November 12, 2011 by tim_stebbins.

Here is the notice that was had delivered to all(?) residents of
Arroyo Vista Village.  Conflict  

Note it is a direct conflict with the Membership Meeting and the
Nov. board meeting.  Members are entitled and encouraged to attend
all Membership Meetings and board meetings. 

This is obviously distracting to that because many are also interested
in the Neighborhood Watch program.  Plus the HPD has scheduled time and
personnel.  

This is just another example of the incompetence of RMI and another
big reason the Membership Meeting and even the board meeting should be
postponed.  

Tim Stebbins

Posted in SCA Board, Community Affairs, News! | Print | No Comments »

March 4, 2009 by tim_stebbins.

At the regular monthly meeting of the Government Affairs Advisory Committee on March 4, 2009, five of the six members resigned to protest the unacceptable behavior of some current and former members of the SCA board of directors.

Included in this action were Committee Chairperson Ms. Joan Patrick and Committee Vice Chairperson Ms. Rana Goodman. Each committee member professionally presented their disappointment and frustration as they read their personal letter of resignation.

It is indeed refreshing to see people of conviction stand up for their principals. All are people of immense character with enormous talent and experience. It seems some or all of these individuals feel they can and will better serve the interests of the SCA community homeowners as a citizens group independent from the board. They each deserve our support and cooperation as they move forward.

Posted in Community Affairs, Clubs & SIGs, Operations, News!, Other | Print | 3 Comments »

October 20, 2008 by tim_stebbins.

Our board has used its business judgment to make a deal with the developer concerning Rec. Center #3.  The board decided the deal is in the best interests of Sun City Anthem.  I would like to take advantage of their business judgment too. 

Here is my proposed agreement: 

The Association gives me $1,375,000.  I get to keep this money for three and a half years with no obligations what so ever.  After three and a half years I agree to give the Association $191,190.  A year or so later I agree to begin paying a portion of the electric and gas utilities bills for Rec. Center #3 and continue such payments for the useful life of the original “Greening” features included in Rec. Center #3.   

The Association will begin saving money immediately upon the initializing of the payments by me.  I agree to establish a trust account to assure such payments continue if I do not survive the useful life of the original “Greening” elements included in Rec. Center #3. 

I think this is a pretty sweet deal for me.  It is the same deal the board made with the developer.  If it is good business for the Association to make this deal with the developer it should be an equally good business to make this deal with me.

Posted in SCA Board, Community Affairs, Other | Print | 1 Comment »

August 23, 2008 by tim_stebbins.

At the Town Hall meeting last Thursday, August 21 Roz Berman resumed her rude and disrespectful treatment of members.  She repeatedly interrupted those attempting to make comments or ask questions. 

She has upset much of the community in the past with such bad manners and we hoped she had learned her lesson.  At a recent board meeting she announced that members would be allowed to speak uninterrupted.  Apparently that promise was insincere, or at least short lived. 

When it was my turn to speak Ms. Berman interrupted me again and again and again, making it impossible for me to make my comments in a coherent way.  Her misbehavior continued with others until finally a woman more astute than I paused her comments after an outburst from Ms. Berman and stated “I thought we could speak without being interrupted.”  Ms. Berman seemed indifferent to the remark but at least she shut up for a while.   

It has been said, “a leopard can’t change its spots”, and so if there is an analogy here perhaps these characteristics are imbedded in Ms. Berman’s persona because of long term practice.  Now that she has assumed the responsibilities of President wouldn’t it be nice if she could muster enough self-control to suppress these urges for the remainder of her term?   

It is likely most of us would agree a person of integrity would apologize to each of the members treated so badly as well as to the entire community.  It remains to be seen what Ms. Berman will do.  I have not heard anything yet.

Posted in Truth Squad, SCA Board, Community Affairs, News!, Other | Print | 4 Comments »

August 7, 2008 by tim_stebbins.

It has been reported that Clark County will no longer tax the common property of homeowner associations such as Sun City Anthem. 

