The Sun City Anthem Board and Bob Frank

Hello!

Wow! This site is very good!
very thanks
Werner Schultheiss
berirtrerejas

I rarely blog, but I have to set the record straight with regard to comments Bob Sansing has made and his skewed recollection of a meeting we had.

Two years ago I requested a meeting with then President David Weil to discuss some very disturbing occurrences in my neighborhood (Pinnacle Village). He included two other board members, Lyndall Ruiz and Bob Sansing, and we met in the old Library at Anthem Center (not at Mr. Sansing's home). At that time, I was the one that had researched and gathered the information about loan fraud and underage renters living in Pinnacle. There was also the matter of having numerous homes that had either dead or nonexistent landscaping (and it's still that way to this day.)

I reported to the Board members that another neighbor and I had been in touch with several law enforcement agencies and had given them my research. I was told by Mr. Weil that the Board couldn't do anything about the fraud situation, but he would look into the underage and landscaping problems. (Still not resolved.) Although Mr. Sansing contributed very little to this meeting and appeared oblivious to what was going on, I did anticipate a follow-up phone call as a concerned neighbor to find out what was happening. I'm still waiting to hear from Mr. Sansing.

To set the record straight, the only time I've been in the Sansing household was to stop by and congratulate the candidates after they had won the election.

So please do not pretend concern, or that you extended your help, or followed through with these problems in any manner. We've been virtually ignored by the Board and RMI for over two years! I know you say you're "proud to have served"; my question is, Who the heck did you serve?

Oh, and by the way...those 17 votes that cost you your re-election to the Board...
those were your Pinnacle neighbors actively campaigning against you!

I rarely blog, but I have to set the record straight with regard to comments Bob Sansing has made and his skewed recollection of a meeting we had.

Two years ago I requested a meeting with then President David Weil to discuss some very disturbing occurrences in my neighborhood (Pinnacle Village). He included two other board members, Lyndall Ruiz and Bob Sansing, and we met in the old Library at Anthem Center (not at Mr. Sansing's home). At that time, I was the one that had researched and gathered the information about loan fraud and underage renters living in Pinnacle. There was also the matter of having numerous homes that had either dead or nonexistent landscaping (and it's still that way to this day.)

I reported to the Board members that another neighbor and I had been in touch with several law enforcement agencies and had given them my research. I was told by Mr. Weil that the Board couldn't do anything about the fraud situation, but he would look into the underage and landscaping problems. (Still not resolved.) Although Mr. Sansing contributed very little to this meeting and appeared oblivious to what was going on, I did anticipate a follow-up phone call as a concerned neighbor to find out what was happening. I'm still waiting to hear from Mr. Sansing.

To set the record straight, the only time I've been in the Sansing household was to stop by and congratulate the candidates after they had won the election.

So please do not pretend concern, or that you extended your help, or followed through with these problems in any manner. We've been virtually ignored by the Board and RMI for over two years! I know you say you're "proud to have served"; my question is, Who the heck did you serve?

Oh, and by the way...those 17 votes that cost you your re-election to the Board...
those were your Pinnacle neighbors actively campaigning against you!

What a pleasure to see that the two Lady BIGMOUTHS are finally silent!!!

TO RON JOHNSON;
I agree with you.While the anonomous posters make go on the attack, you are right when you say that people don't have to respond. It is an old story that some people like to deliberately antagonize others and do more of it when they see they get an outpouring of bitter response. And in reading the entire blog, it is obvious that several people "bit on the bait" instead of swimming away from it!.

Bob Sansing, you raise an interesting point and I will certaintly want to consider it. Yes, I can stop the practice, but would that be of some benefit? If anyone is going to stand up for the right of one to post anonymously, I would think that Libertarians would be at the forefront, but perhaps not. As troubling as an "anonymous" contibutor can be, how much better off would we really be silencing that critical or abusive voice by requiring users to identify themselves? Users, too, have a choice in this matter. They do not have to respond and accept the bait offered by anonymous users. They can simply ignore such users, if they wish to do so. They can merely move off of personalities and, instead, move on to issues.

Sunshine not starlight; Anthem Critic;
Mr.Incredible; Anonymous IV; Another concerned homeowner; A Resident; Anonymous:

All of the above monikers have been used in this thread. How can anyone hope to carry on a civil adult conversation with people who for what ever reason refuse to identify themselves?

Message to Ron Johnson:
Ron you have the power to stop this and I certainly hope you do ASAP. It is not right to allow anyone to speak about any other member of our community without being personally held accountable for their words.

Regards,
Bob Sansing, ex-SCA BoD Director
Proud to have served my community

THE STAR of the board is raising our dues 55% over the next three years. What are the results of The STAR'S work on the villa agreement-she doesn't state yes or no it was fully funded --she doesn't know and can not find out because RMI has our books in such bad shape, even with their great new computer system. What move has she made to collect the hundreds of thousands of dollars owed by S&D cafe? No, because she like most of the board doesn't have the will to fight to get any of the money. So, insufficient effort to correct the Villa's reserve funds or even our association's reserve funds, no effort to collect any amount from S&D cafe. THE STAR IS JUST GOING TO RAISE OUR DUES over the next three years. Eventually, we will need to raise dues but not until all amounts owed us are collected and RMI manages efficiently. .

