October 11, 2011 by bobfrank.

By Colonel Robert Frank, USAF (Ret.)–Former Board Member, Sun City Anthem HOA, Henderson, NV 89052

(Revised on Oct 10)  On Sunday, October 9, 2011, at 7:30 PM the weekly KDWN - AM 720 Radio Program by conservative talk show host RAY GRANT launched the first of a planned series of programs about HomeOwner Association (HOA) matters.

This show was the first action by a new “HomeOwnerCoalition.org” (HOC) organization to be fully launched in November 2011.

Many homeowners in US HOAs are working on many other initiatives, and HOC will work to try to help the combination of individual efforts to result in the maximum effectiveness on behalf of homeowners.  The common goals including ensuring that the property and citizen rights for HOA owners as being no less than those who do not own property in HOAs.

HOA unit owners are citizens, pay the same property taxes, and are entitled to equal personal and property rights protections and government services under the US and NV Constitutions.

But, Nevada HOA laws and regulations fail to fully implement all of the protections guaranteed under the Constitutions.  And, even when the laws are written to protect unit owners, the Nevada Real Estate Division and its subordinate Ombudsman Office for Homeowners often fail to comply with laws.

This is a bipartisan problem created in part from campaign financing influence by developers and related businesses interests that profit from being able to control homeowner association boards, funds and business decisions.  The HomeOwnerCoalition.org will try to balance the power and help citizens organize and act more effectively by knowing how to use the power of their votes to obtain equal justice under the laws.

Ray Grant has been on the radio and TV in CA and NV for over 20 years.  Ray is also a former professional baseball catcher for Detroit and a Christian Pastor for decades.  According to independent radio listener ratings systems, Ray Grant’s talk show has about 14,000 local listeners and a 13-State listener base.

Ray and his wife, Natalie, and son own their own shows and operate Diamond G Sports & Entertainment companies. They buy their time and sell the advertisements that run on Las Vegas KDWN–AM 720 every Sunday evening from 7 to 8 PM.

Ray’s show is focused on political issues, and it airs Sundays from 7:30 to 8 PM.  This 30-minute radio program is limited to special guest interviews and does not support call-ins.

The new HOA Problems-Solutions-oriented shows will be every 2nd Sunday evening for the foreseeable future.  (Attached below are 8 MP3 program segments from the initial, October 9th show.)

For this first show, Ray and I invited Dr. Gary Solomon and Mr. Tim Stebbins to be interviewed.  Dr. Solomon was asked about his “Warning! HOA Living Can be Hazardous To Your Health” billboard campaign and about his concerns over unchecked mental abuse of homeowners by bully boards and NV government agencies.

Listen to the below sound clips and hear that Dr. Solomon did not pull any punches.  He expressed his great concerns about past and potential future violence in reaction to unfair and  illegal actions by bully board members, the frequent fraud and abuse by board sub-contractors, and failures of government managers to enforce the statutes.

Tim Stebbins was asked about his experiences in recent years with government failures. Tim was also asked by Host Ray Grant about the failed NV HOA Ombudsman program and its failed NV Real Estate Division management.  When you listen to the clips below, you will hear Tim’s courageous reports and clear recommendations for homeowner actions.

Live (streaming) web broadcasts will be available on the KDWN web site.  Recording of the programs (MP3 format) will available the week after each show at various sites.   The new, HomeOwnerCoalition.org web site to be launched in November 2011 will maintain a long-term archive of the HOA programs.

Our future HomeOwnerCoalition.Org (HOC) site will be featured monthly by Ray Grant’s Program, and HOC will provide links to other related web sites as well–to provide access to documents and media files. This way everyone can benefit from this new media channel, and others will be encouraged to challenge other radio and TV shows to expand their offerings.  Ray is also expecting that businesses who sell products and services directly to homeowners will find it useful to advertise on his program.

Ray has had some of his own unfortunate past experiences with bully HOA boards, and he left the HOA market to live on a small ranch in the LV area. He warmly responded to my request to consider doing a series of radio shows that highlight NV government and regulatory failures, and what must be done to solve the problems.

Ray Grant wants to be sure to give due credit to those individuals and media sources like Ch13 who are helping to expose individuals and boards who are flagrantly abusing homeowners.  He intends to focus on “solutions” on his show and to inform homeowner-citizens about what they must do to protect themselves through better knowledge and activist support of honorable government management and pro-homeowner legislative reforms.

Please contact me for more information about this program in the future. Regards, Bob Frank bobfrank@cox.net  702-505-9959.

———————-

The October 9th show was very popular.  It produced a rating of over 30,000 listeners and resulted in over 3,000 web site hits during the first 24 hours. 

MP3  sound clips of the 8 program segments from the October 9th Show featuring Sun City Anthem Homeowner Tim Stebbins and Calico Ridge Homeowner Dr. Gary Solomon can be played and/or download from the following links.

1.  Segment 1

2.  Segment 2

3.  Segment 3

4.  Segment 4

5.  Segment 5

6.  Segment 6

7.   Segment 7

8.   Segment 8 (final)

Posted in Bob Frank-2011, Outside Politics, Truth Squad, SCA Board, News! | Print | No Comments »

May 3, 2011 by bobfrank.