That would mean no more taxes on the Anthem Center, the Independence Center and other lands and buildings owned by our association. The basis is that the property values upon which our personal property taxes are based already reflect the value of these common elements and thus we do not have to pay taxes twice. 

Based on recent budgets that will mean a savings of about $15-20 for every household.  Our dues for next year will hopefully reflect this reduction in our costs.

Posted in Community Affairs, News!, Other | Print | 3 Comments »

June 7, 2008 by tim_stebbins.

Some current and former board members seem to be conspiring to commercialize at least some and potentially most of our recreational facilities. The objective seems to be the creation of a for-profit business enterprise in place of our wonderful active adult community. See this recent email: roz_berman_statement.pdf

Various recreational facilities would be leased to outside business operations so they could run them in any way they deem fit. This could mean opening virtually all of our recreational facilities to the general public of all ages for their use at will. All users would be charged fees for use. Would Sun City Anthem members get a discount? Perhaps, but no guarantees.

If these conspirators have their way members would lose control of our lifestyle. Members would lose control of our buildings. Members would lose control of the Anthem Center. Members would lose control of the Independence Center. Members would lose control of Rec. Center 3 even before it is completed. They could all become public facilities just like any other commercial business on the Strip or elsewhere in Las Vegas.

What might be on the table? Commercial lease of our Fitness Center and Indoor Track in the Anthem Center. This could become a public membership exercise facility just like the Las Vegas Athletic Club on Eastern Avenue and the I-215. Our Pools and Jacuzzi might be included too. Commercial lease of our Tennis Courts. These could become a public tennis club just like other USTA facilities. Commercial lease of our Freedom Hall Theater in the Independence Center. This could become just like any other public theater with shows such as Las Vegas style burlesque and strip performances, children’s dance and musical recitals, - you name it. All open to the public including tourists from the Strip. Commercial lease of the Delaware Room and other meeting rooms in the Anthem Center, Independence Center and Rec. 3. The lessee could rent them to anybody for any kind of meeting, conference, religious service or commercial endeavor. Here too completely open to the public. Contract Public Gaming in the Anthem Center. This could be slot and video machines in the restaurant and bar area with potential evolution to table games in the Gallery area. The list can go on and on.

There might be some benefits, at least in the eyes of the conspirators. Wildly optimistic financial projections have been voiced as a means to stabilize our dues. In reality very modest profits, if any, would likely be eaten up by the costs for personnel, administration and security to over-see and manage all of these leases.

We all paid for our recreational facilities as part of the price for our homes. We all bought a lifestyle appropriate for this time of our lives. We might be able to keep our Senior Community status for our private homes but we would certainly lose it for our common areas and recreational facilities should these plans proceed.

The groundwork is being started. At least one director has stated any lifestyle promises made to homebuyers that are inconvenient to commercialization of our recreational facilities will be rejected or ignored. If we have any gripes that is too bad and we should contact the developer to seek recourse.

Do these prospects scare you? They certainly scare the wits out to this reporter. Maybe we should read Faust again.

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

June 6, 2008 by tim_stebbins.

The title is a direct quote from our governing documents.  This is one of many promises to all of us assuring the lifestyle we chose when we elected to live here.  These are our rights, if you will, guaranteed by those governing documents. 

Here are some additional promises and guarantees to you, me and all other residents of Sun City Anthem contained in our governing documents. 

“Sun City Anthem is very special in that it is a private, restricted membership community catering to adult and senior citizens.”  

“Proof of residency within Sun City Anthem is required to obtain a Membership Card.”  

“Guests or visitors are accommodated only when such accommodation does not infringe upon the convenience or right of enjoyment of members.”  

“while every effort is made to provide comfortable use of the Association facilities by all members and guests, the facilities are not intended to serve the general public” 

We now seem to see blatant plans by at least some of our board members to ignore these promises, to disregard our rights.  They seem to indicate they want to severely limit or even eliminate some of the lifestyle advantages we all paid for. 