Now that I think about it, what if we replaced RMI? They get almost $3 million, how do we know we can not do better? Oh, yes, THE STAR and her husband have told us we can't. But I hear rumors that the financial records could not be in much worse shape and some of them are in boxes.

Incidentially, RMI is supposed to be responsible for the budget along with Finance committee and THE STAR'S oversight. Do they know what they are doing? I want to see the expenses of S&D Cafe and the amount owed us included as potential revenue (not a write off) in the budget. And why are they continuing to set aside reserves for Trumpets equipment that RMI has not inventoried for three years.

THE STAR WILL JUST RAISE OUR DUES 55%. Of course, each of us is only one out of seven thousand who will have our dues raised. Individually, that is less than the percentage the villa owners are but we add up to the entire association including MR. Benjamin. Seems to me that everyone counts.

Dear Ann Bocchino:
Please, don't give up. At one time this was a great community where all residents were respectful in speaking with one another. As an eternal optimist, I am convinced that it can be again, with your help and others like you who understand how important it is to trust each other until PROVEN other wise.
Keep your chin up.

Regards,
Bob Sansing, ex-SCA BoD Director
Proud to have served my community

That's it.....I GIVE UP! This nasty name calling has turned my stomach for the last time. This is a terrible community I retired to one year ago. I am disgusted that I spent my good money, left my family and crossed the country to become a part of this dysfunctional community. YOU SHOULD ALL BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELVES! To toss around the word Nazi is disgusting not only for those directly affected by the horrors of the WWII atrocities against one people, but for all of humankind. There seems to be no sanity in this community.

ANTHEM CRITIC:

You post goes way beyond the pale. If I were a betting woman, I would say that first your reference to calling Bob Frank a Nazi shows what kind of coward you are and I suggest you slither back under the rock from where you came. Secondly, in pursing your ongoing campaign of hatred of Bob Frank and his supporters,it makes you look uneducated, coarse and points the finger at you yourself as the real bully, bigmouth and last but not least, a full blown coward who hides his identity,lest someone come back at you if your identity were revealed.

You look pathetic and ignorant. In your reference to David Berman and his wife, David is more than capable of defending himself as we are and secondly, most of us have not labeled Roz. We may strongly disagree with the state of the finances, that being a legitimate issue, but not the kind of name calling that so easily passes from YOUR mouth!

Anthem critic: “One of my own kind” say that to my face if you dare, but since you are not brave enough to sign your name apparently you don’t have the courage to show yourself for the bigot that you are.

Rana: Like most of you troublemakers you read and respond to only those parts that suit you. If you read my message, the near physical attack at the meeting occurred when one of your own kind assaulted someone he accused of calling him a Nazi. Which was far from the truth

I consider it mostly as "filth" the way you and some of the other big mouths accuse D. Berman of all the things you say about him (and Roz). Nothing can be farther from the truth. Especially since Roz has been the "star" of the board since her election.

Bob Sansing: I know you to be a man of high intellect, so please don’t say you don’t know the meaning of the term “Napoleonic complex. That was what Marcia Kosterka said to you, she NEVER referred to your height or your physical limitations. I know her and she may, no, let’s make that, does have a sharp tongue, but she is not cruel and for you to make that statement in your reply is a total distortion of fact and I won’t let that pass.
As for NRS 82 vs NRS 116, when 116 was written in 1991 it required all future HOAs to conform and to make certain that sections of NRS 82, The sections of our bylaws based on 281 of NRS 82/non-profit corporations are no longer valid under NRS 116. By the way, this was written in 1991 and SCA incorporated in 1998 so our bylaws it seems were not valid when they were written, interesting huh?
As for you, Anthem Critic; talk about brainless! What kind of person are you in this day and age to call anyone such vile names. Nazi is a thing lost in the past and should stay there. I suggest you learn some simple decency. Who are you to read the minds of anyone, who are you to tell people to admit they made a mistake? Did it ever occur to you they are admitting they made a BIG mistake in voting for the other three in showing their continued and undying support for Bob Frank no matter what you do to shame him. Even brining in Tina Dixon to conduct a workshop on Bob Frank’s Planning & Processing Committee won’t change a thing. The “dark side” is fighting a losing battle; the truth will find a way into the light.

Dear Ms. Kosterka:
NRS:82 deals with not for profit corporations, while NRS:116 deals with Home Owner Associations.

I guess with your comment regarding my lack of height and physical disability indicates you are not interested in a civil, adult dialog.

If you recall, you telephoned my home to ask me questions regarding this community before the last elections. I took nearly an hour of my time to try and relay some history of our community, the issues we have faced and some of the players involved. At that time I felt I was talking to a bright new resident of SCA. I wish I could say the same today.

If you would bother to check with Donna Dickey, she will tell you that I was one of the 3 Board members she met with and learned about the illegal activities in her neighborhood.
Our Board President, Dave Weil gave the information to Barbara Thomas who was in charge of enforcing our rules and regulations.

Donna has been in my home and was part of the early development of ACE which took place in my living room.

