April 27, 2011 by bobfrank.

This would be my roadmap to solving the SCA Board misconduct problems we have.

1. Practice the “golden rule” and implement community rules fairly, justly and humanely.

2. Resolve all disputes with members internally and avoid forcing them to go outside to seek justice.

3. Replace the discredited professionals and contractors who serve only their greed.

4. Stop the waste and abuse of our hard-earned savings and retirement incomes.

5. Assess dues for only what is needed to run the facilities at top levels, and always return the surpluses.

6. Require the developers to pay what they owe the community.

Imagine what joy we could have if those were the SCA board policies, and if our community refused to allow anyone to serve on the board unless they say what they mean, and do what they say concerning implementing those policies!

Posted in 2011 Campaign, Bob Frank-2011, Truth Squad, SCA Board, Community Affairs, Operations | Print | No Comments »

April 26, 2011 by admin.

Check out the LV Review-Journal’s revealing articles about HOA Board abuse and how once again, Sun City Anthem’s board is used as one of the worst examples of Nevada board misconduct. 

Here is today’s Review-Journal (R_J) View articles:
http://www.viewnews.com/2011/VIEW-Apr-26-Tue-2011/anthem/index.html

Here is the week-end R-J Business Section article about HOA Mismanagement:
http://www.lvrj.com/business/agency-governing-homeowners-groups-scrutinized-120534784.html

Here is the AnthemToday analysis of the situation:
http://www.anthemtoday.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=2815

And, here you can see David’s Anthem Journal’s pathetic excuses to try to blame “unfair media” for the SCA Board misconduct:
http://anthemjournal.typepad.com/davids_anthem_journal/2011/04/the-latest-media-hatchet-job-on-sca.html

Notice that not one single director, David Berman or his associates have been willing to grant Doris “Penny” Vescio, 86, Shadow Canyon Village unit owner, a permanent variance for her wall extension to protect her small dogs from another coyote attack.    Why is that?  

And, why do they continue to offer the bogus excuse that they “can not comment” on the matter?    Of course they will not comment–no one could come up with a valid excuse for their outrageous misconduct!  Based on Penny’s extensive public statements, it is impossible for the directors to get away with claiming “privacy” considerations as the reason to refuse to comment.

If the board can grant a variance for 2 years, why does the majority of those directors not vote to grant Penny a PERMANENT variance?  It is squarely in the board’s power to stop the madness.  Penny is being forced to escalate the matter until justice is finally achieved.

Forget about Jack Troia and his proven lack of human compassion on so many matters.   His time is way past.  

But, what are those other 6 directors (and particularly those NOT up for re-election) thinking?   Are they just robots or potted plants sitting around the board meetings with no mind, no compassion and no sense of responsibility of their own?  How could they do such a thing?

And, how dare any of those directors claim they CANNOT comment on the case while at the same time complain about Penny’s dissatisfaction with their treating her so dishonestly and shamelessly? 

In the independently published, March 28, 2011 HOA Gazette Newsletter, Johnathan Freidrich reported on false testimony by Celeste Bove, Roz Berman and Kay Dwyer to the Senate Judicary Committee on March 25, 2011.

He said:  “Because in their vain arrogance they insist they are the only ones who are qualified to determine what is a “false or frivolous complaint”.  They have determined all complaints by a petty, insignificant, worthless homeowner against the omnipotent board, by definition, must be false or frivolous because they, as board members, can do no wrong.  One of those women is so conceited, she essentially said to a homeowner: I am a director, and if you don’t like it when I poke a stick in your eye, then you should move.”     (HOA Gazette Source File)            

It appears these people do not realize their names (along with Jack Troia) are candidates for being permanently enshrined in the Nevada HOA Hall of Shame?  Their names might even make it into some future textbooks and business college case studies about “HOA Syndrome” and the kind of HOA board misconduct that can create litigation risks for the association.

Finally, how dare any of those 7 directors and RMI community managers expect to be respected or honored after so conclusively proving on this case (and the income taxes and other issues) that they are unworthy of community support or of future service?