It appears that with flowery words and smiling faces at least some of our board members might to try to assure us on the one hand they are protecting our lifestyle and us while they eradicate our rights with the other hand.  Elimination of resident rights, one here, another there, and who knows, one day we may have lost them all. 

It is like the frog in the pot of cool water placed over a fire.  As the water heats up the frog does not realize what is happening to it.  But in the end the frog is dead.

Posted in Community Affairs, Lifestyle, News! | Print | 3 Comments »

May 29, 2008 by tim_stebbins.

We face a very important fundamental question:   Will we support a restaurant operating in the Trumpets location of our Anthem Center?  Will we patronize the restaurant with regular or even irregular purchase of meals?   

If the answer is no then regardless of the form any new restaurant takes it will fail.  Regardless of the form any new restaurant takes unless we welcome it with open arms as a significant addition to our community and lifestyle it will fail. 

Many indications are not very promising.   

1. Members of Clubs are circling their wagons and digging in their heels by insisting they do not want any obligation to use the restaurant for their catered events.  They want the option to go to other vendors of their choice.  While this does not sound unreasonable at first glance it is indicative of a negative attitude.  It certainly does not demonstrate an enthusiastic spirit of support for our restaurant.  It is unlikely Club members who reject the restaurant for their social events will patronize that same restaurant for their personal dining. 

2. Most members have personal ideas of how the restaurant should be operated.  Too many members are saying they will only support the restaurant if it features what they want.  That might be prices.  That might be types of food.  That might be operating hours.  That might be ethnic dishes.  Personal tastes are all over the map.  This too seems to illustrate an initial negative attitude and does not get us off on the right foot. 

3. It seems most members agree two of the major features of our restaurant are the convenient location, right here in SCA, and the gorgeous views of the Las Vegas valley.  These sound good but they do not seem to be much real value or influence on us in practice.  Buckman’s Grille at the Revere Golf Club offers similar features.  Since the closing of Trumpets months ago there has been no big surge of members patronizing Buckman’s.  Buckman’s still offers only limited dinners at the same frequency as when Trumpets was open.  Members continue to dine out at various restaurants but generally are not choosing Buckman’s as one of them. 

If we choose to not properly support our restaurant, then that is our choice.  That would indicate we do not consider the restaurant very important or at least not important enough.  But then what is the point of having a restaurant?  Perhaps we should take a hard look at other uses of that space where it will actually bring benefits and enjoyment to most members.

Posted in Community Affairs, Lifestyle, News! | Print | 2 Comments »

May 23, 2008 by tim_stebbins.

Our Governing Documents, the “Constitution of Sun City Anthem” (i.e., the “Declaration”, CC&Rs, By-laws and other documents), specifies the right to use Trumpets restaurant is limited to members in good standing and their guests only. This special lifestyle promise is in writing and we all received a copy when we purchased our homes. We all paid a premium price for our homes partly based on the very desirable amenity of a private restaurant.

We hope our board will promptly establish a wonderful restaurant at the site in the Anthem Center. A private restaurant we will all use and enjoy and one we will all be proud of. How nice it will be to have a lovely and peaceful eating experience with the best panoramic views in the Las Vegas Valley. We will be free from any concerns about interferences or inconveniencies caused by outsiders. It will be all ours and only ours. Is that great or is that great?

Historical Note: Back in 2002, long before most of us lived here, Del Webb was in total control of Sun City Anthem. At that time Del Webb entered into a lease with a company called S&D Café to operate Trumpets restaurant. Terms of that lease opened Trumpets to the public and violated the promise of a private restaurant. One of the worst things was suffering large catering events held at Trumpets with typically over 100 tourists and other strangers traipsing through our lovely Anthem Center. It was horrible. Numerous times members were denied entry to our own restaurant! This soured the attitude of many members about Trumpets and they started to avoid it altogether. At transition from Del Webb control to Resident control in mid-2005 there was a window of opportunity to correct the situation and return Trumpets to members as a private restaurant. Our board at that time did nothing, the window of opportunity closed and we were stuck with wide-open public access for over two more years. Finally S&D Café is gone – good riddance. We now have a fresh start and will once again have our private restaurant to enjoy.