The SCA Community Manager has reported that 1/3 of Sun City Anthem homeowners voted for Bob Frank (854 out of 2,853) during the 2011 Board Election.

THANK YOU for your support, and please continue to stay active in community governance affairs in the future.

We can be certain you knew who you were voting for, and what values and principles you wanted implemented by the Sun City Anthem Board of Directors.  You have made clear statements of your desires, and we can be conifident your voices will be heard in the future.   Even though all of your choices were not elected to the board this year, some of the policy and procedural changes you have requested may become feasible.

Rest assured, Kay and I, and the many other SCA neighbors supporting AnthemVOICE programs will continue to pursue mutual goals to defend and protect our homeowner rights and property interests.  With the sustained help from you and your friends, we will eventually persevere.

As we know from our national history, less than one-third of the American population was personally involved in winning the War of Independence from England.   And, we can have confidence that eventually, the SCA Board of Directors will finally implement the necessary balance between quality management of our common property and protection of the individual rights and private property interests of each unit owner.  Your sustained contributions and efforts will bring about those changes in this community.

Very Sincerely Yours,

Bob and Kay Frank

PS.   For your reference:  here are the results from SCA Board Elections since 2007:
2007-2011 Sun City Anthem Election Results

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

May 1, 2011 by kayfrank.

David Berman has posted the following false claim:

“Commenting on the arrests of Bob Frank and Tim Stebbins on charges of filing a false police report, the newsletter says, “Imagine! Bob and Tim were arrested and jailed because the HOA board claimed they filed a false police report.” THAT, my friends, is a defamatory lie! Before, during and after the investigation that exonerated directors Roz Berman and Roger Cooper, no Board member took any steps to suggest to the police that they should arrest and charge Frank and Stebbins.”

“It was entirely the decision of the police to arrest and charge the two SCA residents. All the Board members told me they were surprised to learn of the arrests, as they all assumed the matter was over and done with upon receipt of the Police Chief’s exoneration letter.   I defy any member of the Friedrich/Frank/Stebbins/Goodman crowd to prove otherwise.    Posted by: David Berman | May 01, 2011 at 07:10 PM”

RESPONSE:  The following shows that Berman is once again guilty of self-serving lying:

1.  Berman is NOT a board member, and the newsletter is not close to being “defamatory”.   He could not have witnessed many, if any, conversations by directors with Henderson City officials–except for his spouse who was suspected of committing forgery.

      And, as a suspended attorney and self-acknowledged forger of a judge’s signature on official tax documents, he has been judged guilty of what in most areas of the Nation would be considered a felony criminal act of forgery.   His opinion is truly worthless.

2.  This “false arrest” case involved well-researched and well-documented support for allegations of suspected criminal violations by certain SCA Directors.  Of course, the board’s position was that the allegations were not true. 

      To the contrary, the allegations were recently confirmed to be accurate by the IRS Tax Audit of the 2007 Return that showed SCA owed $1.345 million in back taxes and penalties for just that one year.

3.  During the January 21, 2010 Board Meeting, a Henderson Police Chief letter was read that claimed the allegations were “unfounded”.  Contrary to Berman’s false claim, the individuals were NOT “exonerated” or found “free of all blame”.  The evidence seems clear  that the Henderson Investigation Division rushed to judgment under heavy political pressure from the SCA Board and its friends and failed to complete its duty.

      At the Board Meeting, Director/Attorney/Former Henderson City Attorney (and potential defendant) Ann Small announced there are consequences for filing a false police report.  Small also said (in a very threatening manner) that as a judge, she knew “the court was not lenient”.   Here is a transcript of her board statement: Ann Small’s Threatening Statement

Just a few days later the City of Henderson suddenly arrested Stebbins and Frank and charged them with “filing a false police report”–a criminal misdemeanor.  And, the Henderson Judge’s arrest warrant included politically-charged statements and subjective allegations that could only have come from the SCA Board Members and its attorneys.

      The City’s disgraceful treatment of these two, retired, elderly men may become yet another Henderson City nightmare when the public and courts finds out what The City did on this case.  Tim Stebbins and Bob Frank were only trying find a way to require the board to comply with the law to refund over $4 million of illegally-held/unneeded dues surpluses owed to 7,144 homeowners.

      These 70-something men were jailed, stripped, perp-walked and forced to be handcuffed behind their backs to a pole for over 4 hours while forced to wait to be the last prisoner of the day to be finger-printed.  They were also forced to post over $600 cash bail before being released from jail and before being arraigned the following week. 

      Imagine such outrageous treatment for these seniors!  In my opinion, this was City Hall’s political retaliation against Stebbins and Frank for daring to challenge the City’s friends on the SCA Board!

      Meanwhile, no one can remember a prior case where Henderson has charged and arrested anyone for filing a false police report.  And, it is not yet clear what happens when the case against Stebbins and Frank is dismissed.  After it is clear the SCA Board lied to the Henderson Police (not Stebbins and Frank), will Henderson arrest the involved board members using the same procedures as above? 

      No one (not even Berman) could miss seeing the direct connections between the board’s claims of being falsely accused, Director Ann Small’s self-serving threats of possible consequences, and the subsequent (false) arrests.