Posted in Ann_Small, 2011 Campaign, Bob Frank-2011, Truth Squad, SCA Board, Operations, Community Affairs, News! | Print | No Comments »

April 25, 2011 by kayfrank.

Prophetic words that today I can still repeat—”will not cover up or
tolerate illegal secrets.”  

My prayer for each and every woman is that you, too have such a wonderful
life partner.  

Happy Easter to all. Christ is Risen, He is Risen, Indeed.

Kay

———–

A google search for “bob frank nevada” found this link to Ron Johnson’s
2007 blog! You never know what will be found left around on the Internet….

http://www.scaview.org/anthem-view/2007/08/the-sun-city-anthem-board-and.html#comment-88 

September 1, 2007 5:25 PM

kay frank said: 

My husband has never bullied anyone, including Roz Berman. Perhaps she mixes
him up with her husband. Bob is firm but soft spoken and absolutely refuses
to cover up misbehavior, or as Roz puts it “go along to get along”. 

As his life partner of over forty years, we have disagreed often and I have
always found him to be reasonable and flexible in looking at issues, but with
the uncompromising bedrock of ethical behavior. Raised by a single mother and
grandmother, Bob is always kind and courteous, and never patronizing to
women. In expecting Roz and the others to live up to their campaign and
moral duties, yes, he would be firm, adamant and courteous. 

Arthur, I think the judge found it easy to sign the notice to quit for S& D
Cafe. What she probably found remarkable was that our association board was
over two and one half years late. After not being paid rent for three years,
evicting them made sense instead of treating them like a charity case for
millionaires, and letting them stay until the end of the lease. 

Just the three years of expenses incurred in funding the utilities,
insurance, etc. for those millionaires at S&D cafe who were stiffing us on
the rent could have a significant impact on our dues increase.

In the matter of secrecy, the Business Development Club, headed by Bob
Frank, wrested the Trumpets contract out of illegal secrecy and shined the
light on it. If Bob Frank had not done so,I believe that this spring the
Trumpets amendment would have been signed in secret, sealed and delivered by
the old board before the end of their term. We would now be stuck with ten
more years of S&D cafe, with no assurance they would even pay their reduced
rent, and with gambling in our recreation center.

Is it any surprise that Bob Frank will not cover up or tolerate illegal
secrets just because “one of the club” tells him it is secret? 

————————-

Posted in 2011 Campaign, Bob Frank-2011, Truth Squad, SCA Board, Community Affairs, Operations | Print | No Comments »

April 25, 2011 by admin.

Two (2) Sun City Anthem unit owners, former Board President Favil West and Del Webb VP Randy Watkins, were among the 7 members of the Nevada Common Interest Communities (CIC) Commission accused of misconduct and serious conflicts of interest in the April 23, 2011 issue of the Review-Journal.

Two (2) Other CIC Commissioners with alleged irreconcilable conflicts of interest with Nevada homeowners (and in particular with SCA homeowners) were SCA Auditor/Tax Preparer Gary Lein and Attorney Michael Buckley (a member of the Jones-Vargus law firm involved in SCA HOA construction defects.  Michael Buckley has been a decades-long friend and associate of SCA’s discredited attorney, John Leach.

See this link for details:
http://www.lvrj.com/business/agency-governing-homeowners-groups-scrutinized-120534784.html#blogcomments?submitted=y

Many SCA members will recall that Auditor/CPA Gary Lein is the man who was hired by Del Webb and Pulte a decade ago to provide SCA’s “expert” tax and audit advice.  After recently receiving the IRS audit report that we owed $1.345 Million in back taxes and penalties for just 2007 alone, it appears that SCA is going to be needing a MUCH better auditor–really soon!

So, with 4 of the 7 CIC Commission members having irreconcilable conflicts of business interests in our association, we can see why no board complaint filed during the past 4 years has been reviewed at an open hearing of the CIC Commission and Deputy Attorney General.  That fact alone is compelling evidence of some kind of misconduct or corruption in the system.