Regards,
Bob Sansing, ex-SCA BoD Director
Proud to have served my community

I cannot believe the "brainless" comments on this blog. None of you who voted for Bob Frank have the GUTS to admit you made a big mistake and you are trying to cover it all up with BIG MOUTH verbage. I recall at the last BOD meeting someone getting physical over the perception that someone else had referred to them as a Nazi. You all have overlooked the fact that the BOD has the biggest Nazi of them all. You will see that Mr Frank will be a problem even when three new members are elected next May. He wants to be President so bad he can taste it! And if you can complain about Favil West, just wait and see what happens to our BOD. It's too late now, but if you had counted how many signs Frank posted for the election and how many wooden nickels he gave out--they speak for themselves. He will try to tell you that all he is interested in is helping the community. HOGWASH--all he is interested in is self gratification!

Mr. Incredible:

Just one final note regarding your perception of women leaving the Women's Club in droves. Today, we had our monthly luncheon. We had well over 200 women attending and our raffles raised $1590.00 to benefit the SCA Community Service Club.

What have your done lately for SCA?

BOB SANSING:

It is obvious that you do not practice what you preach, otherwise you would have known that NRS 82 had been replaced by NRS 116 and NAC 116. In fact you should have known that our declaration and bylaws were boiler plate of Sun City Summerlin before NRS 116 came into effect and for that reason alone, our bylaws should have been brought into compliance with NRS 116. By not bringing them into compliance, you confuse homeowners as to what is the law, especially when our bylaws conflict with NRS 116.

But then you, having a Napoleonic complex, and wanting to always be where the power seems to be, wouldn't care about homeowners much anyway.
As a former board member, did you do anything about all the illegal activities that had been and still are running rampant in your own Village of Pinnacle? Please tell us what help, if any, you ever gave Donna Dickey who has been fighting for this issue in Pinnacle, Black Mountain, Shadow Canyon and other villages to be recognized by BODs then and now for three years and that action be taken? Perhaps when a new next door neighbor sets up a drug running operation, or a house of prostitution or teenagers move in without adult supervision next to you, then you will wake up and smell the coffee!

Rivka; You could never be through barking at anyone. You are constantly barking up the wrong tree!!!

Dear Ms. Kosterka:
You said "Since I could not find anything historically referencing anything outstanding that you did in the minutes of the board on which you served...."
I was elected to be part of a seven member board, acting as a team and not an officer of that board. I was the only Director who also was working full time running a business. I am proud of the accomplishments we achieved, such as adding Handicapped Access to allow people like you to easily enter and exit Anthem Center. I consider that to be pretty outstanding. My primary job was as board representative to the Communications Committee. Working together, we were able to bring TV99 from slides scrolling on the screen to real programming. Because of this accomplishment we are now in a position to realize significant revenues coming for the sale of sponsorships to new programming which will help keep our assessments as low as possible.
The main job of a Board Director is to manage the assets of the Association by working together as a team. Unfortunately I felt that sometimes we failed to make the right decision because one individual kept thinking me instead of us. Sound like anyone you know?
You also said "since I know you helped broker a behind the scenes deal for Mike Dixon to become president..." You are absolutely correct; I had already experienced one dictator on the Board and didn't want to see another one.
You also said "since you have said publicly that ACE is dead and since your recent history is nefarious at best..." Because of the recent developments I have changed my mind about ACE and will support its continued efforts. Please explain my so called nefarious history. You also said..."I suggest that you wait like the rest of us until Bob Frank makes his statement and defends himself." I have and what I read are constant references to Ron Johnson's opinions stated as facts. The first thing a new Director must do is to sign an affidavit that he/she has read and understands NRS:116; NRS:82; the CC&R's; Rules & Regulations and all other governing documents.
From his behavior and his statements it is obvious to me that Bob has not done that.
I am still asking the main questions. Why was our SCA VP absent from the courtroom when the most important issue facing SCA over the last 2 years was being decided. Every Board member is expected to attend every departmental budget review. Why again was or SCA VP absent from many of them?
Have a nice day.

Regards,
Bob Sansing, ex-SCA BoD Director
Proud to have served my community

Rivka, Anthem Critic wrote, this time, clearly in his own style, how could his identy NOT be clear to us all, especially, those of us who were once loyal fans?

Anthem Critic,

The more you write the clearer your identity is to me. I think you told me more than once, that if you write on the blog you always give your name. So much for your word.

As to the back and forth between us, a person whom I respect stated his philosophy in the form of a question; To wit, "if you walk in the street and a dog barks at you, do you bark back?" Well, I am now thru barking back at you.

Rivka Wolf

Anthem Critic,
We know who you are ,even tho you use many aliases. No one else is privy to how the BOD votes except #8. And kudos to "big mouth Rivka and the rest of the inquisition lovelies", as you call them.. They, at least speak the truth and dont babble on with utter nonsense. The more you say, the more you make a fool of yourself.

Mark no one questions what Frank is trying to do. They are questioning his devisive Bully methods. He clearly presents things in a way that says he is the only one who is right and the BOD better do it his way. For better or worse he is only one of seven and when the vote is taken the majority rules. He cannot live with that when the vote is contrary to his ideas.