4.  A single Henderson Police Sergeant admitted he had failed to consult any tax experts when he decided to accept only the board’s excuses and then unilaterally decreed the Stebbins/Frank report to be “unfounded”. 

      The Sergeant claimed he had no business degrees, no accounting or CPA training, and that he had to spend hundreds of hours trying to understand the basic business issues.  He admitted to being unqualified to investigate this income tax evasion/forgery case. But, he failed to seek qualified professional help from disinterested parties.

5.  After well over a year of unreasonable court delays and wasted attorney fees being spent by Stebbins and Frank, the Henderson City Attorney and Municipal Judge recently had to admit they had irreconcilable, personal conflicts of interest with SCA Director/Attorney Ann Small.  

      After revealing such compelling evidence of conflicts of interests, the Henderson City participants recused themselves and hired a special prosecutor and special judge for this minor misdemeanor case. 

      In the future, it is possible evidence of inappropriate personal communications between Director/Attorney Small and certain Henderson officials will be revealed.

So, when Berman states “it was entirely the decision of the police to arrest and charge the two SCA residents” he is willfully lying. 

The facts show Berman has no direct knowledge, and his claims contradict the facts in evidence. 

The arrest of Stebbins and Frank appears to have been a “political” act requested by self-serving and DESPERATE SCA board members. 

When the court hearing is finally held, the full truth will come out.   Then we are likely to see the perpetrators of the real crimes having to face the justice system.

Posted in Ann_Small, 2011 Campaign, Bob Frank-2011, kay_frank, Truth Squad, Laws & Rules, Community Affairs, SCA Board, News! | Print | 1 Comment »

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 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 »

March 31, 2011 by admin.

Tenured psychology professor at the College of Southern Nevada, Dr. Gary Solomon, believes recent medical research proves that dictatorial HOA Board abuse against homeowners can create serious mental and stress illnesses–particularly among seniors.

And, the following snapshots of his signs, web sites, and local TV coverage shows he and a group of others with similar interests have set upon a path to do something about it.

Click here for a short article:  HOA Syndrome

See the following websites for more information:

http://www.fox5vegas.com/news/27376288/detail.html

http://www.ktnv.com/story/13966867/hoa-hall-of-shame-sun-city-anthem#

http://www.hoa-busters.com/

No doubt many will consider this to be really bad news concerning the potential adverse affects on HOA homeowner property values where homeowners are making public complaints.

Developers, real estate brokers and some homeowners believe that all such bad news stories must be suppressed to protect community home values, but such self-centered, cover up attempts fail to solve any problems.  They just put off the inevitable and create much worse problems.

The obvious solution is to remove abusive and incompetent board members and work to ensure that only trustworthy directors are elected in the future.

Resolving conflicts to mutual satisfaction WITHIN the community is the only way to achieve exceptional lifestyle opportunities, maintain outstanding community morale, and grow property values ahead of market averages.

Our Sun City Anthem homeowners need to wake up and recognize we have a very serious problem with board misconduct.  Trying to keep a lid on the SCA board’s misconduct has proven to be unworkable.  

A perfect example of what NOT to do is the current income tax fiasco.  Consider the long-term impacts of a case like our Board’s attempting to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars of hard-earned dues money to try to bully the IRS into giving us a tax credit for their obvious mistakes.  What an outrageous act of disrespect and dishonor to our homeowners!

At the rate the “unity boards” are going, Sun City Anthem in Henderson, NV will be long remembered for allowing its boards to do such really dumb things as to pay millions of dollars in taxes out of the many millions required to be refunded to members. 

Excuse me?  Give away taxes to the Government on money required to be REFUNDED each year to unit owners?   Even the best of con men can not make any sense out of that garbage!

We have to wonder, will our community become so notorious that it is studied in future management schools and forever ridiculed for electing such dictatorial, insensitive people to the board, year-after-year-after-year?

The question will be:  “Why did we tolerate such mismanagement?”  Were we intimidated and bullied into submission as the HOA Syndrome seems to  suggest? 

It is common for abused people to continue to tolerate abuse until it gets so bad that some type of major blowup occurs.  Let’s hope we can do better in this year’s election and avoid a blowup.  Having to consider calling for a recall election to get the board focused on working for us homeowners is much more work than getting trustworthy people elected in the first place.

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

March 28, 2011 by admin.

Diane Gerber’s “HOA Advocate Gazette” has picked up on and featured the Henderson “false arrest” story about Tim Stebbins and Bob Frank.

It also highlights Johnathan Freiderick’s report on the “3 amigas”

Kay Dwyer, Celeste Bove and Roz Berman Testifying–photo by D. A. Berman

who showed up to reveal to the Senate Judiciary Committee and to the thousands watching via Internet streaming media as the hateful and self-centered people they are.

Their shockingly anti-homeowner and incompassionate attitudes were exposed in this highly public environment and has been recorded via the Internet.  Such egotistic behavior is usually reserved for the home crowd attending board meetings, and when socializing among the community members who enjoy kowtowing to them.

Web Version: http://www.universitycresthoa.com/HOAadvocateGazette/Issue4.html

PDF File Version of the Gazette:   HOA Advocate Gazette Volume 1, Issue 4

Posted in 2011 Campaign, Bob Frank-2011, Ann_Small, SCA Board, Special Events, Community Affairs, Clubs & SIGs | Print | No Comments »

March 27, 2011 by bobfrank.