Posted in Community Affairs, Lifestyle, News!, Other | Print | 9 Comments »

April 21, 2008 by tim_stebbins.

I seldom comment on the blogs but a recent post by the Unity Team compels me to share my thoughts on their comments.

In this campaign, my focus has been on issues and suggesting new programs and ideas.  I have never spoken to what my fellow candidates do not bring to the table or why I think they are lacking in ability or experience. Each one of us can bring some very special and valuable experiences and accomplishments to the Board. Some candidates are more narrowly focused and some have a broader view of what’s necessary to meet the challenges here in Sun City Anthem.  For the remaining days of the campaign season for 2008, I will continue to focus only on my own campaign issues and the experience I have to meet the challenges ahead.

The campaign season is almost over. I am looking forward to May 2nd when the winners will be announced.  By now most of us have received the mailer from the Board regarding the important meeting to be held on May 2^nd.  I was disappointed that no mention was made in that mailer of the new board being announced at that meeting.  One of the issues I have campaigned on has been communication with the community.  An excellent opportunity was missed in this latest mailer to do that.  I will be attending that meeting to either be announced as a new board member, or to be in the audience to congratulate the winners and offer my support.    The campaign will be over and this will be our opportunity to begin a new relationship with the new board and the community.  Win or lose, I will be there to do just that.  Hope to see you all there too.

Bella Meese

Posted in Other | Print | No Comments »

March 1, 2008 by tim_stebbins.

Our local defrocked attorney has wasted considerable time and effort trying to smear the reputation of board candidate John Briggs.

Wikipedia, the on-line encyclopedia, has another view. 

It states comments like:“Briggs was a leader in several important legislative reforms in California, including:• Proposition 13: Jarvis Property Tax Reduction Act • Proposition 7: Restoring a tough death penalty law • California Indoor Safe Air Act, which banned smoking in public buildings • Reduced the voting age to 18 from 21”.  Learn more from Wikipedia at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Briggs_%28politician%29 

Posted in Community Affairs | Print | 2 Comments »

January 27, 2008 by tim_stebbins.

There is a very important election for 3 new Directors this April.  We have the opportunity to install change that will benefit every homeowner in Sun City Anthem.  Please take advantage of this opportunity. 

Whether you have lived here for 10 years, just recently joined our wonderful community or somewhere in-between we have all been flimflammed, bamboozled and otherwise lead down the garden path concerning our finances.  Millions of dollars are missing and each of us will be forced to pay that bill unless we take action. 

Some examples: 

The developer promised, in writing, to deposit well over $1 Million in compensation funds into our account no later than June 1, 2005.  We do not have that money yet. 

Nevada law required the developer to pay their share of our reserve funds no later than July 1, 2005.  There could be over $2 Million missing.  We do not have that money yet. 

By contract our community manager is required to collect all rents from the lessee of Trumpets restaurant.  They failed to collect over $1 Million.  We do not have that money yet. 

Responsibility for pursuing our debtors and collecting our money falls directly upon our board of directors.  They have let us down.  Whether due to incompetence, negligence, deliberate deceit, runaway ego, or other reasons the fact is we do not yet have our money after more than 2½ years.  We do know that at least some, and likely many, directors we have elected and entrusted to care for our finances have engaged in secret, illegal, meetings as well as otherwise obfuscated and hidden the truth from us.  Their motivation for this behavior is not clear but the pattern suggests placement of the desires of the developer ahead of the rights of homeowners. 

The result is not only do we not have the money due us, it is even worse.  We have been forced to sacrifice $400,000 in 2006 and $900,000 in 2007 in excess dues we paid that otherwise should have been returned to us by law, that is about $200 per household.  Plus this year we are being forced to pay an additional $100 to make up for the missing money our directors have failed to collect.  That amounts to about $300 per household and about 7,000 households for a total of over $2 Million.  That is how we have been required to personally pay the bill so far. 