Here is are PDF files of the above link:  
Basic Article
25apr11_comments_r-j_blog_cicc-conflicts.pdf

Posted in 2011 Campaign, Bob Frank-2011, Ann_Small, Truth Squad, Community Affairs, SCA Board, Operations | Print | No Comments »

April 24, 2011 by bobfrank.

Since this is likely to be a controversial topic, private/confidential emails to me at bobfrank@cox.net would be helpful.

Board election irregularities, and even election fraud, are common in homeowner associations. After the FBI’s reports on HOA election fraud in other area HOAs, no one should be surprised that SCA needs to protect our community from such problems.

Note that nothing has (yet) been said on the berman journal blog.  Since he used to be on the election committee, he is well aware of the weakness of the SCA system, and likely knows why they have been ignored.  No doubt he will get highly defensive about the information being posted;  but, do not expect him to favor spending any money to fix anything.

Also, if something is said on that blog, watch how it launches yet another of his dozens of bogus, personal attacks and works to try to change the subject.

He is likely to claim I have “smeared the reputations” of many directors and election committee members. But, that would be false.

All I have done is point out the obvious ways for fraud to occur in the SCA election system, and openly asked the questions on why such flagrant errors are allowed to exist–year-after-year?

In the past few years, I have privately asked these kinds of questions of directors and election committees, and my questions have been ignored and/or summarily dismissed.

Most candidates are afraid to challenge the election committee on such issues for fear of being sanctioned in some way.  But, the election committee has no authority to sanction any member for anything.

Why would my trying to ensure we have a totally honest, fair and open election be considered unacceptable behavior by those in power?

But, maybe I will be wrong.  Perhaps the Berman Blog will fully support my recommendations?   ;-)

Posted in 2011 Campaign, Bob Frank-2011, Ann_Small, Truth Squad, Community Affairs, SCA Board, Operations | Print | No Comments »

April 23, 2011 by bobfrank.

(Revised Version)

We all hope so, but at our ages and experience, we know there can be a few individuals involved in election management or facilities management who can be bribed or otherwise motivated to try to tamper with election outcomes.

Only well-implemented, trustworthy election systems  and procedures can effectively block those who might want to tamper with the ballots.

For example, a list of the 27 alleged statute violations by the 2010 Board and Election Committee and currently under investigation by the State of Nevada (Case IS-10-2182) is found in this PDF file:  List of Alleged 2010 SCA Election Violations

To answer the question for SCA in 2011, we need to list some basic features and characteristics of a “trusted” secret ballot process, and compare SCA’s current components to the desired criteria.

1. BALLOT:  The ballot should contain the candidate names printed lightly on card stock so the printing and marked votes are not detectable when reversed and held up to strong light in a dark room.

The ballot should include unique, sequential serial numbers created for that particular election to deter the preparation and casting of counterfeit ballots.

2. INNER ENVELOPE:  The inner envelope should be of the windowless type often used for mailing checks or other confidential material.

The inner envelope would contain internal tinting so the printing and writing on the ballots could not be detected without opening the envelope. The flaps should clearly indicate if there had been attempts to improperly open or tamper with the seals.

It should be impossible to detect anything printed or marked on the enclosed ballot.

3. OUTER ENVELOPE:  The outer envelope should have inner tinting and tamper-resistant flap seals. It should be impossible to detect anything printed or marked on the enclosed inner envelope.

4. BALLOT “LOCK” BOX:  The containers used to store the voted ballots in the Community Centers during the voting period should be “tamper-proof”.

The ballot “lock” box construction should use tamper-proof screws, tamper-proof door locks, and tamper-evident seals around the access door.

The ballots should not be able to be viewed,  removed or accessed at any time of the day or night until counting time.

5. BALLOT HANDLING PROCEDURES:  Ballots are either inserted directly by members into a Ballot Lock Box or sent via US Mail addressed to a reserved USPS mail box. Only the authorized voting member should be able to touch a ballot between the time it is completed and inserted into a Ballot Box.

