The August 23 Board of Directors meeting was easily, in the eyes of almost everyone I spoke with during and after the meeting, the most contentious Board meeting ever held at Sun City Anthem, and for many the most acrimonious public meeting of any sort that they had ever attended.
How contentious was it? By the time the meeting had ended and various residents were engaged in verbal shouting matches (this reporter included, unfortunately), several Henderson police officers were standing by in the event emotions turned into physical attacks.
Like many of my readers, I will eventually have my own personal comments to share, but the process starts off with what I hope is viewed as a reasonably accurate report and analysis of what transpired.
It was clear from the outset that a large percentage of those in attendance were there to support Bob Frank in what they assumed -correctly, as it turned out- would be an adverse Board action against him. Many of Bob's supporters had been urged, by phone call and e-mail, to turn out for the meeting to oppose what was being predicted: a vote to remove him as Board Vice President. During at least one in-home meeting in advance of the Board meeting, plans had been laid to coordinate speakers for the member comment period, so it didn't surprise me that a number of the resident speakers read from prepared statements that I was told had been written for them by a single person. In addition, a group of Bob's most ardent supporters were huddled outside Freedom Hall prior to the meeting.
Unlike most Board meetings, there was a great deal of ad-hoc "audience participation" along the way, with some audience members in three-quarters-filled Freedom Hall shouting out comments and objections as the meeting progressed.
Before the Member Comment Period, Board President Mike Dixon said the ongoing agenda experiment regarding resident comments would allow no comments during Board discussion of agenda items at this meeting. He said he believed that the combination of open Member Comment Period plus expanded descriptions of items on the agenda was adequate.
The Member Comment Period ran for about 45 minutes, with all who wished to speak given a two-minute opportunity to do so. Here is a summary of most of the comments:
Sonny Sonnenfeld said he applauds the fact that the Board is holding monthly Town Hall meetings. He said he would like better and more timely responses to e-mail he sends asking questions. He asked if John Leach is still the Association's attorney, and Board President Mike Dixon replied that he is.
Kathy Cox read part of a prepared statement -she ran out of time during the reading- reflecting her views about the many complaints against Board members. She said the community should appreciate Board members for giving of their time. She praised volunteerism in general and said we should have respect for differing views.
Mary Lee Duley,in her prepared statement, spoke of complaints against Board members and asked for an apology for Mike Dixon's discourtesy toward her at a prior Town Hall Forum. She said she is seeking detailed information on the status of Recreation Building 3 construction, stating that homeowners in the immediate vicinity are very inconvenienced by all the dust and noise from the site preparation. Mike Dixon said that a meeting will soon be scheduled with developer representatives, and he called on residents to submit their suggestions and concerns for the new building to Assistant Community Manager Caren Carrero so that they can be consolidated and discussed when the meeting takes place. Board member Bob Berman added that he believes efforts are being made to mitigate dust during the site-grading stage, and he said he believes the project is on track for a nine-month building schedule and a grand opening in July, 2008.
Citing the words of Yogi Berra, Rivka Wolf stated, "This is deja vu all over again." She expressed unhappiness about residents not being able to speak on agenda items as they came up during the meeting. She said, "If there are complaints to be heard, they had better be about everybody."
Norman McCullough said that he was happy to see that disciplinary items were on the agenda, adding his belief that Board member Kay Dwyer should be disciplined.
Donna Dickey objected to a statement by Mike Dixon at the beginning of the meeting on the allowed subjects for the Member Comment Period. She said -I believe correctly- that the Member Comment Period should be about whatever a resident wants to talk about.
Jay Essa, directing his comment to Mike Dixon, asked what is happening with Trumpets. He said that if they are not paying their rent, and with the lease expiring, we should lock the doors on October 1. Mike replied, saying that the Trumpets operators did not give notice of intent to renew and have not asked us to renew. (Note: This reporter was verbally abused by Mr. Essa as he returned to his seat).
Tim Stebbins suggested that changing the CC&Rs to allow for collections on home sales would help stabilize Association finances and help mitigate future dues increases. Mike pointed out that we have our current New Member Fee and Asset Enhancement Fee on home sales, but Mr. Stebbins said his proposal would put the money into our reserve account.