As for being anonymous, obviously from reading the blog, antiFrank appears to be in the minorty although I believe the other 9000 who did not vote for BOB are silent but not happy. So why expose onesself to big mouth Rivka and the rest of the inquisition "lovelies" that inhabit all of the blogs with their complaints and nastinesses.?

Those who use anonymous names are either: 1) a well known person who is very unpopular in the community, 2) a coward who will not stand up for his principles, or 3) all of the above. I like to speculate who the secret posters may be...yep, you I agree with the names you just thought of.

As for Bob Frank, I can really understand why a few are throwing stones at him...it's pure jealousy. They liked to leave total control to the previous board, because they didn't have to think for themselves. They very wrongly assumed that things were being run in a proper and honorable manner, but then, ignorance is bliss isn't it. Bob is the best thing ever to come down the pike and the timing could not be better. We have serious problems, he will, with the help of the majority, uncover the root cause and fix it. Can any one of you naysayers name a person so intent on solving our financial situation? Can any one of you naysayers name a person as honorable and trustworthy? Can any one of you naysayers name a person with the extensive background in leadership positions that Bob has held?

You doubting Thomases, you few, disturbed residents, who have sat idly on your posterior for several years while the walls came tumbling down, while Trumpets sucked you dry, and while your finances were depleted before your very eyes, if you really want to place the blame where it belongs...LOOK IN THE MIRROR.

Why allow posts from anonymous authors? My belief is anonymity equates to cowardice. In the case of the anonymous or "alias" quotes here, they shield the cowards who are then free to spew vile insults. What would happen if these people tried posting the same things to another blog we all know......THEY WOULD NEVER SEE THE LIGHT OF DAY. I for one am fed up with this type of juvenile behavior. We are an ADULT community with some real problems that need addressing. We need input from problem solvers, NOT vile, insulting posts. Come out from behind your masks and offer some viable solutions. If you can't do that, then just SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP!

The Anthem Critic,

Are you the same person who wrote under Mr. Incedible? If not, are you his twin? Why are you hiding? No one pulled the wool over my eyes. Perhaps you are misguided. The difference between you and me is that I make my comments in public rather than you who hides under a rock until you are ready to strike, then you slither back under the rock. Are you afraid to be associated with what you say?

As I said before to Mr Incredible: "I don't respect COWARDS."

Rivka Wolf

I was very happy to read Mr. Franks report. I am very proud I voted for him. I wish I could say the same for my other votes. Why do we have someone checking old files that has know interest in uncovering the truth? How many records will never see the light of day?
I'm very disappointed in Mr. Dixon and his dealing with residents. I have been told of his rudness to others.His demand for spending money for imformation on our lighting is a joke.There are many sources for that imformation that are free.I guess he is blind to common sense.

Mr. Incredible:

Your posting infered that there were a mass exit of women from the SCA Women's Club because Kay Frank was in a leadership position. I find your inference insulting to not only Kay Frank but to the hundreds of women in our club that do so much for our community.

I have been a member of the Charities Raffle Committee of the Women's Club for the past three years. This committee is the main fund raising arm of the club. We raise tens of thousands of dollars each year to benefit many worthwhile causes in our community -- The Minuteman Foundation, Safe Nest, HACA, Opportunity Village and at risk elementary schools to name just a few.

The chairmanship of the Raffle Committee is one of the most important and time consuming positions in the Womens Club and is in effect almost a full time job. In 2005, just new to our community, Kay Frank agreed to assume the chairmanship of our committee for 2006, when no one else would volunteer to do the job. She worked long and hard to make 2006 the best fundraising year in the SCA WC ever. Kay not only was a wonderful organizer and leader, she always found ways for make our work a lot of fun.

She has now selflessly agreed to take on more responsibility. We are fortunate to have such a kind and caring woman as a leader in our club

As Alice said in Wonderland, it just keeps getting curiouser and curiouser.

Jeremy Twitchell reported in the South Valley News last week that Mike Dixon said no member of the board would comment (about the Villas) and stated: "I speak for the board."

Since when? Who gave Mikey the role of spokesman for the board? Such authority is not given to the president of the board in our bylaws or anywhere else that I am familiar with.

Did the board pass some sort of motion or resolution when I was not looking that conveyed such power to Mikey?

Perhaps Mr. Dixon can enlighten us on the provisions of NRS 116, NAC 116 or the SCA bylaws that empower him to “speak for the board.”

Is there truly some authority that gives him that power, or is this just another example of arrogance?

NORMAN:

Thank you for quoting me, but in actuality, it was a quote my parents taught me about respect being earned not demanded.

ISSUES, NOT PERSONALITY:

I concur with you 100%. That was the beginning of the leak in the governance boat. And it has begun to spring more leaks, as Unit Owners demand release of documents, that they have had a right to see all along. They (those that want to continue to cover up misdeeds, acts of fiduciary duty wrongdoing, and blatent malfeasance) appear to be scrambling to direct attention to others, (Bob Frank, Tim Stebbins, Rana Goodman, Mary Lee Duley, myself and others) to throw off the scrutiny they are now under. Well I can tell you we won't go away and that more misdeeds will be made public, which have led to financial problems, amenity problems, structural defect problems, and not but last, the illegal problems (meth lab, prostitution, homeless, break-ins." consistent CC & R violations, mortgage flipping and under age) to name a few. Bob Frank is on the right track and the rest of the BOD should think twice before they compound the problems to the point of demanding that they remove themselves from the board or be prosecuted!

