January 16, 2009 by bobfrank.

Whatever is said about the safety of the Anthem Parkway/Drive loop, we need to stay focused on the real traffic control and safety issues.  Those few who attended the Henderson Citizens Traffic Advisory Board meeting in City Hall last evening learned that Sun City Anthem’s traffic safety issues are being influenced by individuals who obviously have already decided to recommend that the City Council retain the high speed limits on the road that circumnavigates our senior community.

I apologize in advance for the need for such a long posting.  But, there is so much misinformation and confusion, I am obligated to try to explain the facts.  If you do not want this much info, just ignore it, and accept that many others may benefit from it.

One thing that was made very clear last evening was that many community members (including myself) put “member safety” and “retaining the beautiful and scenic parkway through our community” as our TOP priorities for the future of the “Anthem Parkway/Drive Loop”.  However, the meeting also showed that the long struggle to defend those priorities is at high risk of being lost.

The City, aided and abetted by David Berman’s and Chuck Davis’ sustained aggressive advocacy, is clearly intending to seriously modify the landscaping along the parkway to make the 45-55 mph speed on the Anthem loop a permanent decision.  That would probably eliminate the possibility of this becoming the “golf cart permissible community” that was promised to most homeowners, and has been declared on the Del Webb-erected monument at the entrance to Sun City Anthem.

However, this decision may not yet be over.  There are still many nagging issues flying in the face of making such a major change without more facts.  Moreover, few individuals among the tens of thousands residents of the full Anthem Community have been consulted on this critical safety policy issue.

To illustrate some of these issues, here are just a few of the important items discussed last evening:

- The City’s traffic survey team reported that when no speed limits are enforced, “most drivers” find it “COMFORTABLE” to drive at 45 to 55 mph.  That was no surprise since there is almost no speed enforcement and little knowledge of the high risks involved traversing the blind intersections along the parkway.  This is particularly true for those living in such communities as Anthem Highlands since they problem never use the interchanges between SCA villages and the parkway.  In addition, mechanically measuring vehicle speeds at selected parkway points does not reveal what SCA residents think about the serous dangers of entering, exiting and crossing the parkway (both in vehicles and on foot).

- The survey team declared it will NOT recommend reducing the current 45-55 mph speed limits on any portion of the 7+ miles of the Anthem Parkway/Drive “loop”.. (Note: 55 mph is mentioned because everyone knows that speeding tickets are not issued unless a person exceeds a speed limit by more than 10 mph.)  The rationale to stay at 45-55 is for the “public benefit” and not intended to be for the “Anthem Community benefit”.  As shown below, that may be a seriously misplaced objective as those who are “more comfortable” at the higher speeds are just as likely to be seriously injured from a collision at a blind corner as a slow-moving senior. Such  “comfort” at the higher speed is not based on the facts of the roadway hazzards.

- The team/board admits that the way the “parkway” has been built and maintained it does not safely support more than 35 mph speed.  It was reported that it is very dangerous to drive faster than 35 to 45 mph because cross traffic at almost all intersections is not safe when parkway traffic exceeds 35 mph.

- There was great confusion on whether the “Anthem Parkway/Loop” was designed and approved in the master plan as being intended to be restricted to 35 mph.  The confusion was due in large part to the many steep hills, very sharp curves, massive landscaping in the medians and along the sides of the “parkway”.  These items of designed natural beauty for the parkway also provide clear evidence that Del Webb was not intending for this loop to be a high speed (45 to 55 mph) artery for general commuting.  This beautifully-designed and landscaped “Anthem parkway/drive” was obviously intended to be a “SCA amenity” to support the Anthem “golf-cart-permissible” community lifestyle.  Anthem was designed to FEEL LIKE a special, gated community without requiring the burdens of maintaining gated controls.

- Further evidence that the Anthem loop was not intended to be a general purpose 4-lane “public traffic artery” was revealed when it was reported that the Anthem “loop” was the ONLY “4-lane, divided, public road” in Henderson where the median and side properties were owned/maintained by the community.  WOW!  That would seem to be a BIG deal!  The traffic board/survey members said that all other 45 mph divided roads in Henderson were specifically designed for the higher speeds, and they were owned and maintained by the City.  Further confusion was due to the fact that Del Webb had to have received Henderson City approval before it could declare SCA to be a “golf cart permissible community”.  That designation requires parkway speeds to be set at 35 mph or lower.  Perhaps setting the speed limit to 45 mph for the long-run may even require a master plan change with public comments by all those affected in Anthem–before it is final?