Ricard Arendt singled out almost every Board member by name, one at a time, for criticism. He said that Mike Dixon should have given an apology to Mary Lee Duley, and he accused him of "cutting a deal" to become Board President.
A resident whose name I didn't catch said that he had looked hard at the qualifications of Board candidates in the last election, and he singled out Bob Frank for praise.
Joan Patrick stated her belief that that Board is not abiding by Nevada Revised Statute 116, the state's HOA law, and not abiding by our governing documents. She said there is mutual rudeness by the Board and by residents, and that it is important that all relevant laws be followed.
Rana Goodman claimed to be quoting David Berman as saying that Bob Frank should be removed from the Board (Note: Ms. Goodman was in error, as I have never EVER advocated Bob's removal from the Board, either publicly or privately). She also said that David Berman is acting as if he were the 8th member of the Board, and she said to the Board, "You had damn well better be ready to explain Item E" on the agenda, which turned out to be the item that included the vote to remove Bob Frank as VP.
Ellen Bradt spoke positively about Bob Frank. "I'm living on a street with pimps, prostitutes and the homeless," she said, "and something must be done."
Ken Andersen, a leader of the group studying plumbing problems in Sun City Anthem, said the group wants to be able to present its information to the community after those receiving the information sign liability releases. He suggested that the Board should provide appropriate risk protection. Mike Dixon reminded the audience that our HOA-insurance representative will be visiting SCA next Tuesday, August 28, and that residents are invited to attend to speak with him and ask questions.
Referring to an August 14th Finance Committee meeting he attended, Nelson Orth described the meeting as "scary." He says no cash balance had been agreed upon for December 31, 2006, and he said that he gives Board Treasurer Roz Berman an "A" for effort and an "F" for results. Mike Dixon noted that the 2006 Audit Letter was being accepted at this meeting, and that 2006 end-of-year figures are in the audit report that will soon be made available to residents.
John Briggs stated that statute requires proper notice to remove a Board officer. He said it is not permitted to limit the total time for resident comments to 30 minutes, to which Mike Dixon replied by noting that the comment period at that point had gone on for nearly 40 minutes and a 30-minute time limit was not being enforced. Mr. Briggs added that he is an insurance broker and wants to examine our current policies before the August 28 meeting with the Association's insurance representative.
Joe Barbato commented on renewed Clark County interest in cutting back on semi-weekly trash pickups while increasing recycling pickups. He said he wants the Board to take a formal position opposing such changes. Mike Dixon said he plans to attend upcoming public meetings to voice SCA opposition to the proposal.
The final speaker, Bill Way, referred to those who had been speaking against the Board at the microphone as "cowardly." He said he was embarrassed to be part of this audience.
BOARD PRESIDENT'S REPORT
In his Board President's Report, Mike Dixon said he has met with representatives of the Minuteman Foundation, and will meet with them again, to discuss defining what the Foundation wants with respect to its occupancy in the Community Service Building. He also acknowledge community concern about the current regulations that cause clubs/groups holding potlucks to have to pay $1.00 per person fees, and he said the matter is being assigned to the Lifestyle Committee to research the history and to determine if this requirement can perhaps be abolished.
Mike gave some statistics on this year's Enforcement Survey, reporting that the results show at least 86 percent of SCA homes being occupied by at least one person who meets the qualifying age to live here. He complimented Enforcement Manager Christine Wikoff for her coordination of the survey.
Mike reminded the audience that City of Henderson representatives will be attending the September Town Hall Forum to discuss traffic issues and neighborhood services. He concluded by noting that a hearing in the Trumpets case is scheduled for August 30, and he said plaintiff S&D Cafe has 10 days to respond to the counter-claim filed by the Association.
FINANCIAL REPORT
Treasurer Roz Berman reported that the July financial reports had not been received prior to the Finance Committee's August 14 meeting, the delay caused by the fact that RMI received the final list of adjusting journal entries, resulting from the 2006 audit, only a few days before the Finance Committee meeting. RMI had to process the entries and restate the December 2006 financial reports and the June 2007 financial reports. The Finance Committee is now reviewing these restated reports. Roz said RMI is now rolling the July opening balances into their new accounting system and will provide the Finance Committee with the July financial reports before the end of this month.
DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT PROJECT
Board Secretary Elaine Berg reported that her team working in the Greene Room is now into the second phase of the project, which is initial sorting. She cited four resident volunteers who have given generously of their time: Mary Bruner, Ted Tedesco, Frances Toth, and Roger Cooper. She hopes to complete this phase by the end of September.
PROPERTIES & GROUNDS COMMITTEE
The Properties & Grounds Committee (P&G) was very successful in obtaining Board votes of approval for most of the action requests submitted to the Board, primarily in the area of access/security. The following items were approved by the Board:
- Placement of 10-MPH speed-limit signs to be placed in strategic locations in the main parking lot between Anthem Center and Independence Center.
- Authorize RMI to spend up to $5,000 to hire a lighting consultant to recommend increased illumination in the parking lot, and at access doors and defined risk areas.
- Authorize RMI to make corrections to landscaping at ground level and around the outside pool to meet standards set by Code and as recommended by the Henderson Police Department.
- Authorize RMI to enter into a contract with a towing company so that the SCA Security Patrol, through authorized RMI or Board personnel, may have any vehicle removed, at the vehicle operator's expense, from the parking lots after their vehicle has received two reminders for unauthorized overnight parking, and authorize RMI to obtain and place in parking lots appropriate warning signs,a s well as announcing the program publicly to residents through the Spirit.
- Authorize RMI to assign a person to be responsible for assuring that all doors in all buildings are locked at 10 p.m., with exception of doors required for restaurant and maintenance access, and have RMI, working with the SCA Security Patrol, develop written procedures covering lockdown operation procedures.
- Authorize the Security Patrol to be responsible for validating that doors are being locked in compliance with the lockdown procedures.
- Authorize the service of at least one security guard (from the SCA Security Patrol) to be present at all non-SCA after-hours events.
- Authorize the purchase and installation of locks for the Anthem Center restroom doors leading to the members-only area (gallery) so that they may be locked for after-hours functions.
Several other P&G recommendations were tabled or sent back to P&G for additional attention.
LIFESTYLE COMMITTEE
The Lifestyle Committee's (LSC) report indicated that LSC is proposing that non-resident room rentals be discontinued. Changes to the appropriate governing documents to reflect this revised policy to the Board at its September meeting.
The Board voted to approve a request by the LSC, submitted with the support of several other committees, for creation of a standardized form to be used to notify the committees when the Board is returning a committee request for additional follow-up.
FINANCE COMMITTEE
The Finance Committee (FC) will lead an Assessment Scenario Workshop with the Board at 2 p.m. on Monday, August 27. This public workshop will feature a discussion of various financial scenarios and their potential impact on homeowner assessments.
The Board voted to approve an FC recommendation for a Reserve Fund appropriation in the amount of $72,000 to paint the exterior of Anthem Center.
The Board voted to accept the final 2006 Audit Report from auditor Gary Lein of Hilburn & Lein.
ELECTION COMMITTEE
The Election committee (EC) submitted for approval a set of recommended changes to the 2008 Election Manual. Several Board members expressed reservations about two proposals in particular, which relate to restrictions on Board members in campaigning for or endorsing Board candidates, and suggesting how soon after the election results are announced that the Board must come together to hold a meeting and elect its officers. Board member Bob Berman, in particular, said he didn't believe it was proper for the EC to dictate policy to the Board on such issues which were the exclusive province of the Board. EC chairperson Lorraine Kennett addressed the Board to say that it had been her committee's impression that the two questionable revisions had been requested by the Board, but Board members said this was not the case. Kennett offered to simply delete the two items so that the rest of the revisions could be approved, but Board VP Bob Frank instead requested that a workshop be held. The revision requests were then tabled and will be discussed at a workshop.