That is not fair.  We deserve better.  The only way we are going to recover the money entitled to us is to change the direction of the board with new members who are not only capable but also have the will to right the wrongs. 

Carefully study and listen to the candidates we have this year and choose wisely.  We have the opportunity to install change that will benefit every homeowner in Sun City Anthem.  Please take advantage of this opportunity.

Posted in Community Affairs | Print | No Comments »

January 21, 2008 by tim_stebbins.

At the board meeting last August Mike Dixon urged the directors to attempt a removal of Bob Frank as Vice President of our Association. This angered a large portion of our community. Board candidate John Briggs and I filed a complaint with the Nevada State Ombudsman citing this action violated Nevada laws established to protect the rights of Mr. Frank as well as the rights of Sun City Anthem homeowners and therefore was illegal and invalid.

Earlier this month a formal hearing was held by the Ombudsman to resolve the complaint. At that meeting Mike Dixon agreed to place an item on the agenda of the January 2008 board meeting to remove Mr. Frank as Vice President in a manner fully accommodating Nevada laws. All parties agreed this was a satisfactory solution to the complaint, and the Ombudsman expressed her thanks stating the matter was resolved and the case file was closed.

During the Town Hall Meeting of January 17 John Briggs asked why the draft agenda handout provided to homeowners did not reflect the agreed upon action item? Mr. Dixon replied the agenda item would be added next week at the board book meeting.

After the meeting ended Mr. Briggs and I went to Mr. Dixon and thanked him for his assurance the agreed agenda item would be added.

Mr. Dixon then said he actually chose to refuse to honor the terms of the settlement committed at the meeting with the Ombudsman and would not place any legally framed removal topic on the agenda–as he originally guaranteed. Mr. Briggs and I were shocked and stated that was not fair nor in accord with the promise made at the meeting by Mr. Dixon. Mr. Briggs suggested that if this were now to be the case, Mr. Dixon might not have told the truth to the Ombudsman and to us as part of the agreement to resolve the serious matter and never intended to perform as promised.

Mr. Dixon flew into a rage. He advanced toward Mr. Briggs, leaned into the face of Mr. Briggs yelling loudly, jabbing his finger at Mr. Briggs and spraying spittle into the face of Mr. Briggs. This seemed to be a deliberate (unsuccessful) attempt to provoke Mr. Briggs into some sort of verbal or physical reaction.

Mr. Briggs, staying cool, kept his composure and professional self-control. He backed away but Mr. Dixon advanced toward him again, and again, yelling, poking and spraying. At about the time it seemed necessary to intervene to protect Mr. Briggs from Mr. Dixon, Mr. Dixon stomped away still poking his finger in the air and screaming to shocked residents how much he disliked Mr. Briggs. The still very composed Mr. Briggs simply shook his head in disbelief that any adult, let alone the President of our Association, could behave in such a manner as he watched Mr. Dixon stomp toward the exit.

The Ombudsman was promptly notified of Mr. Dixon’s refusal to honor his commitments, and she immediately referred the matter to the Nevada Real Estate Division’s Compliance Branch for investigation. A formal investigation of statute violation could lead to the removal of Mr. Dixon from office.

It is worthy to note that at official meetings with the Ombudsman no one is sworn to tell the truth. Such meetings seem to be structured so that honesty is a matter of personal integrity, honor and trust.

Tim Stebbins

Posted in SCA Board, Community Affairs, Other | Print | 1 Comment »

October 23, 2007 by tim_stebbins.

The Town Hall meeting on October 22, 2007 was very telling – and it told an unsettling tale. 

A homeowner asked a very simple question:  “Is Favil West the head of the Oversight Committee?” 