- Evidence was also presented suggesting that much of the traffic increases in the past two years and the current speed-related problems were related to new residents in Anthem Highlands, and adjoining communities to the South and West.  Most of these individuals have to use the parkway to connect to Eastern for their commute to work.  These major community increases were not anticipated in the original design and construction of the Anthem Parkway loop in the late 1990’s.  And, the roads required to support the new communities to allow exit/access to the North and West have not been completed.  Some believe THAT very critical issue needs to be addressed before a permanent conversion of the Anthem loop into a high speed artery is considered.  In the meantime, most (if not all) of the former law enforcement professionals living in SCA believe that a posted 35 mph speed limit and traffic lights at the most dangerous intersections will provide the needed traffic/speed controls–without having to butcher our parkway landscaping and ruin our community style.

- Also confirmed was that the intersections at such places as Thunder Bay, Scotts Valley, Williamsport, and Atchley were examples of VERY dangerous intersections and worthy of high consideration for future traffic light controls.  It was also reported that the DW/Pulte master plan agreement required the company to pay for any future traffic lights.  That might be a good reason why there is so much invisible resistance to the ideas of traffic lights at key intersections. Proposing some cost savings through a slower speed limit may also be a way to motivate Pulte to support our desire to retain Anthem Parkway/Loop as a golf-cart-permissible roadway.  Worthy of consideration?

- It was reported that improving line-of-sight abilities at most intersections may make it safer for those who are “comfortable” driving at high speeds and for those entering and exiting SCA villages along the parkway.  But, no conclusive evidence was presented to show that massive changes to improving line-of-sight barriers will finally solve the dangerous blind intersections problems.  There are just too many steep hills, sharp curves, utility boxes, walls, monument signs, etc. to be able to make it function like the flat terrain of the typical 45 mph roadway.

- The City intends for landscape removal actions to be just a first step, but it was clear that most of the expenses for improving the Anthem loop safety would be BILLED to Anthem residents.  In the meantime, it appeared that a much higher accident and injury rate at the intersections may have to be experienced in order for the City to justify installing new traffic signals at the blind crossings.

- The traffic board/survey team is proposing to City Council that Pulte (that means Anthem residents) pay the high costs of major landscape reductions near the intersections since the Anthem residents own or will eventually own the medians and side landscaping. While some line-of-sight landscape work in the intersection areas has already been done, and more needs to be done, the proposed plan is to wait to consider adding traffic lights ONLY if parkway accidents continued to increase to MUCH higher levels.

David and Roz Berman appeared to be the only ones present from SCA that supported the City’s plans.  Roz said nothing. But, since she does not drive, and she does not believe that SCA Directors should get involved in public policy matters, her lack of action was typical.  Meanwhile, David deceived those in attendance by issuing a prepared statement claiming that “70% of surveyed SCA members” preferred the higher speeds.  That was just plain wrong and totally deceptive. For example, during his statement, David did not report that:

(1) No community-wide, or Anthem-wide survey (affecting tens of thousands of people) has ever been taken on this vital matter.

(2) At least 3,000 new SCA homeowners have moved in since the previous (limited) survey was conducted in 2005.  In other words, David Berman’s survey results contain no representative or statistically significant data in the year 2009.

(3) Many thousands more (of all ages) live in new homes built/occupied in Anthem Solara, Anthem Highlands and in the many other adjacent communities to the West and South. None of those thousands of potentially concerned residents have been informed on the key safety issues involved by driving at high speed across the extremely dangerous intersections along the parkway.  They do not know that it is next to impossible for cross traffic at many blind intersection to see fast, oncoming traffic in time to avoid a collision.

In other words, thousands of Anthem residents are not aware of the very high risks to their lives and property from the slow-moving, slow-reacting senior residents trying to cross the parkway at the blind intersections–without the protections of traffic signals.  And, SCA homeowners are not aware of their potential liability risks if our SCA insurance is insufficient to settle a suit from an unusually serious accident involving the combination of high speeds and blind intersections.  Where the the board has prior knowledge that SCA community property features can increase the risks of accidents, and where the board has failed to act to mitigate those risks, our liabilities could be greatly increased.  We need to act to help reduce the accident risks along our Anthem Parkway through reduced speed limits and new traffic signals at blind intersections.

Conclusion: it was clear at the meeting that David Berman’s obsolete community survey, and his personal opinions, are dangerous paths to follow.  I am one of those who were deceived by his arguments in the past.  But, we have now learned that Mr. Berman’s arguments are not useful for making decisions in 2009. His flawed positions must be soundly rejected in the future.