On March 24, 2011 the Nevada Real Estate Division notified the Sun City Anthem Community Association that the Attorney General would serve as the Prosecuting Attorney at a hearing of the Nevada Commission for Common Interest Communities and Condominiums on April 26, 2011.

The alleged violation by the two boards in 2008 was to twice vote to illegally modify the SCA CC&Rs.  Board President was Roz Berman, and the basic work accused of violating statutes was performed by association attorney John Leach.

This is a historic event as this will be the first of close to 100 alleged SCA Board statute violations brought to trial/hearing before the CIC Commission.  It has taken about 3 years to reach this point.  

For members who are interested, I served on that board and vigorously objected to what I believed to be highly improper (if not illegal) changes to the CC&Rs being promoted by attorney Leach.   I was the only director voting NO on both board votes.  However, I had nothing to do with the filing of the case leading to this prosecution.  

Since I will have to explain to the Commission my objections and NO vote against the board majority votes to approve the alleged violations, I must save those explanations until after the hearing.

Meanwhile, the hearing before the CIC Commission should be a very interesting situation.  At least 4 of the Commissioners have potentially serious conflicts of interests with the other directors, and are likely to have to recuse themselves on this case.

At this time, only the basic affidavits have been scanned in and attached to this posting.  The exhibits will be added as time permits.

Download: Attorney General Charges

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

March 27, 2011 by bobfrank.

The Board of Directors and Election Committee has been accused of knowingly and willfully violating NRS 116 laws governing board elections.

They have refused to send out candidate information sheets 30 days before the ballot packages are mailed.  This failure not only violates the law, it is unfair to first-time candidates and candidates who are promoting platforms that oppose the board’s policies and practices.

Here are copies of the basic documents filed with the NV Real Estate Division:

Affidavit
a-26mar11_certified-letter-to-sca-board.pdf
b-nred_election_rules.pdf
c-sca-2011-community-election-calendar.pdf
d-sca-2011candidates-election-calendar.pdf
e-page-7-of-2011-sca-election-manual.pdf
f-page-16-of-2011-sca-election-manual.pdf

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

March 26, 2011 by bobfrank.

The below article was received from Davis Leonard. While all veterans and their direct family members are not able
to share the spirit, honor and traditions of the vast majority of USMC members and their families, we share a common
bond as fellow warriors who signed the “blank check to our Nation” by serving in combat.

This story deserves special mention at this time for the residents who continue to support those in our  community
who truly understand the meaning of honor and prove it by doing what is right–regardless of the personal
sacrifices, humiliations and disrespect heaped on them for just telling the truth.

 ————–

Burial at Sea

A veteran is someone who, at one point, wrote a blank check made payable to ‘The United States of America’ for an
amount of ‘up to and including their life.’ 

That is Honor, and there are way too many people in this country who no longer understand it. ”

———————

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

March 20, 2011 by kayfrank.

David’s Anthem Journal said (in part) today:

“I am certainly not going to support a candidate who charged my wife with criminal acts before she was completely exonerated and who then was himself arrested and charged with filing a false police report.”

Posted by: David Berman | March 13, 2011 at 05:05 PM

Truth:  Past Board President Roz Berman and Secretary Roger Cooper and other Board members have NOT been “completely exonerated” from wrong-doing concerning the 2007 SCA income tax disaster.

And, our disgraced “suspended attorney and self-acknowledged forger of a judge’s signature on tax records” has once again lied by writing “charged my wife with criminal acts”.

Bob Frank and Tim Stebbins only filed a well-researched, and thoroughly-documented report of suspected forgery in a possible violation of Nevada Revised Statutes 205.  They only asked the Henderson Police Department to investigate their suspicions–as required of citizens when financial  wrong-doing concerning other people’s money seems apparent.  Even a suspended attorney knows that only the District Attorney can file “charges” on such a possible felony offense.

Truth:  The IRS Audit Report notifying the SCA Board it owed $1.345 Million in back income taxes and penalties for 2007 has shown that Tim Stebbins and Bob Frank did NOT knowingly file a false police report.

So, the slow process of the City’s justice system seems certain to eventually “completely exonerate”  Stebbins and Frank.  And, once again the questions will be: were there State or Federal criminal violations involved with SCA’s 2007  incorrect Income Tax filings?  And, who is responsible for the apparent mishandling of millions of dollars of surplus funds that were (falsely) claimed to have been “returned” to members?

The Board members and professional advisers who appear to have made, or went along with making false statements  to the Henderson Police Department will be the ones found in the harsh glare of extensive law enforcement investigations and possible District Attorney charges in the future.

Truth:   2008 SCA Board President Roz Berman and directors Shirley Cheri, Roger Cooper, Mike Dixon and Carl Weinstein had the perfect opportunity in June 2008 to avoid all of the millions of income taxes and penalties as reflected in the following document.
SCA Board Rejects Opportunity in June 2008 to Avoid Income Tax Fiasco

Note that this opportunity to resolve the dispute on whether the income tax filings were correct or not was in June 2008.  This was 4 months BEFORE the fateful 2007 Income Tax Return that contained apparently false statements.