Initially there was no response from any member of the board.  They were obviously intimidated by the question and reluctant to provide an answer.  Why?  They all new the answer.  Were they embarrassed by the question?  Were they ashamed to answer?  Were they trying to cover-up something?  Again, why? 

Then the dancing began.  One director finally started talking but totally evaded the question.  Then another joined the festivities also refusing to answer the question but stating it did not matter who was the head of the Oversight Committee.  This silliness continued for several more minutes, wasting considerable time. 

Finally, after many in the audience shouted their demands for an answer to the question, it was admitted that Favil West was the head of the Oversight Committee. 

If the Oversight Committee is a worthwhile organization why try to hide who is in charge of the committee?  It does not seem to make any sense. 

If our board tries so hard to avoid an answer to a very simple and straightforward question, is there other much more significant and meaningful information being withheld from the community?

What are your thoughts? 

Posted in Community Affairs | Print | 6 Comments »

October 21, 2007 by tim_stebbins.

Nevada law states surplus funds are to be returned to unit owners or credited to next year’s dues. (NRS 116.3114 if you care to look it up) 

This year our budget calls for $900,000 in surplus funds to go to our Reserve Fund rather than to you and me.  That is in addition to about $650,000 already scheduled to go into our Reserve Fund.  We each will NOT GET about $135 as a refund of dues for 2007 nor as a credit to 2008 dues. 

Collection of the millions Del Webb owes to our Reserve Fund would put us in pretty good shape and there would be little or no need to transfer any surplus funds to our Reserve Fund.  All or most could be returned to us.  

Our board of directors has chosen to not give you and me our rightful refund of the surplus but rather put the $900,000 into our Reserve Fund to make up for the uncollected shortages in payments by Del Webb. 

Further, the proposed 2008 budget calls for a dues increase of $100 from each of us to go into our Reserve Fund – about another $700,000+.  That likely would not be necessary if Del Webb paid us the millions owed. 

The Finance Committee is working very hard to cut costs and eliminate any waste in order to generate a good budget but they can only work with what the board gives them.  So far the board has chosen not to give them the millions owed us by Del Webb. 

Bottom line: That is a net cost to each of us of well over $200. 

This reporter is not very happy about that.  How do you feel?

Posted in Other | Print | 1 Comment »

October 20, 2007 by tim_stebbins.

If you hear anyone claiming there must be a minimum restaurant fee in order to keep our Anthem Center and our restaurant private for Sun City Anthem residents and their guests only - don’t you believe it.  That is just a scare tactic to bamboozle us into keeping our Anthem Center open to the public with anyone and everyone welcome including children of all ages and behaviors.  It is a ploy to cause panic among those on limited income by a few who wish to commercialize our kitchen facilities and focus on catering rather than on satisfying the dining pleasures of the residents of our community.  We “gave away the store” to the former operator of Trumpets and they put catering way, way ahead of service to our community.  We all suffered from that.  Let’s make sure that does not happen again.

This reporter for one does not want our Anthem Center to be a commercial catering company.  I want our great facilities to provide a wonderful restaurant so we can all enjoy a good meal and a spectacular view.  We purchased our homes here to have the magnificent “Active Adult” lifestyle and we can certainly enjoy that even more now because our restaurant is available for our exclusive use.

There is no need to have any sort of minimum restaurant expenditure for SCA residents.  All we really need is a good restaurant manager with vision and a spotlight on the benefits all of us want and deserve.  Restaurant minimums are common practice in much smaller organizations such as private golf clubs, private social clubs, etc.  But there is no reason for a minimum of any kind in a community as large as SCA.  We expect around 12,000 residents.  That is larger than many cities in Nevada, even larger than some entire counties.

We do not have to be a chef to know when we are served a bad meal.  Nor do we need to know how to properly operate a restaurant to know that it can be done.  As a reality check let’s look at our neighbors in Anthem Country Club.  They have a private restaurant.  Those of us who have dined at Anthem Country Club can attest it is a first-rate restaurant with excellent food and service.

