreement when obvious mistakes were scattered throughout. It is outrageous that they waited until the END of the agreement period to insert most of the changes that they “negotiated” to get cost reductions! What unprofessional behavior by both the board and RMI. (We need to demand to see the legal opinion.)
3. Claims to finally have a written legal opinion (but has refused to release it) that he claims gives the board full cover for its anti-competitive behavior. It probably does not even provide a risk assessment on the possibility of litigation for failing to compete the agreement.
4. Claims there are “savings” negotiated, but does not provide anything to indicate why the amounts of contract reductions would not have been many times more if competitive processes were followed.
Note that once again, Attorney/Director Ann Small is silent on the legal aspects of sole source contracting. What value is her legal training and election to the board if she does not help our community avoid such major mistakes?
See below:
“The Board of Directors at the February 25 meeting voted
to renew the management contract of RMI. Many rumors
and speculations were put forth in our Community when
the Board was considering renewal of the RMI contract. I
would like to report on the sequence of events that resulted
in the renewal of our contract with RMI.
The Board received an informal opinion on September 25,
2009, from legal counsel that renewal of the RMI contract
was possible without obtaining 3 bids. In the fall of 2009
the Board decided to start negotiations with RMI to see if
a renewal of the contract was feasible. If the preliminary
negotiations were not successful, the Association would
pursue other vendors. All Board members were provided
a copy of the original RMI contract and asked to submit
potential issues and concerns. The first such list compiled
was dated November 27 and was provided to RMI for
comment and consideration. A first draft of the renewal
contract was prepared by RMI in response to the Board’s
list of potential issues and concerns. Subsequently, this
process was repeated four times and resulted in the final
draft of the renewal contract being received by the Board on
February 22, 2010. A formal written opinion from our legal
counsel was obtained on December 2, which confirmed
the previous opinion that the renewal of the existing RMI
contract was within the spirit and intent of the law.
The final renewal contract provides for reduced
management fees of over 10% and a reduction in overhead
labor burden charges. These items will save the Association
approximately fifty (50) thousand dollars a year. The
Contract is for three (3) years effective January 1, 2010, can
be extended on a month to month basis after December 31,
2012 and can be terminated by either party with ninety (90)
days notice. Additionally, the contract has been enhanced
in many areas including indemnification and termination,
personnel matters and specific requirements for operating
policies and procedures.
By Jack Troia, SCA Board President”
Posted in 2010 Campaign, SCA Board, Laws & Rules, Operations | Print | No Comments »
Hot Postings Found On Rana’s Blog!
April 16, 2010 by admin.
In case you have missed it, the hottest blog this year for board campaign topics is AnthemToday–operated by Rana Goodman and Dick Arendt. It is really doing a great job of daily reporting on the news stories, board issues, and the candidate opinions. Here are just a few interesting links:
http://www.anthemtoday.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=1604&start=0
http://www.anthemtoday.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1603&start=0
http://www.anthemtoday.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=1606&start=0
http://www.anthemtoday.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1605
http://www.anthemtoday.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=1426
Posted in 2010 Campaign, SCA Board, Community Affairs, Lifestyle | Print | No Comments »
Emergency Board Mtg Today @ 5PM–Voting Problems!
April 14, 2010 by admin.
We just received a phone call from RMI announcing an emergency Board Meeting today @ 5 PM, Wednesday, April 14, 2010, in the Anthem Center Greene Room.
No specific agenda was announced, but we believe it has to do with major problems concerning the integrity of the current voting under the SCA Board Election processes.
The ballot information sent to members in the past few days contained very serious errors. It is clear that voting can not proceed without creating valid allegations of election fraud.
Today’s emergency board meeting will probably begin the process of dealing with the known ballot and candidate flyer corruption, and other election errors. It can not be fairly resolved through a dictated solution.
Since the election problems were caused by Board, RMI and Election Committee mistakes, the candidates and SCA members have the right to participate in the development of solutions and given the opportunity to agree on the appropriate set of remedies.
All SCA members are urged to attend! This meeting promises to be historic. Be there!
Posted in 2010 Campaign, Truth Squad, SCA Board, Operations | Print | No Comments »
What Comes After Tirzo’s?
April 9, 2010 by bobfrank.
Now that Tiro’s Bistro appears to be on the way out of SCA’s restaurant space, what is next?
I have been challenged to outline how I would approach the task of filling the restaurant space. The following is what I have previously reported on other blogs, and it is posted here for AV blog readers.
Suggested SCA Restaurant Strategy Approach for 2010-2011:
1. Catering services to be offered in all SCA Centers to support SCA club events, board-sponsored special entertainment functions, and member-hosted private occasions like weddings, memorial services, etc. Non-member/public-sponsored services would not be allowed.
Catered events would be on a planned, reservation basis with menus set for the occasion by the sponsor. Catering would be allowed anywhere on or in SCA premises–including all three SCA Centers, outside pool and lawn areas, and in the SCA village areas (for block parties, etc). An approved list of catering vendors would be provided by SCA.