This is only one of dozens of items of evidence that caused Tim Stebbins and Bob Frank to ask for law enforcement assistance on this matter involving many millions of dollars of SCA funds.

In other words, it is perfectly CLEAR that Tim Stebbins and Bob Frank have always been telling the whole truth, and nothing but the truth!

It also seems perfectly clear that current directors (Jack Troia, Roz Berman, Ann Small,  Dan Forgeron, John Waterhouse, Celeste Bove and Jerry Gardberg)  have viable options available to allow them to terminate the waste and abuse of SCA funds.  But, they seem determined to condemn themselves to share the guilt of past directors and auditor while they help cover up the obvious income tax return mistakes.

Since Troia, Berman and Forgeron would have to recuse themselves (due to irreconcilable conflicts of interest on the tax issues) the remaining four directors could easily stop the madness.

That 4-member board majority could call an emergency board meeting and vote to hire their own 3rd party negotiator (with no conflicts of interest with the board, auditor, attorney or developers) to cut our losses to the bare minimum. 

Will you join me in writing and asking for that alternate, smart course of action?

Kay Frank

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

March 19, 2011 by bobfrank.

There are a number of significant statements and questions posting on AnthemToday at this link:
http://www.anthemtoday.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2641

Here are my comments for Bob Miller and Nelson Orth:  If the board was sincere about trying to avoid paying the $1.345 Million in income taxes, what would the odds of success be for the two following strategies?

versus

Since no public evidence or court settlement exists showing that any corporation has defeated the IRS on Revenue Ruling 70-604 income exemption issue during its 40 years of existence, would you agree that option 2 has at least a thousand times better chance of success?

What should the penalties be for directors who agree to follow such apparent gross negligence?

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

March 19, 2011 by bobfrank.

“Braveheart” (R. B. Inglefield) said on Anthem Today on 17Mar11:

If I ask a question of the entire board, I would ask the president the question. If I want to ask a specific board member a question, it’s because I want to know how they feel as an individual on the question I asked them. In my opinion, we’ve suffered enough BOD “group speak” to last a lifetime.  It’s time for SCA to enjoy the luxury of a BOD made up of individuals who vote their conscience, not the party line.

Response to Braveheart:  I would like to concur with Braveheart that member questions to a director should be answered by the director.

While a director is obligated to research his/her opinion before sending it to ensure it fairly complies with the official policies or relevant rules, informal questions and answers among members and directors should be a routine matter.

All other directors should usually be cc: copied on the exchanges to allow other directors to comment if they wish. And, summaries of the appropriate exchanges could or should be posted on the SCA website under a “frequently asked questions” section.

If a director has previously disagreed on some policy or financial matter, and lost to the board majority, the director can say so, and inform the member of the rationale used by the majority to make their decision, and of the reasons why he/she could not agree.

It is unwise to want all directors to hide behind ego-based confidentiality when members are usually just wanting to know the truth about an issue.

Again, I believe Braveheart is correct. His question can provide an opportunity to encourage other candidates to comment. We can see that SCA’s environment has been poisoned by undesirable “group-think” behavior.

We need to elect directors who have the expertise, ethics and self-confidence to deal with members and each other in respectful, honest and compassionate ways.

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

March 19, 2011 by bobfrank.

I can fully understand why you refuse to use one of the local BLOGs to promote your candidacy for the coming election, but today I noticed your name is mentioned in a new editorial on his BLOG.  The BLOG owner said this of all the other candidates; “Rather than living in the past, they are pledged to address current problems but are primarily looking toward the future in terms of what they are hoping to accomplish.“

I’m not aware of ANY pledge that has been made by ANY candidate to ignore the past illegal secret meetings, or the past financial misconduct that has plagued our community (To use your words).  It’s been said that those who ignore the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them.

Will you pledge NOT to ignore the mistakes of the past, such as our Federal Income tax debacle, and the growing numbers of residents who have been fined and threatened by our current Law Firm?

My Responses to Norm McCullough:
It will be interesting to see if the candidates promoted on David’s Anthem Journal blog confirm that they ENDORSE the old Unity Mantra of “Rather than living in the past, they are pledged to address current problems but are primarily looking toward the future in terms of what they are hoping to accomplish.”

I doubt any of the candidates will agree with David trying to deceptively slip the discredited unity slogan into their campaigns. But, we should watch to see which ones openly reject it–as I do.

This action by David’s Journal shows that while the widely discredited Unity Party machine is working in stealth mode, it is clearly involved again this year, and some candidates may have made secret deals in return for unity support.

Of course, no competent board candidate could “live in the past” or only “hope” to accomplish something as a SCA director as claimed by David’s Journal. As George Santayana said in 1905, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

The Unity Party political machine tactic used by David’s Anthem Journal is a good example why I refuse to have anything to do with his blog. That site uses and/or abuses people while helping directors deceive the community about the board’s past financial misconduct.

Unfortunately for us unit owners, the past financial misconduct has involved many more millions than the initially reported $1.345 Million owed in back taxes and penalties. That is just the tip of the iceberg.

