Text

As a result of the departure of former Board officers Elaine Berg and Kay Dwyer and the decision of Mike Dixon to not seek reelection as president, the Board elected new officers at their organizational meeting in mid-May.

As pictured here, the new Board officers are Roz Berman, President, Carl Weinstein, Vice-President, Shirley Cheri, Treasurer, and Roger Cooper, Secretary.

When it came time to allocate assignments for Board liaison to the various standing committees, Board president Roz Berman apparently decided to eliminate Bob Frank from assuming that responsibility, while at the same time tasking Cheri, Friedman, and Weinstein each to two such committees. Some view Frank's omission as payback for his efforts in calling for a third-party accounting of past Association finances, including what this writer has concluded were the concerted and devious efforts of the prior Board to defraud Villa Neighborhood owners of reserve monies that were properly owed by the Developer.

While many are disposed to give the newly elected Board a free reign while they settle into their new responsibilities, that prospect may prove difficult given that our new president was one of the key players in the conspiracy that led the prior Board to taint the outcome of the Villa Neighborhood reserves at the time of transition through the Association's contract for a 2005 reserve study. That, in turn, resulted in the potential "loss" in fully-funded reserves at transition of hundreds of thousands of dollars--a shortfall that the Villa owner were subsequently expected to make up from their own pockets by paying increased assessments.

In taking the action on Villa reserves they did, the prior Board took a calculated risk that the Villa owners would ultimately prefer to pay up rather than litigate the matter, or they would attempt to elect a Board more favorable to their cause and fair treatment. Unfortunately, that election effort failed by fewer than 170 votes out of roughly 3,000 cast. That margin of loss (or victory depending on one's view) represents less than 3% of the total number of households eligible to vote. Since the newly elected Board does not appear inclined to support the efforts of the Villa owners, concerned Villa Neighborhood homeowners may have little choice but to pursue other available options.

Homeowners should be aware that the Association accepted financial liability for any additional monies owing in Villa reserves, based on the terms of the West-Dwyer settlement agreement entered into with Pulte in April 2007. In her July 2007 presentation to Villa homeowners, Roz Berman wrote, in part, as follows:

With that understanding clearly spelled out, what further incentive did the then Dixon-Berman Board need to justify their efforts to doctor the amount of fully-funded Villa Neighborhood reserves at the time of transition? As previously reported, that effort resulted in the Board's recent conclusion that the Villa Neighborhoods reserve accounts were over funded, i.e., meaning there was no shortfall at transition, counting the 2007 settlement agreement payment. Accordingly, the Board takes the position that the Villa Neighborhood reserve accounts are not in need of any additional funding.

In response to the actions of the prior Board and the disappointing outcome of the recent election, the Villa owners' representative has recently put the Association on formal notice of the monies owed and of the potential for legal action if there is no agreement reached on this matter.

Expect the current Board to ignore such demands given that the hole that was already dug was so deep no amount of effort would allow them to reach the safety of breathing fresh, clean air.

So what was that "Emergency" Board meeting in May all about? In a word, OOPS!

The publication of our CC&Rs carries with it a significant degree of responsibility inasmuch as the CC&Rs codify what the Association is authorized to do, e.g., collecting monies, etc. Errors and omissions may be serious as anyone knows who is familiar with the need for precision in matters pertaining to legislation. A wrong word or omitted passages (as in our case) can have unintended, even serious consequences.

You may recall receiving a CD from RMI. That CD contained the Second Amended & Restated CC&Rs, etc. While the information contained on the CD should have been accurate, it was seriously flawed. Fingers of blame have been pointed here and there and then there is the issue of who is going to pay for the cost of producing and mailing out a "Corrected" version and a new CD. Thus, the need for that "Emergency" meeting to address this matter.

Since David Berman has done such a fine job in summarizing the significant outcomes of the May Board meeting, I have reproduced his keen observations here. Click here to read David's report.