2. Full bar in Trumpets with coffee and tea services and bar-style food items (nachos, packaged snacks, desserts, etc.) available from about 10 AM to evening closing time. Additional beverage and snack services via mobile carts could be considered for Independence and Liberty Centers. SCA would obtain the beverage/alcohol license for serving members and their guests only, and contract for a bar service provider. Revenue from beverage sales could be used to offset overall facility operating costs. Gaming would not be installed in Anthem Center unless approved by the majority of SCA’s membership.
3. Buffets or table service could be offered to all members using a rotation of catering companies on Friday evenings, week-ends, holidays and/or special events. Profit/loss risks would be the responsibility of the catering companies, but SCA Spirit advertising for scheduled events open to all members could prove cost-effective for SCA. Caterers would pay fees for use of SCA property used in all 3 Centers.
4. Meals-on-wheels for home delivery and/or resident party catering by one or two vendors could be offered in the entire SCA area during announced days and hours. Revenue-sharing or sliding fees would help cover the costs of shared utilities and kitchen facilities. SCA would be indemnified from all risks offered by these mobile services.
5. Breakfast and lunch services would only be offered via the catering services.
6. As part of a member lifestyle program to encourage use of SCA food services and stimulate broader socialization among our thousands of homeowners, the Board could sponsor quarterly ‘member appreciation nights’ in the Centers (in conjunction with Town Hall meetings) where bar services and catered buffets would offer low-cost food and beverages. Beverages and food would be allowed to be served and consumed throughout the participating SCA facilities. Musical entertainment could be provided in Anthem Center and the sound piped into all participating facility areas.
After this sort of approach was tried for up to a year or so, one or more regular lease operators might become interested in offering regular restaurant table services in Trumpets, and they might possibly be interested in operating a sports bar arrangement in one or more of the multi-purpose rooms in Liberty Center. If approved by the members, a small, Liberty Center sports bar and gaming service might be installed/sub-contracted so that one or more of the multi-purpose rooms could be used for special events and parties. The outside entrances in that area of the Liberty Center could allow such an offering with extended hours.
The above flexible approach should be possible on a break-even basis, and it could give multiple vendors the chance to try out their services while building SCA customer loyalty. Once SCA members learn they can expect certain kinds of quality food and services from participating companies, members may develop eating habits that lay the foundation for longer-term/expanded food services. Or, it might turn out that the above approach is best for SCA for the long-run.
Meanwhile, our history has shown it would probably be a mistake to try and locate yet another regular restaurant lessee without finding out what SCA residents will actually patronize in our facilities.
Posted in 2010 Campaign, SCA Board, Clubs & SIGs, Operations | Print | No Comments »
SHIFT STRATEGIES ON OPEN PIT MINING PROJECT?
April 6, 2010 by admin.
Is it time to shift strategies on how to oppose the open mining issue?
We believe the DOI/BLM authorities in Washington are deceiving and distracting us from the basic issues.
And we believe that the DOI/BLM folks in Washington have secretley decided to approve the leases-regardless of how many opposing signatures are submitted to them.
If true, then we need to shift our strategy and put all our attention on letters, email and voice calls to Senator Reid and Congresswoman Titus to submit a legislative amendment to remove BLM’s authority to grant mining leases at the site in question near Anthem and Inspirada. As a reminder of the situation:
· 100% of NV Congressional Members Publicly Oppose the Mining Leases, But the Project Lives On.
Because thousands of personal objections were received in the past 2 years, ALL of Southern Nevada’s elected members of The Congress have written and spoken out in STRONG OPPOSITION to BLM plans to award 30-year mining leases for operating an open pit mine for building materials near I-15, Sloan Canyon, Anthem, and Inspirada. This unique, 1-square-mile area of BLM land is on the proposed extension of Democracy Road–West of the Madeira Canyon development and near Las Vegas Boulevard. It a really bad initiative that must be killed. BLM should not waste any more money “studying” the idea, but BLM can not unilaterally kill the project.
But, even after 2 years of aggressive opposition by many thousands of Southern NV homeowners with all NV members of Congress, the BLM project continues to waste funds studying the impacts as the leases head towards a Washington DC decision. The lack of a clear decision to terminate the lease suggests problems are ahead.
· The Henderson City Council Has Serious Conflicts of Interest.
Strangely enough, the City of Henderson supports BLM’s plan for the mining leases. A few years ago, the City secretly signed a long-term support agreement with certain mining and development companies. The full facts behind this situation could become embarrassing for some past and present members of the Henderson City Council and Planning Commission. While Henderson is unlikely to reverse its position, we can ask them to explain why it can not be absolutely neutral.
Common sense should have told those involved at all levels (especially in the City of Henderson) it was a really bad idea to agree to an open pit mine that was planned for:
(1) SOUTHWEST of the massive Anthem development projects with tens of thousands of upscale and/or senior residents,
(2) Immediately SOUTH of another massive housing development that was subsequently named Inspirada, and
(3) Surrounded by the long-range gaming/business development corridor extending for many miles along both sides of South Las Vegas Blvd. and South I-15.