Open financial issues always exist in multi-million-dollar corporations. They can not be effectively resolved in the future without fully understanding the past circumstances. If someone claims they will only look forward if elected, they should NOT be trusted to manage our money.

And, I believe that members should not allow a candidate to get away with promising to wait to “look into things AFTER they are elected.” There is plenty of time now to formulate valid opinions and make unambiguous commitments on the key issues facing our community. While serving as a director, one rarely gets more than a few days to research the background and formulate an opinion on a board agenda item.

And, despite the deceptive tactic used by most directors, the basic facts concerning SCA’s key policies and prior board decisions are NOT protected by any type of legitimate confidentiality.

Finally, if SCA members would like to stimulate some interesting discussions on the blogs, club forums, or at coffees, encourage candidates to explain why they agree with, disagree with, or prefer to restate my top 10 pledges (listed below).

While these pledges are not the only issues of high concern to our members, they could be used to form an initial framework of long-term policies for the 2011 Board to create the good governance practices that SCA members thought they were going to receive when they purchased their retirement homes.

1. Strictly comply with Nevada Statutes & SCA governing rules
2. Return surplus dues immediately to members to avoid income taxes
3. Honestly implement open & respectful communications with members
4. Fairly enforce community rules and quickly resolve member disputes
5. Ensure dues are cut to the minimum while maintaining quality facilities
6. Replace auditor & attorneys with ones not having conflicts of interest
7. Cut the costs of the community management contract
8. Improve our lifestyle with respectful treatment of all members
9. Require the restaurant facilities to operate on a break-even basis
10. Sponsor monthly surveys via Spirit mailings on member concerns

In addition, I hereby pledge to do everything in my power to stop the board
practice of improperly & illegally conducting unqualified secret board meetings.

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

March 19, 2011 by bobfrank.

Carl said at this link: http://www.anthemtoday.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=2648&p=5091#p4961,

“I still believe that fliers should be distributed to all three centers. The value exceeds the risk!”

Carl is right. There can be no valid excuse by the Board or Election Committee to prohibit candidate information sheets being placed in all three centers. Imagine Election Committee Chair Mary Bruner’s thinking when she requires members to visit the Anthem Center to obtain candidate information because otherwise it inconveniences RMI and the EC.

This kind of unreasonable ruling is symptomatic of other arbitrary, unfair and improper Election Committee dictates. This and other EC policies clearly violate the rights of both SCA members and candidates. For example, Nevada Law NRS116.31034.12 says:

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.

But, it is up to the membership to demand respectful treatment by EC Chair Mary Bruner, RMI and the Directors. The candidates have little authority unless or until elected. If those who normally use the Independence Center and Liberty Center do not care if they are disadvantaged, then nothing will change.

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

March 19, 2011 by bobfrank.

There will be three remaining existing board members following this election, one of which, will be our current treasurer, DAN FORGERON.

Rumor has it that he has been “groomed’ to replace Jack Troia as the next president of our association. Mr. Forgeron was a member of the Finance Committee that unanimously approved the IRS 2007 IRS filing that resulted in our current audit whereby we have been assessed $1,345,000 in back federal income taxes, penalties, and interest.

In addition it has been VERIFIED that he, along with fellow directors Jack Troia & Roz Berman, WITHHELD integral background information from other board members, prior to voting acceptance of Audra Tubin for our restaurant ownership:

IF ELECTED to our board, and if Mr. Forgeron expresses interest in the presidency, WOULD YOU SUPPORT DAN FORGERON to be president of our association?

My Responses to Dick’s 18Mar11 Questions:

No.   I do not see how anyone could support Mr. Forgeron for any board officer position. In fact, it is hard to envision how he can complete his 2011 term considering the very long list of serious mistakes in judgment he has amassed since his Finance Committee days in 2008.

I will leave up to others to list all of the many reasons why Dan Forgeron should not continue to be a board officer. Our main focus for now could be his personal roles since 2008 leading up to the $1.345 Million tax bill for 2007 and likely additional taxes and penalties for subsequent years.

The attached letters show that even as late as November 2009 he knew the board had failed to comply with Federal Tax Rules. But, as Treasurer and as a Director/leader on tax matters, he failed to act properly. Had he acted before the IRS Revenue Agent had arrived, we probably could have avoided the current fiasco.

With such clear evidence of his inability to be trusted, it is hard to understand how anyone would allow him to continue to have any authority over our community properties and finances.

IRS Policy Letter

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

March 19, 2011 by bobfrank.

Dick Arendt Asked on 8Mar11:  Assuming no illegal activity has taken place, if a club or service group elects a leader, should a Board of Directors have the authority to override that decision, and refuse to seat that individual as it’s leader?

ALSO

Does a board have the right to demand to see actual vote totals of any club’s elections summarizing the number of votes each candidate received prior to seating any individual as their leader?  If so, please cite the CCR’s regulation that permits that action in both cases.     Thank you.

Response to Dick Arendt’s 8Mar11 Questions:

Dick, thank you for your questions. They get to the heart of some important issues in this community.

1. Concerning “refuse to seat that individual as it’s leader?”:

No. Once a Committee, Club or Service Group has elected its leaders from among its membership, the board should accept and support them. The Board should help its service group leaders and volunteer members be successful through POSITIVE leadership. Volunteerism is seriously damaged when the board is engaged in manipulating a group’s leadership.