In the meantime, our community must become better informed and prepared to defend our rights and lifestyles for the future.  Our Board must become far more involved in protecting our community lifestyle.  Traffic safety and community security must be recognized as being far more important to our senior homeowners than being able to drive up to 55 mph on the parkway before being ticketed for speeding.  Even if you prefer to drive 45 mph, a posted 35 mph does not automatically force you to slow down.  I believe that reasonable people can agree that 55 is NOT an acceptable speed on the parkway.

But, regardless of the speed limit solution, we urgently need some type of traffic signals at the most dangerous/blind intersections. I can not accept that just removing landscaping is a viable solution, and I refuse to wait for more of our members get killed or injured before being mobilized to demand approval of the necessary traffic signals.  I hope you will join me in this effort.  It is clear that if more SCA residents do not get engaged in this issue, the original intent and beauty of the Anthem Parkway will be lost, and the traffic dangers to our residents will steadily increase until many more parkway deaths and injuries are experienced.

How about all of you past and present Security Patrol members?  What do you think?  I welcome statements on both sides of this issue–so we can continue to learn and sort out the truth!  <bobfrank@cox.net>

Bob Frank
SCA Director

Posted in 2009 Campaign, Truth Squad, SCA Board, Community Affairs, Lifestyle | Print | 5 Comments »

October 28, 2008 by bobfrank.

ALAN HARALDSON said on the SCA-HOA Message Board:

“How about a dog park in the area where that church wanted to be put up last year. was that around the airport somewhere?”

And, I responded with the following:
“Alan, thank you for bringing us full circle on this pet park issue.

Last Fall, as part of my work as the lead SCA Director opposing the proposed church school on Volunteer, I proposed that the parcel would be better used as a combination Henderson Pet Park/Memorial Wall and Senior Walking Park. Here is a link to my 2007 illustration.
http://www.anthemvoice.org/petpark.html

I went so far as to discuss it with the City Parks Department Manager and City Councilman Andy Hafen. They both liked the idea and said the best way to get such an idea moving would be for a community project to propose the idea. I suggested it to the SCA Pet Club, and they were also favorably inclined, but reminded me that there was already a pet park as part of the Rec. Ctr. 3 design, so the idea did not get going last year. Perhaps some of the pet club members might want to re-visit the proposal? Although the City budget is not likely able to build the park in the short-run, the first step would be to get the City to obtain the land from BLM for the suggested purpose.

Clearly, if a large number of residents really want a pet park in the neighborhood, this proposed location has a lot of positive benefits–not the least being that it would not cost SCA anything to construct or maintain it for the lifetime of the park. The idea also has the benefit of getting the City to turn that desert area adjoining SCA on the West side into an attractive senior walking and pet park.

What if a SCA member project leader could volunteer and pull together a team to turn this concept into reality? I would be happy to actively support the effort if a volunteer leader emerges.”

Bob Frank, SCA Director, bobfrank@cox.net

Reference File:  pet_park_proposal.pdf

Posted in SCA Board, Community Affairs, Lifestyle, News! | Print | 1 Comment »

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 »

May 16, 2008 by bobfrank.

Our community needs to encourage all SCA homeowners to read Mark Cook’s recent posting about flagrant and deliberate low-level airspace violations by “King Airelines” over SCA airspace. We must seriously consider the implications of this and a variety of other rapidly expanding aviation overflight problems in this area.

For example, other residents have previously reported on airline and helicopter violations of SCA airspace. Serious concern has also been expressed over the Sloan Heliport being built for about 300 helicopters–due west of SCA. The move to relocate and greatly expand Grand Canyon tours (involving both light aircraft and helicopters) from the McCarren Airport to the Henderson/Sloan area is already causing a rapid increase of flights across SCA airspace.

And, it has only just begun! Overflights (at any altitude) are guaranteed to destroy our “quiet enjoyment”. We are truly “old fools” if we wait any longer to demand that flight paths be routed way South over low populated areas instead of due East directly over SCA. While current promises are that future helicopter flight paths will go around the Anthem area, we can never be confident that ALL helicopter flights will go that way unless we closely monitor and stay involved in the activities. See this R-J article for the latest heliport info: Sloan Heliport

Concerning personal experience, I lived next to a large heliport in Vietnam in 1969; and, to this day the obnoxious operating sounds of helicopters coming and going overhead reminds me of hell on earth. The constant sleep disturbances and inability to get any quiet time from heavy helicopter operations will ruin our retirement lives. Even if you are hard of hearing, such noise and constantly interrupted environment produces high stress, constant irritability, and sustained anxiousnesses. Why would any senior community tolerate such added nonsense? This is a MAJOR change in our environment and we simply do not have to put with it.