6. BALLOT HANDLING PROCEDURES RECEIVED VIA US MAIL:  A special USPS Mailbox should be rented for the sole purpose of receiving ballots during the voting period.

Only a limited number of background-cleared individuals should have key access to the USPS box during the voting period.

Ballots should not be removed from the USPS box before they can be taken directly to, and immediately inserted into one of the Ballot Lock Boxes in a Community Center.

7. BALLOT COUNTING PROCESS:  The process of opening the ballot lock boxes and counting the votes should be in plain sight.

All members should be able to pass by and observe the activities from a distance–not to exceed 10 feet.

Once the outer envelopes had been validated as representing members entitled to vote and the ballot had been removed, the outer envelopes should be sorted in street address sequence and made available for inspection by members.

The outer envelopes should be permanently stored in case there was a question about the member validation process.

Board members and candidates should have priority access to reviewing the outer envelopes.

So, how does the SCA 2011 Ballot Handling Process measure up to the “trusted” criteria described above?

——————

IT FAILS!   None of the SCA Election system components uses any of the trusted criteria.

For example:

1. SCA BALLOT PACKAGE IS VULNERABLE TO TAMPERING.   The SCA ballot and envelopes use the cheapest materials available.

It appears possible to hold up completed/sealed ballots in front of a strong light in a dark room and detect the votes in most, if not all of the ballots.

It appears possible for someone having access to the ballots to destroy some of the ballots cast for certain candidates or groups of individuals. 

The preferred candidates would be certain to win, and the opposed candidates would lose by “reasonable” margins.

The current SCA ballots and election procedures could not detect such tampering and fraud.

2. SCA BALLOT BOX IS VULNERABLE TO TAMPERING.  The SCA ballot boxes are not tamper-resistant.  The construction is of wood with normal screws.

The access door is locked by the cheap type of lock often seen in file cabinets and office desks.

Such locks can be easily picked by a non-expert using techniques readily found on the Internet.

No tamper-resistant/tamper-evident seals are used on the doors, other potential access points, and voting slots to detect unauthorized accesses during late nights and weekends.

No information is provided by the Board on who has restricted access to the ballot box keys or about what kind of 24/7 security/access-prevention is being provided for the ballot boxes.

There are no procedures for detecting and reporting on attempted accesses to the ballots.

After normal hours to avoid being detected, it would be easy for someone to move/wheel the ballot boxes to a more shielded area from the outside and/or remove and inspect ballots via the open slot on top.

3. SCA BALLOT HANDLING PROCESS IS VULNERABLE TO TAMPERING.  Ballots cast via the US Mail appear to be mixed in with regular mail and processed without special handling.

It appears it would not be difficult for employees or volunteer members to gain unsupervised access to the ballots received by mail and to the “extra ballots” made available for members who might need them.

In addition, copies of extra or reproduced ballots can be voted by unauthorized individuals–with little chance of being detected.

An individual may also be able to (a) remove and destroy ballots from the ballot boxes, (b) to cast counterfeit ballots for likely non-voting units (such as rentals or units for sale or for rent), and/or to (c) tamper in other ways with the contents prior to placing seemingly valid ballots into a ballot lock box.

None of that kind of illegal activity is likely to be detected by the current SCA election procedures.

With so few effective security elements and procedures, how COULD the SCA election process be considered “trustworthy”?

The current SCA system is so loose it can not provide any hard evidence of ballot tampering, destruction, or counterfeit submissions, and the “certified” results can not be audited by a 3rd party individual.

So, we must argue it is important to recognize the serious weaknesses in the system and for members to demand they be corrected in the future.

We believe the SCA Board of Directors and Election Committee should care deeply about being vulnerable to suspicions and mistrust by candidates and community members.

Even if no one is discovered taking improper or unfair advantage of the election system, it must always be implemented so that it at least appears to be open, fair, secure and above reproach.  Such capabilities are the foundations of our American Constitution and culture.