Thank you “issues not personalities” for bringing us back to earth. I’m really tired of people against Bob Frank defending their stance by throwing mud and calling us names. For goodness sakes, I was at the board book review and unless I was sound asleep, all I heard was Bob asking a few questions AND THAT could hardly be called acting like a bully. A bully act would be more apropos of one who refused to allow him to defend himself the day the board attempted to vote him out of office and promptly shutting the meeting down.
One must ask, now that Bob has made his statement, WHY do they still counter with name calling under the guise of annonimity? Seems to me that the old adage must be correct, the best defense if a good offense; guess they don’t have a real defense so they need to throw stones!

If the Business Development Club had not insisted rightly that the Trumpets lease agreement was not confidential to homewowners--the board would have signed the addendum and the S & D Cafe owners would have extended their lease for ten more years at half the rent( really the same as half of nothing is nothing) and the homeowners would have had gambling in their facility. The board would not have been forced to bring this ridiculous lease extention to the homeowners.

Remember we homeowners had been told the lease was a SECRET that we were not entitled to know and we were told the negotiations were secret and we were not entitled to know.

I want to know and am entitled to know why didn't they evict S & D Cafe, Trumpets operator years ago. I don't buy the secret excuse any longer. Do you?

This is an important issue not a personality disagreement. Six board members and their supporters are calling it a personality issue, Bob Frank believes it is about grave issues of fiduciary responsiblity and secrecy. Do you?

Suzanne; I also deeply bow in your honor. How many times have we heard this statement.

"RESPECT MUST BE EARNED, NEVER DEMANDED"

I'm very much afraid that some people think it does not apply to them, and act accordinly.

Dear Mr. Incredible: As an elected Board member of the Women's Club, I need to take you to task on your assertion that women are leaving our club in droves. You do a great disservice to a fine organization. Marcia was correct in her post that some villages and special interest groups had left. But that was several years ago, and after empowering a task force, many issues of discord were solved, and many groups have returned. That includes my own Big Sky Village, of which I am also the coordinator. We have outstanding current leadership of the Women's Club, and I know that will continue next year under the direction of Mrs. Frank as you refer to her. Many residents are working hard to make our community a better place. They do it in various ways - on committees, in clubs, by forming Neighborhood Watch (which you imply is somehow nefarious), by serving on the Security Patrol, by putting themselves on the line by running for the Board, and also by working hard to shed light on serious Association issues that some would prefer not see the light of day. They do it on behalf of all of us. What are YOU doing to improve SCA?

D Berman is no bully but Bob Frank certainly is. Come to a Board Book review and a workshop and see him in action. Now he writes his rebuttal to the charges--and full of lies and mis-statements. If he is so concerned about Finances and RMI why did he fail to attend Budget reviews with the Finance Committee? All the other Board members were there. He also failed to show up when the Board visited RMI headquarters last month.

And I agree with one of the statements above. Rivka has a BIG MOUTH and obviously Frank has pulled the wool over her eyes (and Rana as well).

Suzanne, at this moment I am taking a deep bow in honor of that profound statement. BRAVO!

David Berman,interesting how you described yourself. YOU are the poster boy for bullies....and what else did you call yourself? was it idiot? do you recall how you were suddenly in my face after the BOD meeting screaming and yelling because you heard me talking to someone and you disagreed with what I said....and as I walked away you called me a vile name? And at least a dozen people heard and came to my defense?
I have never seen Bob Frank bully anyone. He acts with dignity. His behavior is not psychotic.
At least 4 other women have told me of your similar behavior to them. Be careful. Maybe the next one will have a husband who cant control himself.

All in favor of a recall , say "We have had enough" - (In unison please).

Mr. Incredible,

You certainly picked a name for yourself to hide behind. Incredible people don't do that. But I hope the name you picked makes you feel good.

I felt compelled to respond to you because you called me a big mouth. Your comment proved that your mouth is just as big as mine (or maybe bigger?). You hide. You don't give your name but you blast, from ambush, Bob Frank and Kay Frank quite hard. You also express a totally unsubstantianed opinion about members leaving the women's club and the feelings of the 2500 + who voted for Bob Frank. Would you be willing to render one of your "famous opinions" about the feelings of those who voted for the other 3 new members of the BOD?

You have your opinions and you are entitled to them. But, don't accuse others for having a big mouth and being negative when you do the same and more.

I do not respect cowards.

Rivka Wolf

It seems a pity that the continued psychotic behavior of one blog owner has to infest Ron Johnson's comment section. Just earlier this morning, that person's obsessive/compulsive personality comprised 11% of the total comments on this subject alone. Not satisfied with his own site, which demonstrates a lower number of people paying attention and blogging, his insatiable compulsion to always have the last word has become rather tiresome. After spending many days taunting Bob Frank supporters to reveal why the board acted illegally, he is now not satisfied with Bob's response to the community. Meanwhile, more information is being revealed as to HIS and other previous BOD's poor judgement and illegal behavior, which are the root cause of the many problems just surfacing now.