While such a stressful environment is bad for any phase of life, it could be deadly for elders! Furthermore, we should not buy the argument that “modern helicopters” do not make as much noise as the old ones! So what! As we get older, the sounds of any kind of overhead helicopters during any hour will destroy our retirement environment. We simply MUST demand that ALL flying to and from the Grand Canyon and other areas to be routed to the South and far, far away from our senior communities. We already know that is not the case since we have serious violations by fixed wing and helicopters on a daily basis. Either way, we have to do something tangible to stop it.

But, let us not kid ourselves. It could be difficult to make all flights avoid overflying SCA since it will cost the companies a lot of money for the extra flying time. What will it take to wake up our fellow senior citizens to get engaged and to STAY engaged? The prevailing attitude in most senior communities is just “let board member Bob, or Mike, or Carl do it.” “I am retired, and I must reserve my time to enjoy my retirement”. But, that is fatally flawed. Since your fellow seniors are also unpaid and retired, who will do the work, if it is not worth your time? The good news is that SCA history shows that if thousands of our homeowners pull together, we can prevail!

So, if you share a deep concern for what massive overflights of aircraft and helicopters will do to this unique community’s future, please volunteer to help. The airport and FAA will ignore us if only a few residents complain. We need some long-run project leadership. And, in the short-run, Mark needs some SCA homeowners to volunteer to help identify airspace violations. The procedures for clearly identifying overflight violations, and for being able to accurately estimate the aircraft’s altitude can be explained by Mark. You might even find it fun to do! ;-)

Finally, flagrant airspace abuse over SCA is certain to increase and to seriously damage our lifestyles as well as our property values! Ignoring these obvious problems today will lead to very serious lifestyle degradation within a few years. Will you help?

Bob Frank
SCA Director, bobfrank@cox.net

Posted in SCA Board, Community Affairs, Safety, Lifestyle | Print | 12 Comments »

December 12, 2007 by Rana Goodman.

Ron Morse, a member of our advisory board, wrote, as a SCA resident an interesting comment recently on David Berman’s blog under the topic Oversight Committee fades etc.that David wrote against some Anthem Voice members and supporters involvement with our government representatives. Mr. Berman feels that only the SCA board should be contacting these individuals in efforts to assist this community. Personally, I felt that Ron Morse made some great points in his writing, of course, what Mr. Berman didn’t know is that Mr. Morse has one hell of an edge, he is a pro being internationally published.

What was MOST AMUSING HOWEVER was that when David realized that the “Ron” who has signed the post was none other than our Ron Morse, he added the prelude to Ron’s post stating that he was a member of the Anthem Voice Advisory Board and the following quote;   “I think it is only fair for readers to understand that you come into the discussion as someone not exactly neutral”.

The question David would be, is it considered NEUTRAL to block anyone who disagrees with your point of view from posting to your site?.. Is it NEUTRAL to never be able to see anything but one point of view?.. Is it NEUTRAL to never attempt to see if ACE and Anthem Voice might be very similar,  you have never been to a meeting and  have a had closed mind from day one? 

I think one major sign of Anthem Voice  “NEUTRAL” is the fact that AV has always had a link to Ron Johnson’s blog, and Dave Berman’s blog in spite of the fact that there is NOTHING neutral in Dave Berman’s look on anything or anyone associated with this site, pity, I think that is the guy that talks about hypocrisy all the time too.

We have a challenge to offer you though David; over the weekend we will be creating a chart that will be placed on our home page, www.anthemvoice.org we will list all of the things we can think of that the current board has done since being seated in May. For example; Started allowing members to speak to agenda items: YES This had not been allowed in Favil’s term.. Oh dear, can’t do that anymore, Mike stopped it. Started Town Hall Forums YES.. GREAT! And so on.. Let us see what they have accomplished. You do the same and see if we are biased

Readers, we invite you to please submit your list to us of everything you can think of for our list. Please click on the comment (or no comment, remember it just means you are first and add items to our list)

Posted in Lifestyle | Print | 3 Comments »

November 7, 2007 by admin.

There was a very informative SCA resident at the Anthem Voice meeting on November 6.  He made excellent comments on how the developer had deviated from the approved engineering specifications possibly resulting in plumbing defects and failures.  This could be valuable to everyone. 