SCA Boards and EC members have done little in the past to try to protect the association from allegations of unfair elections.

And, the fact that the board’s preferred candidates have won every open seat for over 3 years is sufficient cause to worry about the integrity of our election system.

We believe a board majority that truly cared about election trustworthiness could repair all of the election  system vulnerabilities in just a few short weeks, at low cost, and permanently ensure that everyone can have pride and high confidence in our election process.

Regardless of the 2011 election outcome, please help us to demand that board action be taken to provide SCA with “trustworthy” elections in the future. 

Our future in hanging on providing open, honest and fair board elections in the future.

Posted in 2011 Campaign, Bob Frank-2011, Ann_Small, Truth Squad, SCA Board, Operations | Print | No Comments »

April 22, 2011 by admin.

Is the SCA Board “robbing” the membership? 

What do you think about just the following few items?

1. Board retains almost $5 Million of “surplus member assessments” in a slush fund after claiming to the IRS such funds will be “returned” to avoid income taxes.   But, it failed to do so, and is still failing to give that money back to the members.  Instead, the board is spending hundreds of thousand of your dollars to buy time and to try to defend its indefensible acts.   Meanwhile, the members get nothing returned.   How is that different from being “robbed”?

2. The Board has been raising annual assessments at the same time it has been accumulating gross quantities of surplus assessments while it was refusing to refund the previous surpluses.   Meanwhile, the annual budgets have not reflected that the millions of surplus slush funds are on hand, but they are not being credited to the next year’s assessments.  The 2009 tax return even admits that millions of surpluses are being “carried off line”.   How is that different from being “robbed”?

3. The directors have been accused of dozens of major law violations and instead of attempting to resolve such disputes internally, they have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on attorneys to confuse and distract the authorities from the core issues.   Meanwhile the boards get away with doing what ever they wish and with wasting hundreds of thousands of our dollars on useless lawyer fees.  How is that different from being “robbed”?

There are major statute violations buried in the misconduct described above.  The SCA boards have exploited our money to pay their attorneys to get away with abusing the trust and access we have given them to manage our resources. 

Could your annual dues be cut by at least $200 each year!  Absolutely!  By the directors refusing to do that, could you consider that as being “robbed”?

The massive, $5 Million surplus accumulation of slush funds on top of the so-called major “dues holidays” prove that annual dues are grossly over-collected.  Could you call that as being similar to being “robbed”?

Of course, there is no hope as long as the community keeps voting in people who favor the developer’s, and the developer-appointed professional’s interests over our unit owner interests. 

We know the enemy–it is US.   It is our voters who are too “busy” to vote, those who vote for the board-favored candidates each year, and those who will not favor a removal election for directors who have proven they can not be trusted.  

Will change come this election cycle?   It seems too close to call.  But, it is not too late to vote and make a difference.

Posted in Ann_Small, 2011 Campaign, Truth Squad, SCA Board, Laws & Rules, News! | Print | No Comments »

April 11, 2011 by bobfrank.

Long-time AnthemVOICE blogger and frequent contributor to SCA Board Meetings, Sonny Sonnenfeld, will be the featured speaker at the SCA Veterans Club in Anthem Center at 7 PM on Tuesday, April 12th.

Sonny and his wife Rose are residents of Pinnacle Village.  Their son is the famous Hollywood Producer, Barry Sonnenfeld.    “Men In Black” was one of Barry’s many film successes.  Sonny grew up in New York and is considered a legend in the theatrical lighting industry.

Sonny will talk about his WW II Army experiences.  He served early in the War in New Guinea and other parts of the South Pacific as General Douglas McArthur was island hopping towards Japan.

Sonny was assigned to the 163rd Infantry where he survived many encounters of jungle combat with the Japanese while installing and servicing urgent military communications lines, equipment and facilities.  He was awarded the Silver Star for Valor.

Posted in Veterans Affairs, News! | Print | No Comments »

April 10, 2011 by THE VOICE.