2. Concerning “does a board have the right to demand to see actual vote totals of any club’s elections?”:

Yes and no. Everyone has the right to see the vote results, but not the ballots. Secret ballot elections are intended to protect the privacy rights of the voters–not the results. All SCA elections should implement procedures to assure candidates and the voters for that election process it was honest, and that the results could be quickly audited/verified by a disinterested 3rd party.

The Board’s liaison member could observe the ballot counting process from a distance, but not be involved in the actual counting.

Unfortunately, SCA members also have a community-wide issue with secret ballot handling practices. Our community does not faithfully implement a valid “secret” board election as required by law. Last year was a total disaster, and once again this year there are radically new, last minute, and untested ballot handling and counting procedures for the board election.

If we are to trust the results, our members must be demanding far better election planning and processing practices from RMI, Election Committee and the Board. None of those individuals should be allowed to take offense at being questioned. They should be proud to show and tell about how they are guaranteeing absolute integrity in the election results.

Dick Arendt 13Mar11 Questions About Communications:

I believe that lack of communication is perhaps one of the biggest problems that we face today in our community.  So many decisions are made behind closed doors, and as a result, apathy has been the result.

Do you feel that to be the case, and if so, how would you promote open communication within our community in order to reduce it? Do you feel that all emails sent to board members should receive a response?

My Responses To Dick Arendt:

Thank you for pressing this issue as the solution involves more than just simplistic promises from yet another batch of new directors. I apologize for such a long response, but I can not help but be passionate about truly “fixing” this chronic problem.

Of course, all correspondence with the board should be answered in respectful and professional styles. All members are equal, and the board members should demonstrate they know they came from the membership, and eventually they must return to being just another member.

Candidate promises to “improve communications” are often well-intentioned, but extremely difficult to implement. Every candidate ever elected to our board has promised to “improve communications”, but few were able to make tangible improvements during their terms.

I learned as a former director that the cause of the reversal of candidate promises vs. director actions has been the controlling influence from the association attorney, RMI management, CAI training, and the carry-over board member influence. New directors are told they MUST favor the “corporation’s interests” over the interests of the membership that elected them.

They are told they MUST function as a “corporate board team” versus a “shareholder leadership team”. Directors are wrongfully instructed they have only a duty to the lifeless “corporation” and that they must allow members to speak/write, but that directors do not have to listen or respond. This is totally wrong.

New directors are intimidated/bullied into feeling guilty if they dare to speak out in public against the majority will. They are told they are violating their fiduciary duty to the “corporation” if they do not always appear to be a well-oiled, robotic machine that is working in perfect sync and not responding to member complaints or concerns.

They are told that the members do not approve if it appears that there are significant differences of opinion within the board. I passionately believe that members must not be treated like potted plants with no brains and no life experiences.

New directors are also told that a HOA is not a democratic body, and that the US Citizen rights under the Constitutions (US and NV) do not apply to the corporate contract the members signed at time of purchase.

While this is not entirely true, it is also not entirely false. The trick is for smart and compassionate directors to navigate the middle ground, and do what is right for their fellow members.

If a director can not help but follow their conscious and vigorously oppose a bad decision by the majority, the director can be reminded by the “omnipresent controlling force” (the developer’s preferred association attorney–the “minder”) that such an independent/rogue director can be severely embarrassed and punished by the board majority through sustained legal actions and other serious sanctions. I consider this behavior to be a form of extortion.

As a result, you see most directors willfully participating in illegal secret meetings, cover ups of past financial misconduct, and practicing total silence about widespread dissatisfaction with so many board decisions. And, you see that directors never fully respond to complaints or allegations of law violations because the association attorney advises them to keep quiet while he protects them through the government chain. Meanwhile, the SCA HOA web site refuses to allow open and full communications and the association law firm gets wealthy on the backs of our SCA members.

The first step towards implementing professional and respectful communications is to change the secret policy of not listening to members. To do that we have to REPLACE the association attorney with a firm that has no conflicts of interest with the developer and the CAI trade association.

We also have to change the board training by RMI to install the proper balance between concerns over shareholder interests and corporate responsibilities for the common properties.

Directors who are capable of doing that, will be highly successful in implementing open and respectful communications as they will have their priorities aligned properly.

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

March 19, 2011 by bobfrank.

My replies to 3 previous questions to me are as follows:

I. Norman McCullough Questions:

Would you vote to stop the Current Board Policy of conducting a Kangaroo Court Hearing (as defined by Wikipedia) that denies any resident the following rights.

1. ) The right to face his accuser in open meeting.
2. ) The right to cross-examine his accuser (or leave it to his/her attorney).
3. ) The right to obtain the information who voted to acquit, and who voted to convict.
4. ) The right to obtain a DETAILED accounting of the money assessed EVEN IF IT WENT TO JOHN LEACH.
5. ) The right to be judged by an impartial body ESPECIALLY if any person has been the subject of any previous NRED complaints by the accused.
6. ) If wrongfully accused of violating a non-existent Code of Conduct, the right to have that person recused from participating in the deliberations ESPECIALLY if asked to do so by an attorney.