His name is: Ross Stephens, 896-5710,roval@cox.net 

Ross has offered to help anyone and everyone who would like to get the specifications for their house to determine how that might relate to problems with Rehau and other plumbing systems. Please feel free to contact him by phone or e-mail. 

Thank you Ross.

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

October 22, 2007 by Rana Goodman.

Sun City Anthem need your help with a letter writing campaign NOW Time is of the essence THE DEADLINE IS NOVEMBER 14th 

At the town hall meeting this evening there were many speakers on the topic of the Calvary Church application to the BLM for the land mentioned in the story “News Flash” below. We are asking that you all write to the Bureau of Land Management protesting this encroachment bordering many homes of SCA. The impact mentioned by the speakers this evening, on our lifestyle by the noise of the playgrounds, ball fields, and parks. The lights from those ball fields at night into our homes and yards, forcing us to need blackout shades just to enjoy the TV, as many of my own neighbors do now in Big Sky, due to the shopping center near by where the lights are on until after midnight. The persistent music from the mega-speakers of the proposed amphitheatre, and let’s not forget parking from those very same things will be devastating on this community.

While we are on the topic of parking, the church has an excess of 1,000 members, the parking area on the map calls for 160+ parking spaces, where do the rest of the congregation park, in SCA? What about the impact of traffic? We only have Volunteer and Eastern as main roads in and out. Add events at their amphitheatre, where does the traffic flow go, what about extra school drop off and pick up? Do we really want this when we all moved to a senior community?

Our City Councilman was there tonight he asked that we write to the BLM first at the following address:

Be sure to reference (BLM Serial #N-80468) on you letter

BLM FIELD MANAGER  LAS VEGAS OFFICE
4701 N. TORREY PINES DR. 
LAS VEGAS, NV. 89130

If that failed then the next step is City Council the Church must go there for zone changes and approval. We must stand together to fight this. Petitions will be circulating at the Board meeting on Thursday, please be sure to sign and do your part for all our sakes…. Our property values for homes on that side of Anthem will nose-dive if this passes. 

 To read more from the BLM site, click this link.
http://www.thefederalregister.com/d.p/2007-10-04-E7-19584

to reply to this topic click comment

Posted in Lifestyle, News! | Print | No Comments »

September 15, 2007 by Rana Goodman.

1. How about the one food, one drink policy and the ping-pong game Mike is playing with the life style committee? I asked Len Chapman, a member of Life Style, why we needed such a ridiculous rule and began to argue my case before the poor guy had a chance to respond to me. Len said that he had absolutely no idea where the rule came from and he agreed it made little sense. For those of you that don’t know what I am referring to, let me illuminate you; let’s say that your club or group is planning a function over at Independence Center, you can only serve one food item, let’s say cake, and one beverage, coffee, that’s it. If you want to serve more, then your group must pay $1 per person as an additional clean up fee. However, we, as an association already pay for a maintenance service to cleanup. Now, I can understand charging any group that leaves the room a mess an added fee, but we are adults and should be responsible enough to leave the place as we find it. By all means, be charged a penalty if we don’t, but let’s get real here, these rules feel like a prison camp. NOW COMES THE FUNNY PART because I know what you are thinking, Rana is always complaining. Len told me, “If you don’t like it, just let the board know, all they have to do is rescind the rule” OK, I wrote a letter and made that suggestion asking that it be made an action item. Long story made short and I will cut to the chase; Mike Dixon has decided to send the suggestion back to the Life Style committee “for investigation” he says “he needs to know where this rule came from and why”
   My question to all of you is WHY DOES HE CARE? It’s a silly rule, if the Life Style committee agrees that it is a silly rule, it should go. The Women’s Club complained to Bob Berman about this last year and he said that he would take care of it, then said he “forgot and it fell between the cracks” everyone seems to agree that it is a silly rule, why waste even more time, just rescind it, stop bouncing things around, does this man have a commitment problem or what?

   UPDATE SEPTEMBER 23^rd:  This item is on the agenda for this Thursday’s meetings if you are interested please try to attend. I will post a report on the outcome.

Posted in Lifestyle | Print | 2 Comments »

September 4, 2007 by admin.

Please scroll down to login and logout in the Meta Box–below left!
This is a moderated site provided for Sun City Anthem residents by the AnthemVoice community of volunteers.

Posted in Laws & Rules, Special Events, Community Affairs, Clubs & SIGs, Safety, News!, Lifestyle, Operations, Other | Print | 2 Comments »