 Last week, the board’s blog (normally called “David’s Anthem Journal”)  announced that the golf course owners were in DEFAULT on their loans. 

     — But, we heard NOTHING from the unity directors.

Then, the board’s blog (and 8th board member) reported that things were much worse than originally reported–but not to worry.

     — But, still NO WORD from the unity directors.

Few things could cut our property values and destroy our hoped-for lifestyles more than if the golf courses fail!  Every SCA homeowner (and even all homes in the Anthem community) could be directly affected by the health and future of the SCA-adjoining golf courses. 

All of our properties (not just those adjoining the courses) are significantly valued based on the open space and beauty of our resort-styled community designed around the two golf courses in the valleys.

Unity directors (particularly Ann Small and Jack Troia) have previously said that since the golf courses are not part of our common property, they have no board responsibilities, and have no direct interest or responsibilities for what happens to the golf courses that go through SCA. 

Many members remember that 2 years ago, Dr. Ron Morse, PhD, alerted us to the impending financial problems with the golf courses when he was a board candidate.  But, the “Great Oracle of All Things” (David Berman) and others in his unity group attacked Ron for daring to tell the truth, and most people ignored the obvious.

Worse than that, when a couple of board members tried to find ways to work with the course owners in 2008-2009 to help promote use of the golf courses, former director and Dell Webb/Pulte associate, Favil West, interfered with the action, and successfully blocked the initiatives.  

So, why must our board and members insist on being involved in the future of the courses running amongst us?  Some real estate professionals have said that if/when the golf courses go bankrupt, the most likely benefactor could be a developer.  The developer would most likely pick up the property for peanuts and fill up the land with a few hundred low-cost/highly profitable homes.   What could be worse for SCA?

The Board attitude is what we call GROSS NEGLIGENCE.  It is legal EVIDENCE of DIRECTOR FAILURE to honor their fiduciary duties on behalf of our community association.  

Failure of the golf courses would make previous board failures look small in comparison.  The current Board’s actions to ignore this obvious disastrous problem for our community and lifestyle is reason alone to reject all carry-over directors and all candidates who show disdain and disregard for this major problem.  

While solutions to this complex problem are not easy to formulate, FAILURE TO DO ANYTHING must be considered GROSS NEGLIGENCE by the unity crowd!

Posted in Ann_Small, 2011 Campaign, Truth Squad, SCA Board, Operations, Community Affairs, News! | Print | No Comments »

April 7, 2011 by admin.

Raid at Homeowners Association:

“LAS VEGAS — The Nevada Attorney General’s Office, with the assistance of
the FBI, served a warrant at the Paradise Spa Homeowners Association on
Las Vegas Boulevard South near Serene Avenue.

AG investigators were looking for records of the HOA. Residents allege HOA
board members have embezzled more than $1 million of their money. Many
of the people who live at Paradise Spa are elderly. They say they pay $160 a
month in HOA fees but there is nothing to show for it.

Several units were destroyed by two fires in 2009 and 2010 and the insurance
company paid $842,000 but nothing has been repaired.

Eighty-five-year-old Iris Hokanson wants to know what happened to that
money. “I heard it went to California, but it was not used on our building.
They have not rebuilt it, they have not done anything. Then they came and
stole all the guts out of the building,” she said.”

More details are found at this link for Channel 8:

http://www.8newsnow.com/story/14404196/breaking-news-raid-at-homeowners-association

Since so many HOA Boards have been accused of fraud andother kinds of
misconduct, it makes you wonder who is next?

Posted in 2011 Campaign, Bob Frank-2011, Ann_Small, Truth Squad, Community Affairs, SCA Board, News! | Print | No Comments »

April 3, 2011 by admin.

It seems like everywhere one goes these days, members are asking about the “charges”, “indictment” or “allegations” of law violations formally filed by the Attorney General against the 2007 and 2008 Sun City Anthem (SCA) Directors.