ACC has about 1,800 homes.  They have a Food & Beverage minimum for each household of $150/quarter, that averages as $50/month.  We will have over 7,100 homes.  On that basis we can enjoy the same or better quality restaurant with a Food & Beverage minimum of less than $38/quarter, less than $13/month, or about $3/week.  That is so low there should be no need for any minimum at all.  Proper management and promotion of the restaurant would certainly achieve all the revenue required for success.

Any manager who cannot make our private restaurant a winner with at least as high quality food and service as the one at ACC with no minimums on anyone should not have anything to do with SCA.  Catering parties and other events by our Activities Department, catering luncheons and other functions by our Clubs and catering personal parties sponsored by SCA residents will all add to revenues and to the success of our private restaurant. 

It will be interesting to see how the expected survey from the Trumpets Working Group addresses the matter of keeping our restaurant private.  If they say it will demand minimum purchases by residents to do so we will know they are on the wrong track.  We might have to start over with a group focused on a restaurant for the enjoyment of SCA residents rather than on a commercial catering company serving the entire Las Vegas Valley.

Posted in Community Affairs | Print | 13 Comments »

October 15, 2007 by tim_stebbins.

Posted in Community Affairs | Print | 5 Comments »

October 10, 2007 by tim_stebbins.

A presentation at the October 9^th Anthem Voice meeting illustrated that Pulte/Del Webb was supposed to turn over about $4.5 million to Sun City Anthem, that’s us, for our Reserve Fund on May 31, 2005 when governance of our community transitioned from Pulte/Del Webb to control by our elected leaders.  The actual amount given to us was only a little over $2 million.  That left us about $2.4 million short, equivalent to over $300 per home. 

The result is we have a Reserve Fund that is really hurting.  The budget for 2007 and the projected budget for 2008 are desperately trying to makeup that missing money by transferring more and more and more of our dues into the Reserve Fund.

Stern warnings about this major problem were given to our recent boards by the firm that prepared our reserve study – that is the yardstick that tells us how much should be in the Reserve Fund – as well as by the specialists that audit the books of our association.

We would expect that our past and present boards would rush to protect the interests of all homeowners and would act with fervor to contact Pulte/Del Webb in order to recover the missing money.

Unfortunately that has not happened yet.  There seems to be both a lack of interest, and will of our board members to seek the money owed to us by Pulte/Del Webb.  The policy seems to be to ignore the obligations of Pulte/Del Webb and rather to go after the homeowners to cough up the $2+ million dollars from their pockets.

This is wrong.  This is not fair.  Why should we have to pay money Pulte/Del Webb was obligated to give us over 2 years ago?  Why should our dues be increased 17% when there is over $300 per home left on the table and our board will not pick it up? 

Our Reserve Fund would be in great condition today if our money was paid to us on time.  It is likely our dues would not have to go up.  They might even go down if the missing money was in our bank account.

The $64 question is WHY?  Why is our board so reluctant to seek recovery of the missing $2+ million?  Is there something to hide?  If so, what?  It doesn’t make sense unless there is some sort of nasty secret hiding in the shadows.

Right now there are more questions than answers. 

We do know that we are still lacking the $2+ million and it is likely our dues will increase.

That makes me angry.  How about you?

Posted in Other | Print | 4 Comments »

October 7, 2007 by tim_stebbins.

At the September board meeting our directors imposed a $10.00/hour fee on all Sun City Anthem residents just to view our own documents.  The claim is that the new fee is needed to “recover our costs” for gathering documents homeowners wish to take a look at.

Question: Is this new fee necessary and fair?  Or, is it just a penalty?

Last week this reporter asked a director: “What costs?”  What charges have we incurred for gathering documents and what is the basis for those charges?

The director finally admitted that there have been no charges, but quickly added there might be some in the future unless things change.

The director said the new fee was the “only tool” the board had to address the issue of too many requests for documents by homeowners.

The director went on to state key RMI staff has spent many hours of time gathering documents and that this excessive amount of manpower time had to be reduced.