As to Mr. Incredible, you self proclaimed name speaks volumes. Try getting your facts straight.
The individual village women's clubs did not like several of the rules the master club invoked upon them. Now, they have agreed that there will be more autonomy for individual womens clubs. Oh, and by the way, Kay Frank does not become president until December!

David Berman, why are you so afraid of Rana Goodman that you have to continually point your finger at her? Perhaps you will some day report that she is also guilty of putting her role of toilet paper on the roll incorrectly, and everyone in the Community has to be informed about it. Leave her alone. She, along with a handful of dedicated individuals that want to do the right thing and have the truth exposed are the people that want our community to be run properly and legally not as an "Anthemgate". Why must you continually make sure people know what a terrific person you think you are? Do you really think anyone cares how many people read your blog or how many subscribers you have?

We are in for a Mr. and Mrs Frank "Takeover". Bob on the BOD; the Mrs. President of the Women's club (and the women are leaving the club in droves); and both of them as leaders of the Neighborhood watch program. Looks like a pattern to me. And finally the Mr. reveals his spots with the long nasty email sent all over the place. None of which answers why the BOD had the justification to take the action they took. And then we have Rana and big-mouth Rivka adding fuel to the fire with their negativism and accusations running amok./ They continue to cast aspersions on anyone whose name they can think of including Bob Berman and Bob Sansing who as much as anyone else want nothing but the best for Anthem. Bob Frank set his pattern when he was President of the Small Business Club and has continued his aggressive behavior on the Board. Nobody does anything right unless they do it his way. We are in for a year and a half more of trouble even though three new members will be elected next May. The 25oo who voted for Frank are afraid to admit that they made a BIG mistake!!

FYI, here is something of interest written by Beth Grimm, oeprator of a blog on California HOA law:

What Do You Do With An Obnoxious Board Member (Bully)?

What do you do when a board member or anyone else that "gets in your face", threatens you, or won't shut up even after making whatever point it is they are trying to make? This is a question that could be faced by an owner, other board members, and even the Association's service providers (manager, attorney, CPA, etc.) The "perpetrator" could be a man or it could be a woman.

Well, the simple answer is "Keep your cool!"

With that, you are more able to "tune them out", think of counter arguments (if its worth arguing with an idiot), gather yourself for the big comeback, or move on, without allowing that person to cloud your own thinking. It happened to me the other night. A candidate for the board who had just been elected and was already trying to bully a board into acting in a manner that was not legal got very heated when I opined that the law did allow what this person was proposing. This person began to argue that there was lots of information available on the web and that he/she had read on the internet that the board could do it. The other board members had no control over this outburst, and sort of collectively expressed great misgivings about whether they wanted to continue to serve with this kind of obnoxious behavior to look forward to. I silently sympathized with them, thinking "what a way to spend an evening each month." But someone had to bring a halt to scene. I was embarrassed for the instigator. I thought the person was making a fool of themselves. I simply said to the Board - and this person - "the Board has a choice, do you want to take legal advice from this person? Or from me?"

That brought things into perspective.

I believe the kind of conduct exposes the person (idiot I should say) as someone who has little professionalism and if allowed to bully others into submission, could do a great deal of damage to an association. In the person's defense, they were quite frustrated in their attempts to make something happen that was not a slam dunk favorable idea because of the cost involved. Still, frustrated or not, obnoxious behavior is not pretty or necessarily forgivable. I would hope that in any similar instance, conduct that exceeds a simple outburst of frustration would be viewed as immature and not worthy of respect.

If you know of a board member or owner, or a service provider, who acts out in this manner, there are various ways to deal with the conduct - in a legal and professional manner. (Of course, if you could just opt for sticking earplugs in your ears or placing earmuffs on your head as a symbollic measure. That might work and it is cheaper. Humor can work wonders if the timing is right.) The more serious remedies include (need to do legally - not necessarily per advice you find on the web, unless of course it is approved by your attorney) barring them from meetings and/or meaningful discussions on just about anything, or neutralizing their position on the board (see earlier blog about confidentiality issues) . The road to get there may be bumpy, and it could require an expenditure of money for the earmuffs or the right kind of help, be it someone in the legal profession or otherwise, but you do not have to put up with a bully. And resigning from service, although it might seem appealing, just leaves the bully in charge. That is never a good idea.

David, are you so egomaniacal that you think you intimidate me so much I need to hide behind my daughter to take you on? Don’t flatter yourself. As for documents; I believe, THIS Michelle was pointing out that if your committee was to make documents more accessible, why did they end up in boxes. Now you blast her by say “they were to be made accessible through various channels including the website? But those channels now seem to be, RMI, website and boxes full of rat feces. Way to go David!
You continue to run around desperately trying to convince people that six members of the current board are righteous and honorable, and the bad guy is Bob Frank, which sorry to say only points the finger at you and the other board members that are guilty of so much misbehavior that has, and will continue to hurt the people of SCA in my humble opinion. Give it a rest, it’s over, I’m done talking to you.

