January 14, 2011 by bobfrank.

Some of the other blogs have been debating whether the Community/Security Patrol organization of volunteers can survive the long series of attacks by the Sun City Anthem Board of Directors?  It seems clear (to this former board member) that the SCA Board always does exactly what its leadership wants to do.  And, no one should misunderstand the Board’s and RMI’s intent during the past few months.

Here are the links to our extensive reports on the August 12, 2010 meeting, subsequent actions, and the public misconduct by Board President (CPA)Troia and Board Secretary (Attorney) Small.
http://blog.anthemvoice.org/2010/07/31/why-change-security-patrol-name/
http://blog.anthemvoice.org/2010/08/13/security-patrol-named-killed-by-board/
http://blog.anthemvoice.org/2010/08/05/still-mystified-about-security-patrol-name-dispute/
http://blog.anthemvoice.org/2010/08/16/who-committed-the-software-crime/
http://blog.anthemvoice.org/2010/08/22/follow-the-money-behind-security-patrol-name-change/
In my opinion, the board’s intent to replace the volunteer patrol with a commercial contract is unmistakable.  The unjustified, blanket charges of “theft” and “criminal violations” by CPA Troia and Attorney Small against past and present Security Patrol leadership were intended to damage SCA perceptions of the integrity of the Security Patrol leadership and to destroy the Security Patrol’s morale.  All of the patrol’s leaders had previously completed honorable careers in public safety and/or law enforcement.  The way they have been treated by the Board members has been truly disgusting.

In addition, the piling on by Director (former attorney) Jerry Gardner, and the other Unity Party directors, shows they had prior secret meetings to formulate a carefully orchestrated plan to slowly kill the organization.  The timing and subsequent events prove to most members that the board had a plan to motivate the volunteers to quit while preparing for a contracted organization.  The plan recognized that over the past decade, thousands of SCA members had supported the Security Patrol, and the Board was naturally a bit concerned about the possibility of creating a political backlash against the Unity Party’s control of the Board during the 2011 board election.

So, who wins when the patrol is “outsourced” to a contractor?

•  Board of Directors:  The Directors seek “absolute power” over everything and everyone within this community.  Most board members in the past 3 yeas have disliked the patrol’s volunteer leadership and many of the volunteer staff members.   Due to the nature of the patrol’s mission and its elected leaders, these members have usually been independent thinkers backed by strong community support.  But, the SCA Board Presidents and other controlling officers have been dictators–not leaders.  The Unity crowd can not tolerate anything less than complete subservience.  While the Patrol has faithfully followed Board policies and procedures, ever since Roz Berman became President (and Bob Berman left the Board) the Patrol has been considered “uncooperative”.  By contracting out the Patrol mission, the Unity Party Directors expect to finally achieve total, unquestioned control over this major SCA mission area.  I believe it is obvious the board majority is not concerned about cost or quality service.  It is simply about seeking self-serving, “absolute power”.
• RMI:  It is certain that a contracted out Patrol would have to be done through RMI, and the public and private business benefits/increased profits to that company are obvious.  While patrol services are not normally offered by RMI, it is easy to envision how RMI possesses unacceptable conflicts of interest in a program to replace the volunteer patrol with a contracted service.
• Patrol Contractor:  No candidate contractor has become known to us, but one can see from way the Board normally uses sole-source contracting, it likely has at least one company in mind.  Whomever that is, it would certainly provide windfall profits to some individuals who are likely to be most grateful to the most influential directors.  While we are not suggesting kickbacks or other financial benefits are certain to be involved in this affair, one has to see the obvious potential for such hidden agendas.  Speaking as a former Air Force contracting officer, this kind of odd situation would normally be identified as a potential fraud.

So, is the “volunteer Patrol” dead, but simply put on life support until after the next board election?   Yes!  The only chance of saving the Patrol we have known and loved will be to elect anti-Unity directors in 2011 who will sign a notarized pledge to save the volunteer Patrol.

Nevada Statutes provide for the Patrol members and their preferred board candidates to have the rights and obligations to use their internal organization to oppose the board’s apparent intentions during the election period.  SCA members/shareholders should not allow themselves to be bullied into submission by directors serving their personal interests, while flagrantly violating their fiduciary duties to the shareholders/homeowners.  It this opinion is not fully understood, please contact me for specific evidence to back it up.

If the majority of the thousands of current and prior Patrol volunteers are not willing to get off their “lazy-boys” and immediately do the hard, door-to-door campaigning to identify 4 board candidates and the hundreds of SCA voters they can trust to save the Patrol, we are facing a contracted operation, MUCH higher assessments, and MUCH lower quality of community services.

Posted in Ann_Small, 2011 Campaign, Truth Squad, Community Affairs, Laws & Rules, Operations | Print | No Comments »

January 9, 2011 by admin.