I asked if the new $10.00/hour fee was intended to discourage or depress requests by homeowners for documents and thereby reduce the amount of time expended by RMI personnel?  The director said that was not the case.

Hmmmm.  Are you as confused as I am?

Here is what we do know –

The $10.00/hour fee, or penalty depending upon how you want to look at it, was imposed even though there have been no financial costs to the Association.

Apparently the board sees this as their only tool to address the matter of gathering documents requested by homeowners.

The real or imaginary excessive amount of manpower time expended by RMI personnel to gather documents has to be reduced.

It is claimed the new $10.00/hour charge is not intended to discourage homeowners from requesting to view Association documents.

Thus the question remains – Why did the board choose to impose this new $10.00/hour viewing charge on our community?  Is this new fee necessary and fair?  Or, is it just a penalty?

Posted in Other | Print | 10 Comments »

September 29, 2007 by tim_stebbins.

I had a very nice chat with Ms. Veronica Westurn yesterday.  Veronica is a very well educated and astute member of our community with a sincere thirst to learn the facts.

She gave me a great run down on the happenings in the BoD meeting last Thursday.

She brought out a very interesting point.

Various members of the board at various times painted a very rosy picture of the action they wanted to take on agenda items.  Their presentations were very good and can even be convincing to many.

The key point to note is they only give one side of the issues, their side.  They only present the information they want to present, only that which supports their side.  They present only the facts that support the view they want the community to have.  They purposely skip and leave out facts, figures on any other information that might raise questions or doubts.

They forbid any comments, questions or input from homeowners when agenda items are before the board.  They insist that only one view, their view, is to be made available to the community – at least at board meetings. 

Remember the debating teams back in high school or college?  The first speaker only presents the facts, figures and analysis to support their arguments concerning the topic in an effort to convince others they are right.  It is left to another speaker to challenge and present facts, figures and analysis of an opposing view.

Any lawyer worth their salt does the same thing.  They present only the evidence and analysis that supports their position.  The other lawyer does the same from the opposing view.  The Judge or Jury then decides who is telling the truth or has the better case.

Is it fair to our community for members of our board to present only what they want the community to hear?  Is it fair they present only the facts, figures, claims and analysis that support what they want you to believe?  Is it fair that no opposing view is allowed?  That no contrary comments are acceptable? That no facts or other evidence showing any other view is permitted?

How can our community ever be confident matters are being handled properly and in our best interests?  It can be a bit scary when we realize we do not get the whole picture but rather a one-sided view.

Maybe it is time to change the rules so all, or at least more, facts and analysis come to the attention of Veronica, you and me.  Would not we all be more confident that our board is making the correct decisions if we get more information, hear from all sides?

This might be accomplished by allowing questions and comments on agenda items from the community as they come before the board, after board members have expressed their views but before any vote is taken.

Fairness is not a trivial issue.  All Sun City Anthem residents deserve to be treated fairly.

If you would like to reply to this topic click on comment

Posted in SCA Board | Print | 4 Comments »

September 21, 2007 by tim_stebbins.

 GOOD NEWS?

The draft agenda for the September 27, 2007 board meeting shows discussion of a reserve study analysis.  This proposal concerns having the company who did our 2006 reserve study work back in time to determine just how much Del Webb owed our reserve fund at the time of transition, May 31, 2005.

This is exactly what Anthem VOICE has been calling for – engage an independent, professional, well qualified reserve fund analyst to determine just how much Del Webb owed us at that time.  Maybe the board has heard our urgings is finally taking action? 

But we cannot get too excited yet.  The item before the board is really only a proposal to get a bid from that company to do the analysis.  There is no actual commitment to do the study itself.

We estimate that Del Webb owes us between $1 million and $2 million, plus interest from May 31, 2005 to date of final settlement.  We urge the board to move ahead with the bid and the analysis itself.  That can be a large amount of money rightfully due to all Sun City Anthem residents.

Posted in News! | Print | 1 Comment »