As David Berman noted, our new Board acted to sanctioned a broad scale refurbishing plan involving both the Anthem Center and Independence Center and the expenditure of $550,000. David adds that there will be no impact on our dues. I find it difficult to believe that the Board is so anxious to refurbish that they find themselves willing and our coffers able to take on a cost of $550,000, of which $320,000 alone is designated for Hanneman Hall.

With one arm of the Board already looking at and advancing ways to cut back and save money and another arm looking to spend $550,000 on refurbishing, perhaps that "savings" arm might want to take a good look at that 500 pound refurbishing arm. As many will recall, this all got started a year or two ago when some attention was made of the bruised and damaged wallpaper (and partitions) in Hanneman Hall. Instead of addressing the issue of the damaged, say wallpaper, the then Board got committed to an entire do over with decorators and all that those efforts might entail. A cursory examination of wallpaper will tell most observers that 95% of the damage is limited to the first four or so feet, leaving the remaining wallpaper to last another fifteen or more years. Speculating, of course, an adroit decorator just might have a keen solution to address that four foot issue. One thing led to another and now we have a one-half million dollar budget for refurbishing.

As to whether our dues are on the line (David suggests NO) is another issue. While David may be looking at the short term, one has to consider the long term implications of budgetary decisions. For example, the need to effect a major repair of the Anthem Center took about six years from the completion of the Anthem Center in 2000, recognizing that we are now two years beyond that. Are we to assume that we had actually planned to meet this level of dollar need in such a short timeframe? I have my doubts.

And how are we going to financially address the needs in the future to meet this type of recurring expense? It's unclear to me that these issues have been fully explored or even addressed. Even allowing for an eight-year cycle, is the Board telling us that we will need to raise another almost $400,000 for "refurbishing" the Anthem Center every eight or so years. Was that "refurbishment" effort the period planned for in our Reserve Study? The documents available from the Board do not appear to address all of these issues. Another potential concern is whether there are any projects that will not be funded in a timely manner or postponed because of this planned expenditure of half a million dollars.

The Board just voted to dissolve the Trumpets Working Group, an inevitable end to their hard working efforts to find us an acceptable restaurant operator. However, that decision may have been a bit premature in view of rumors that are spreading throughout the community.

The Board is reluctant to admit they really do not want a dining operation to occupy the Trumpets facility, or so it would seem. One rumor has it that the Boulevard Group has withdrawn their interest in Trumpets due to what they perceive as unreasonable demands being placed in the course of lease negotiations. What's really going on?

It would seem that the some members of the Board are only too willing to cater to those few naysayers who have complaints about how restaurant/catering operations were run in the past. For the overwhelming majority of former and future restaurant goers, those few outspoken complainers will ruin it for the entire community. Efforts to satisfy those few naysayers will likely cripple our chance to get any meaningful restaurant operations going again in Sun City. Instead of demonstrating leadership, the Board seems intent on pandering to the few instead planning for the needs of the entire community.
As it now stands, the Board appears to be operating with a vision of Trumpets’ future that they are unwilling to share with the homeowners they presumably are supposed to represent. Is that level of communication and apparent secrecy really what we want or deserve from our Board of Directors?

One among many issues is whether or to what extent Trumpets should be open to the public as it was in the past. This goes to the heart of the catering question. Can any future Trumpets lessee sustain a profitable operation in Sun City while being restricted from engaging in public access catering operations? The answer to that question in turn likely centers around the issue of how much of a restriction is appropriate or even necessary to satisfy both parties.

Another issue is whether our Chartered Clubs will have the option of opting out from using the new lessee’s catering services for their own events in the Anthem Center. But consider, if our residents are expected to support the restaurant, is it too much ask that our Chartered Clubs be required to do the same? If the cost per serving is made “reasonable” for Club use, such required support should pose no problem. And what about "catered" events that rely on the use of ethnic dishes, dishes that lie outside of the type of food typically available from or prepared by the lessee? Would they be exempt?

For another view concerning our potential support for a future Trumpets, as well as other articles on Community issues, check out the Anthem Voice website by Clicking on this Link: Anthem Voice, which will take you to the Trumpets article.