Below are files containing the words in 5 recent Nevada Real Estate Division Intervention Affidavit requests filed by Norman McCullough against one or more of the SCA Directors.

Normally, such formal Intervention Affidavit words are held confidential by those making the allegations in hopes of reaching some kind of private settlement or justice from the State agencies.  But, that has not been the case.  This time, we have posted the affidavit details, and some online links of validation, to respond to those members who complain that insufficient detail is available to know what is going on.

Some readers will complain of having to deal with too much detail.  Others will complain about there never being sufficient facts posted to know the whole truth.  So, consider the following to be a middle ground.  Those who want the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, can contact us for even more details.  Either way, a fair-minded person should see that the directors can not be blindly trusted to always make honorable and legal decisions.  And, members should wonder, what they would do if the board’s unchecked wrath is ever turned on them?

In the meantime, we are not aware of one single dispute over board actions between a SCA member and the SCA Directors that has ever been settled to mutual agreement.  Nor has there been any punishment against past SCA Board misconduct, so one has to conclude the system is unfair to homeowners, and there are no reasons to keep the detailed allegations private.  It is past time to show the entire membership how they have been deceived by the directors and CAMs, and the only way to do that is through the public media channels.

This change in approach may draw some adverse public attention to the board’s gross negligence and other misconduct, but before anyone tries to condemn the victimized members for going public, it must be remembered that it was the Director’s choice to abuse their power, and to refuse to resolve major conflicts in private.

Also, each filing with the State of Nevada requires Norm to certify under oath that he is telling the truth to the best of his ability, and to recognize there could be State punishment if any allegation is found to be willfully false or frivolous.  Each filing also requires the Directors to formally respond to the member about the allegations, and they have refused to do so.  But, the directors are never punished for failing to tell the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

So, no matter who you are, or if you have previously supported the unity and other SCA political party activities, how can you have blind faith in the Director’s perfect judgment and behavior?   In these reported cases (which are a small percentage of the more than 100 filed by various members in the past couple of years), what conclusion can there be except that the Directors have been aggressively working to “retaliate” against Norm and Mary McCullough for refusing to shut up about the financial errors and omissions committed against the villas owners in the past few years?  The McCulloughs have suffered real financial harm involving hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars from SCA Board’s uncaring, mismanagement and RMI participation. Are there not significant litigation risks apparently willfully created by the Directors for SCA and themselves by such unexplainable director behavior?

It is particularly sad when one realizes that the money owed to the villas owners could have been refunded instead of wasted on association attorney fees paid to cover up the Board’s mistakes.  And, if you disagree, please post your common sense explanation for the board’s behavior.   We just don’t understand it….

—–Norman McCullough’s Allegations Against SCA Board Statute Violations——–
Affidavit #1
Affidavit #2
Affidavit #3
Affidavit #4
Affidavit #5

——————–
There has been massive evidence previously posted online by most of the SCA blogs concerning apparent SCA Board deception, fraud and corruption.  Here are just a few links to corroborating evidence of apparent willful board law violations against Norman and Mary McCullough. No one can honestly claim that no hard evidence against the Directors has been previously released.

For example, Ron Johnson has consistently reported the truth on SCA-View.  Here are just some recent examples:

http://www.scaview.org/TheCoverUp.html

http://www.scaview.org/Deceit.html

http://www.scaview.org/JusticeDenied.html

http://www.scaview.org/TheMcCulloughHearing.html

http://www.scaview.org/BermanComplaint.html

http://www.scaview.org/BoardLost150000sf.html

Previously posted on Anthem Today:

http://www.anthemtoday.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=2218&p=3923&hilit=mccullough#p3923

http://www.anthemtoday.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2073&p=3588hilit=mccullough#p3588

Previously posted on this Anthem VOICE blog:

http://blog.anthemvoice.org/2010/09/10/mccullough-foundnot-guilty/

 http://blog.anthemvoice.org/2010/08/29/was-it-a-charade-or-fraud/

http://blog.anthemvoice.org/2010/08/25/board-to-hold-kangaroo-court-on-august-26-2010/

Those who help cover up and blindly ignore such blatant board misconduct must be considered parties to what clearly looks like fraud and abuse.  NV history shows that if similar conduct was performed by (for example) the Henderson City Council or the Clark County Commission, the responsible officials were criminally charged and some went to jail.

But, because of apparently corrupt HOA enforcement, our board has skated free–without any accountability for their misconduct.  The only solution is to abolish political parties in SCA and elect independent truly directors who can be trusted to be ethical and honor their promises to SCA members/shareholders/homeowners.

Posted in Truth Squad, Ann_Small, 2011 Campaign, SCA Board, Community Affairs, Operations, Laws & Rules, Lifestyle | Print | No Comments »