NEW BUSINESS
A proposal was on the agenda to use coupon books for mailing in assessment dues. The item was on the agenda for discussion only, and was accompanied by a statement of pros and cons, presented as follows:
The Pros: Each quarter, RMI mails out a statement to each homeowner with the amount of the quarterly Assessment Dues. The computer system cannot differentiate between members paid in full for the year and those that are paying quarterly. The computer generates statement for all homeowners regardless of their payment history/balance. Upon receiving these statements asking for payment, many homeowners who have paid in advance become confused and/or worried that perhaps RMI has not received their advance payment. Therefore, some of our homeowners will pay the amount on the statement, thereby paying double and some will become upset and will call RMI for clarification. To alleviate double payments and members having to make calls to RMI to correct their accounts,management is asking for approval to obtain coupon books with four (4) coupons, one for each quarter. Hence, the homeowners can either pay quarterly or double up on payments or pay for the entire year at one time. This will save the Association money because there will only be one mailing per year instead of four (4) mailings and eliminate the confusion with prepaid accounts.
The Cons:
Many homeowners would prefer to have the statements mailed to them each quarter as a reminder that the payment is due instead of the coupon books which could be misplaced and thus members will forget to make the Assessment payment.
As this was only a discussion item, my understanding is that the Finance Committee will take a look at it.
COMPLAINTS AGAINST BOARD MEMBERS: ALL HELL BREAKS LOOSE
Finally, at the very end of the agenda, came the moment that most in the auditorium had been waiting for. After quickly disposing of one of the two items, which I assume was a complaint made by a resident against a Board member, the Bob Frank matter was at hand.
Based on some of the comments made at the beginning of the meeting, I think many in the audience expected and desired some Board commentary that detailed the accusations against Bob Frank pursuant to removing him as Vice President of the Board. But it was clear that this was not going to happen, because while one statute requires that such actions be taken at a public meeting, privacy and confidentiality rules do not permit telling residents what the violations were. As I understand individual rights and freedoms in matters like this, I believe only one person, Bob Frank himself, can reveal the details to anyone he wishes, so it would be his choice whether to share that information publicly.
As Mike Dixon began reading a prepared statement, cleared by legal counsel, before the vote would be taken, many in the auditorium, realizing what was happening, shouted and yelled to the point where Dixon was drowned out, according to some I spoke with.
This is President Dixon's statement in its entirety:
Over the past several months, the Board has received numerous written complaints alleging violations, by a Board member, of provisions of NRS 116 and NAC 116. The allegations and supporting documentation were reviewed by our attorney who determined that both statutes had been violated. On the attorney's advice the Board sent a certified letter to the Board member asking him to agree in writing to cease violating the law. A Board member's failure to comply with the laws that govern us puts the Association at risk of a lawsuit. If the Board allows a Board member to willfully violate provisions of NRS 116 it may result in the Association and the entire Board losing coverage under our Directors and Officers insurance policy. When the Board member refused to agree in writing to obey all applicable laws and our governing documents,the Board met with the attorney to discuss further action. The Board's fiduciary duty is to the Association, and we must take action to protect it. While our discussions with the Board member and the attorney on these matters took place in Executive Session, any sanction by the Board must be voted on at an open meeting.
At the conclusion of this statement and before the vote to remove Bob Frank was taken, Bob stated that he was not being given a chance to defend himself. Mike restated that the vote was only the end result after several months of seeking Bob's cooperation.
Amidst an incredible volume of shouting, booing and angry outbursts from the audience, the Board took its vote and quickly adjourned. The vote to remove Bob Frank was 5-1, with Frank voting against the motion and Board member Barry Friedman abstaining.
But things didn't end there. Although several Board members left the stage and the building, several others stayed behind as much of the crowd moved down to the open area in front of the stage while others stood in the aisles and spoke their minds. The level of anger directed at the remaining Board members and toward others who were milling about was growing steadily, and I was personally relieved to see the calming presence of several police officers who stood quietly by and observed the events. There were numerous shouting matches, including one involving myself which resulted in my directing an insulting comment at a resident, using an inappropriate phrase and word. Knowing that this was improper, I sent her -at least I think it was her- a message of apology later that evening. I don't approve of such behavior by others, and I certainly don't approve of it in myself.
Thus ended what in some ways was a historic event in Sun City Anthem. And there's a chance the saga may not be over yet, as a question has been raised about whether notice of the removal item appeared correctly on the agenda. If this turns out to be true, I would expect that if there is no surprising change of circumstances, the Board could simply reissue a correct notice and take the vote again.
I hope that the readers who were at the meeting will agree that I have accurately reflected both what happened and what the mood was at the meeting, as I always try to do in such reports. If you think otherwise, do let me know.