· BLM’s National Director is Bob Abbey (From Reno, NV) See this link:
http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/info/newsroom/2009/august/NR_0807_2006.html
Director Abbey had to be well known and personally sponsored in 2009 by Senator Reid and Congresswoman Titus to be appointed to BLM by President Obama. From 1999 through 2005, Abbey was chairman of the Executive Committee for the implementation of the Southern Nevada Public Lands Management Act. Prior to being selected for BLM Director, Bob Abbey served as a partner in a private consultant firm called Abbey, Stubbs, & Ford, LLC. with offices in Las Vegas and Reno Nevada.
Most importantly, Mr. Abbey had previously served for 8 years as Nevada State Director for the U. S. Bureau of Land Management. He provided direction and oversight for 48 million acres of public land managed by BLM in Nevada. It was during those Nevada years that a few legislative sentences were mysteriously inserted in the land management act to allow the unusual exception for the leases in question. We should not expect Director Abbey to favor anything except to move ahead with approving the mining leases.
· BLM Does Not Give Priority to Our NV Citizenry.
The Federal Government (BLM and other agencies) collect hundreds of millions of dollars from federal mining leases throughout Nevada, and other Western States, but NV does not receive those revenues.
BLM Director Abbey controls over 80% of the land in Nevada–vastly more than Nevada’s Governor. But, Abbey is not accountable for his “land management” actions to our Nevada citizens.
And, while BLM employees in NV are required to follow certain procedures and make recommendations, they do not make the final decisions. The final decisions are made by Washington DC politicians and lobbyists. In the past, Washington has not demonstrated much interest in the needs and concerns of Nevada citizens.
· It Therefore Appears Reasonable to Conclude That:
1. National BLM Director Bob Abbey has been personally aware of and quite involved in the NV BLM processes leading to the creation of the so-called “do-nut hole” exemption legislation, and subsequent BLM mining leasing actions. And, Abby and his BLM Washington DC committee structure are likely to be motivated to approve the granting of the mining leases—no matter how many letters of objection have been received by BLM.
2. Business and federal government interests have trumped citizen/homeowner interests on this matter from the start. No matter how many opposing letters are produced under the EIS, we should expect the Washington political power system to approve the mining leases, and provide empty words to deceive us in the meantime.
BLM can be expected to disregard the facts that the proposed mine is:
(a) in the middle of massive home development projects,
(b) immediately adjoining the Sloan Canyon National Preserve,
(c) planning to consume hundreds of millions of gallons of the critically-short ground water in the Las Vegas aquifer, and
(d) surrounded by the I-15 commercial development corridor along South Las Vegas Blvd.
3. The legislative plans and BLM actions used to create this open pit mining fiasco and enable it to continue appears to be a deceptive, political process. Citizens have been led to believe their voices can make a difference in the outcome, but that is extremely unlikely. There appears to be serious conflicts of interests by BLM Director Bob Abbey, his former business partners, some Henderson officials, and the leading NV members of The Congress-especially those of Senator Reid and Congresswoman Titus. We can not trust the current BLM process to respect our urgent, medical and lifestyle needs.
Bottom Line:
1. We appear to being treated by the national political system like old, ignorant fools. The leasing project should have been terminated over a year ago. It was not, so we have to believe the FIX is in, and the leases will be approved by Hqs. BLM–unless we follow a modified approach in the future that concentrates on modifying the law that allows BLM to lease the unacceptable mining area.
2. BLM Director Abbey, Senator Reid, Congresswoman Titus, and other NV Congressional and their business associates have not initiated the critical actions needed to terminate the mining lease projects. All they would have to do is use the political authority they have in this Administration to insert just a few words into just about any House or Senate Bill, and the mining lease matter could be over.
3. The decision to approve the leases is likely to be made without regard to how many citizens oppose the mining operations. To avoid unnecessary expenses and efforts, we need to initiate much more aggressive actions and demand that the project be killed via legislative amendment–immediately. Our focus should be on getting Reid and Titus to sponsor the amendment needed to remover BLM authority to lease the mining operations in the area of our concern.
When we think of the authority used by Senator Reid on his earmarks, and on the so-called “Cornhusker Kickback” and the “Louisiana Purchase” agreement, Senator Reid could have terminated this mining lease matter at any time during the past two years. We need to focus on getting Senator Reid to do what only he can do–remove BLM’s authority to lease the mining area of concern.
Our Southern Nevada citizens need to insist that the thousands of signatures already gathered opposing the open pit mine are sufficient to justify that legislative action be taken immediately to terminate the mine leasing program in question. We urgently need to submit hundreds/thousands of more letters and emails and phone call to Sen Reid and Congresswoman Titus and insist they submit modifications to the legislation that removes BLM’s authority to lease the properties. Can you agree to help in this regard?
Robert and Kay Frank
Henderson, NV 89044
April 7, 2010
Posted in Truth Squad, 2010 Campaign, kay_frank, SCA Board, Community Affairs, Operations, Laws & Rules, Lifestyle | Print | No Comments »