What you hear from board members and their friends is that:
…it is just a big mistake by the Attorney General.   No illegal changes were made to the SCA CC&Rs in 2008.  It was just an “update”….

After 3 years of investigations by Real Estate Division professionals, and after extensive verifications by the Nevada Deputy Attorney General, the FORMAL CHARGES are considered by the SCA directors and their association attorney to be just a “mistake”?  Really?

This is coming just a few weeks after the income tax fiasco where the board claimed that IRS made “mistakes” and SCA might be able to convince IRS to back off its demand for $1.345 Million in back taxes and penalties for 2007.  Really?

If you were a betting person, would you make a bet that the SCA Directors, and its notorious attorneys are likely to be correct?  Could both the IRS and Nevada Attorney General be wrong?   We don’t think the chances are much above zero.

The question is, what’s next?   It took about 3 years for the allegations to be investigated, validated, and charged by the State of Nevada against the 2007 and 2008 Boards. 

So, what else is in that huge backlog of dozens of other law violations filed against the boards that could be coming out this Spring and Summer? 

We wouldn’t want to be in former board Presidents Mike Dixon’s, Roz Berman’s or Jack Troia’s shoes!

– Relevant comments from Anthem Today Forum:   ccrs_anthem-today.pdf

Posted in 2011 Campaign, Bob Frank-2011, Truth Squad, SCA Board, Community Affairs, News! | Print | No Comments »

April 2, 2011 by admin.

Your April issue of the Vegas Voice in the mail and at shopping centers contains an ad on page 21 sponsored by the “Sun City Anthem Homeowners Committee to Elect Bob Frank”. 

This public exposure was necessary because the SCA Board refuses to allow board candidates to pay for ads in the Spirit magazine or Relay Newsletter–as the commercial vendors do.  Does that make any sense to you?

The Homeowners Committee Ad says:

 ”April 8th to April 29th is when you cast ballots for the Sun City Anthem (SCA) Board of Directors.  Our homeowner group asks you to vote for Retired Air Force Colonel Bob Frank because he has proven to be the kind of trustworthy director we need to defend our homeowner interests.

Bob’s strong, no nonsense leadership style has attracted some political attacks from directors and community members who favor business and personal interests over homeowners.  But, we ask you to disregard those negative forces and concentrate on the positive truths about Bob Frank’s selfless and consistent record of honest service to homeowners.

In recent years, there have been dozens of community issues illustrating Bob Frank’s leadership skills, reliability, integrity and character.  But we only have space to outline his top role—refunding surplus dues to avoid income taxes.

History shows Bob Frank was the only SCA director who opposed the gross over-charging of annual dues and who worked to avoid the $1.345 Million taxes revealed in January.  Bob’s actions included:

1.  Organized a SCA group of retired IRS specialists in 2008 to help the board avoid errors and omissions.  But, the board threatened Bob with a law suit if he asked IRS for guidance without board approval.

2.  Objected to the questionable tax policies at 2008 board meetings and voted NO on the 2008 budget that wrongly raised dues by $160.

3.  Proved that instead of raising the dues for 2008, the rate should have been cut over 50% by refunding the over $3.7 Million of accumulated surpluses as directed by IRS rules.

4.  After completing his board term, Bob helped to obtain a policy letter from the National IRS Expert that proved SCA had submitted false income tax returns—but the board ignored it.

5.  Recently, Bob reported on a possible way to:

(a) avoid paying the $1.345 Million in taxes and penalties, and

(b) avoid wasting hundreds of thousands of dollars appealing a hopeless tax case.

Finally, to give your candidate(s) the best chance for election recommend only voting for truly trustworthy people.  Eliminate errors by lining through names you do not wish to elect.

More information on Bob can be found at blog.anthemVOICE.org or from: bobfrank@cox.net”

Please remember to vote to return Bob Frank to the SCA Board.

Sponsored by Sun City Anthem Homeowners Committee to Elect Bob Frank

Posted in Bob Frank-2011, 2011 Campaign, SCA Board, Operations, News! | Print | No Comments »