Interesting pattern here: 90 comments prior to this post, and a total of 30 of them from the same four people. More like 36 if you count Rana posting as "Michelle." That's the problem with a totally unsupervised message board; people will always take advantage of it, and that's why I will respect the vast majority of my own readers by not allowing my blog to be hijacked.

Michelle (who may be Rana herself posting under her daughter's name):

In your ignorance of the facts, you obviously don't understand what the Document Access Task Force was. It had nothing to do with sorting through the accumulated documents of the past. Its purpose was to develop a protocol for how we would make Association documents more easily accessible to residents through various channels, including the website. MANY documents not previously available are now on the site, and that is partly a product of the Task Force's recommendations, in my humble opinion.

To Dollie Circle and Dennis Olson above - I am a member of Property and Grounds, and although I do not have the answer to your questions above about the lighting study, I will bring up both your comments at our next meeting.I personally do not know if they are viable options. President Mike Dixon, in a Board/P and G workshop indicated he would like to see a lighting consultant hired. Our facilities manager is currently soliciting bids. Thank you for your ideas. And by the way, come visit our committee anytime. The P and G meetings are very resident-friendly and our chairman, Carl Weinstein, always allows comments on agenda items as they are discussed. Love to have your input on anything anytime!

Dave Berman and Bob Sansing, with all due respect gentlemen to your service to our community and your blasting of Ms. Kosterka David; I have spent the better part of the day reading the minutes of your tenure and several things popped right out there. It seems YOU, David Berman, were charged with the duty of the formation of a special committee on October 27th 2005 “documents access task force”. On February 23, 2006 you gave a report for that committee “the need to access association documents at a level more assessable to all residents” you announced that your committee would hold a meeting 2/28/at 1pm So instead of letting everyone beat up Ms. Berg about the documents being in boxes since she was secretary, why didn’t you ever step up and tell everyone what your role was in all of this document mess?
As for your claim that you and Bob Sansing “almost” sued Trumpets I am halfway through all the minutes posted and have found zero mention of any threat or hint of a suit. There is however this brave entry “David Berman explained that the response letter includes regular quarterly monitoring of the amount due from Trumpets and that a separate report will be prepared and submitted to the board on the basis of those quarterly reports” OOOOOO real brave way to collect rent guys!

would Nevada Power do the light study? Many power companys do.

Regarding the $5000. proposed study for parking lot lighting. Don't we have safety/loss control engineering services with our property/liability insurance carrier that would make proposals or recommendations at no charge? Seems that could be another avenue to pursue in order to save us a significant amount of $$bucks$$.

Marcia Kosterka:

I've taken time away from living at Green Valley Ranch to write as follows:

You addressed the following to Bob Sansing:

"Your statement that Bob Frank was removed as Vice Present because he would not sign a statement clearly indicates that this was second hand information given to you since you were not there. In fact that couldn't be further than the truth..."

How do you know that, Marcia? If you know what the truth is, do share it, because no one is supposed to know outside of the Board. Apparently someone has been talking to you?

I'm getting a kick out of those who, in their zeal to portray anyone they disagree with in the worst possible light, are casting me as some sort of Trumpets apologist or supporter. So here are some FACTS for you:

Like Sansing and Ruiz, my platform included a pledge to see that the Trumpets lease was enforced. Upon being elected to the Board, all three of us realized how tightly Favil was controlling things, even to the point of informing us of nearly nothing related to Trumpets "negotiations" that we were not sure were negotiations at all. We continued to press for legal action, however, and eventually convinced Dave Weil to form a majority of four in order to pursue legal approaches. We hired the firm of Harrison, Kemp & Jones, the law firm that later became lead plaintiffs' attorney in the Kitec class-action litigation, and we paid one of their top attorneys, now a partner in that firm, to study the complete Trumpets file and recommend what sort of legal action we should take.

While this was going on, a new election took place, Favil became Baord President, and the services of Harrison, Kemp & Jones were terminated. But I can assure you that through the entire tenure of Sansing, Ruiz and Myself, we wanted to immediately sue S&D for breach of their lease and kick them out, but we were thwarted at every turn.

Shortly after Trumpets went private, I was appointed chair of a newly formed Trumpets Liaison Committee. We were prohibited from interfering with lease issues, but we did make some progress in the form of a community-wide member interest survey, introduction of special members-only fixed-price dinners on Mondays, and several other initiatives. But shortly after the non-payment-of-rent issue arose, the Trumpets principals refused to have further dealings with us, and that pretty much ended it.

Unlike some who talk a good game but don't have much of a record of volunteerism in this community (excepting Linda Krivec and Joan Patrick), I have always felt a sense of obligation to do what I could to make SCA a better place to live. -- Go ahead, folks, resume the attacks.

Please let all know that Bob Sansing is The Voice behind Bob Berman, Bob Berman could not stand on his own two feet now than Favil is gone. He wanted to control the Board after Favil left and that is how he go the deal between the 3 old board member to get Mike Dixon in. Now they have Roz Berman, and of course the turncoat David Berman and his new great friend
Bob Berman. Just remember it was David Berman who worked with Trumpets for years and did nothing, it was aslo David Berman who was Favil West campaign mananger to help get Favil in. He does not know which side to take but we know it is the ones that will help him in the long run.