My Responses to Norman:  Yes, I would vigorously oppose the kinds of board, attorney and community manager misconduct you have listed. In addition, because of my prior SCA Director experience, I know how to initiate action to accomplish more than to just verbally object and/or be a minority vote against such a series of management failures.

In my opinion, it should have been clear to everyone attending the hearing that (a) you were wrongly charged, of (b) violating a non-existent rule, (c) by a person with no standing under our governing documents (RMI manager not being an SCA unit owner), and (d) convicted in secret of violating a different rule than previously charged during the hearing. Worse still, you were arbitrarily denied access to SCA facilities for 6 months and required to pay hundreds of dollars to reimburse the board’s attorney fees.

Since the board’s attorney was responsible for drawing up the bogus charges, the law firm’s invoice for that task should have been rejected by the board, and the attorney should have been blocked from performing any more work for the SCA Board.

Considering the multi-year disputes between you and Mr. Troia over the many villas reserve funds management errors, the other directors should have voted to require the Board President to recuse himself from the voting. The board and the community owes you a deep apology for such misbehavior, and I trust the next board will heal this unjustified wound to our lifestyle. Honorable people should work together to ensure that nothing like it ever happens again in our community.

II. Dick Arendt Questions:

Would you merely retain John Leach as our association attorney, or would you interview other candidates for the position of association attorney?  If so, why, if not, why not.

In a related question, when requests are made to RMI in order to examine legal fees paid by SCA, only totals are disclosed. Details are always blacked out. I can understand privacy issues blacking out names of residents which are involved, but other than that, I have never understood why we are not provided a detailed summary of what those bills encompass.

My Responses to Dick:  We MUST make a change in law firms.  In my opinion, based on 2007-2008 board experience, the single greatest cause of unresolved disputes and open hostility between SCA homeowners and the board is what I have seen to be extraordinarily bad advice and product from the board’s law firm. And, the attorney’s involvement in helping to author the notorious Senate Bill 174 (and others just beginning to surface) is just another example of his anti-homeowner behavior during the past decades.

I believe the board’s law firm is not competent and has irreconcilable conflicts of interest with the SCA developers, other companies, CAI and numerous politicians. I believe the results show the law firm does not favor SCA member interests over any other interests.

It appears to me that not a single negotiation handled by the board’s law firm in the past decade has been settled to SCA member’s benefits. NOT ONE! As a result, SCA members have lost millions, and the law firm has profited hundreds of thousands of dollars. The seemingly abysmal results by the board’s attorneys during the past decade provide compelling evidence that a change MUST be made to a firm that can be relied upon to win disputes on behalf of our homeowners.

Redacting Attorney Invoices? In my opinion, there is no reasonable justification to redact (black out) more than a unit owner’s name and other personal identification data. The statutes do not specifically prohibit the board from doing it, but it is clear that the only one benefiting from such secrecy are the attorneys. So, such actions should be terminated by the new board. In addition, I would advocate that the personal privacy data be replaced by a case number in law firm invoices so that no redaction could be justified.

In addition, I consider it outrageous that the SCA boards have been doing business with its law firm without requiring a contract or engagement letter containing terms and conditions. How could a board ever find its law firm failing in any capacity if there are zero terms and conditions to protect the association? That seems comparable to writing a blank check to the law firm on a monthly basis. It should not be accepted in the future.

III. Forrest Fetherolf Questions:

To date, more than a year later, the current BOD has not required RMI to implement the approved ad hoc purchasing and contracting group guidelines.  What would you do now as a Board member to correct this issue?  How would you eliminate this from happening again?

My responses to Forrest:  Concerning Failure to Implement the 2009 Purchasing & Contracting Group Report? In my opinion, it is gross negligence by the board to allow RMI to refuse to implement the ad hoc group’s report.  Failure to implement the key recommendations in that report that the Board approved for implementation should be considered a breech of contract. The new board should issue a “cure notice” to RMI and give them 30 days to fully implement those approved contracting provisions or to show detailed reasons on why such provisions are impractical or not feasible.

We need to be mindful that large management companies like RMI can be receiving financial payments and other benefits in return for the subcontractors receiving favorable awards. Since RMI claims to have over 200 HOAs under contract, it is in a unique position to be tempted to engage in such improper activities. I am not accusing anyone of anything improper, but know from many years of being in the purchasing and contracting career area that the only way to preclude improper behavior is to be ever watchful.

And, one way to avoid such contracting misconduct is to delegate to a director the responsibility and authority to oversee implementation of such purchasing and contracting board decisions–similar to how we assign financial management functions to the “Treasurer”. In addition, I have long advocated that a new standing committee for Purchasing and Contracting be established. It would complement the work of the Properties & Grounds and Finance Committees. During the monthly board meetings, the new committee and its assigned director would report to the full board and the community on RMI’s progress.

If there were failures by the Community Manager to comply with the directions, it would be carefully documented by the new committee and taken up in an executive management session with the RMI CEO and community manager.

After such a meeting, an action plan to correct the contract violation would be prepared and quickly implemented. For the long-run, the Purchasing and Contracting Committee would administer the agreement as chartered by the board. Failure to comply with the agreed action plan schedule and tasks would be a breech of contract and a cause to initiate more formal actions.

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