Be careful you have a person who thinks he can do no wrong and is now woring with Bob sansing to help Mike Dixon and the other three Board members screw up this Assoc. more.

Bob Sansing, a few things really trouble me about your post almost as much as your inexplicable vehemence against Bob Frank. I mean, wasn’t it you who, although you are a founder of ACE, brokered the deal between Mike Dixon and Bob Berman as soon as the election was over to “crown” Mike president rather than Bob? He was, after all the one who the majority of voters naturally assumed would have been our new president? But that is beside the point, What I’m curious about is that, since you are a resident of Pinnacle Village, I am amazed that you are so confident that Ron Johnson and Norman McCulough are dead wrong and you are sure the reserves are just fine and dandy. I mean, that WONDERFUL agreement that Kay Dwyer signed with Del Webb blew off any chance of Pinnacle getting more funds from them ever again also. I ASSUME you are aware of that. Your new BFF said something to the effect of “you just have to deal with it”. It was Bob Frank insisting that all of these dirty little secrets be shared with us that keep getting him in trouble. Your new BFF would prefer we all stay in the dark. It is not the COST of looking back they are afraid of; it’s what everyone might find out once the lights are turned on. For all you know, the prices you quote as costs might be what we would recover, in fact, did it ever occur to you that some of these prior directors might even be personally liable???

Bob Sansing:

In reference to your question as to why Bob Frank did not attend the court hearing on the S & D Cafe eviction hearing, I am afraid you should have posed that question to Bob yourself. Perhaps you could have done so this morning at the Current Events meeting and tried to embarrass him or could have asked him privately. As to attending departmental budget meetings, even your friend David Berman corrected you on that statement by telling you Bob has attended some of the meetings, so what is your motive when you were refuted on this issue? Your statement that Bob Frank was removed as Vice Present because he would not sign a statement clearly indicates that this was second hand information given to you since you were not there. In fact that couldn't be further than the truth, so I would advise you of the following:

Since I could not find anything historically referencing anything outstanding that you did in the minutes of the board on which you served, since I know you helped broker a behind the scenes deal for Mike Dixon to become president, since you have said publicly that ACE is dead and since your recent history is nefarious at best, I suggest that you wait like the rest of us until Bob Frank makes his statement and defends himself.

I have one question to ask the people writing to this string. Please explain why Bob Frank, someone whom I voted for and placed his campaign sign in my yard, didn't bother to attend the court hearing on the S&D Eviction nor attend any of the departmental budget meetings held over the last few weeks?
According to the procedure read at the last Board meeting, Bob Frank was removed as Board Vice-President for refusing to sign an affidavit promising to obey the rules, which include NRS:116, our CC&R's, Rules&Regulations, etc. How can anyone support a person that refuses to promise to obey the law? Simple minds want to know.

Regards,
Bob Sansing, ex-SCA BoD Director
Proud to have served my community

To the fed-up person,

You seem to be fed-up about important issues that you don't seem to know anything about. Also what does sex have to do with it? Are you trying to tell us something about your life? You are telling us too much about you own life. Is that why you did not give your name?

Rivka Wolf

It appears from what A fed-up resident said, ("because they all now lead a sexless life with their spouses), we may have a window peeper in our midst. Be on the lookout!!!

Sorry to burst your balloon, JosephM, but when I have something to say I will post it under my own name. I don't post anonymously.

A fed-up resident wrote and gave us his opinion...no facts mind you, just his opinion. Thank you so much for that opinion Mr. Fed Up. Afraid to show your name? Let's see, who could this be? Mikey, Bob B, Kay D, hummmmmmmmm, aha, I've got it, David Berman...gotcha!

I have read all the messages. It is absolutely disgusting. You all assume the worst. I personally believe that Bob Frank probably did something that FORCED the BOD to take the action they did. Bob Frank's personality came thru loud and clear when she had the problems with the old BOD regarding the Business Club. AND I don't believe for one moment that Roz Berman shares ANYTHING with David. His blog runs just the way he said it would run. The same people keep writing nasty stuff here--perhaps because they now lead a sexless life with their spouses.

Once again the peacock (David Berman) has spread his beutiful feathers and told us how wonderful his blog is and how great and fair his reporting is. I wonder, why does he have to toot his horn all the time? Does he really feel good about himself, or is he covering something up?

I am one of the people whose comments he removed from his blog. Yes I will boycott his blog and urge others to do so.

Rivka Wolf

Once again the peacock (David Berman) has spread his beutiful feathers and told us how wonderful his blog is and how great and fair his reporting is. I wonder, why does he have to toot his horn all the time? Does he really feel good about himself, or is he covering something up?

I am one of the people whose comments he removed from his blog. Yes I will boycott his blog and urge others to do so.

Rivka Wolf

Bob Frank received the majority of votes to get elected to the Board. We need these people who had confidence in him to represent the homeowners honestly to make their voices heard and let their friends know that we must support Bob Frank against the Board. Please, everyone, get out there and do the right thing so that we can protect our community.

The recent happenings and the publicity that covered it affects our property values.....doesn't anyone care about that? Would you purchase a home in a community that is having such underhanded maneuvering going on? Wake up, everyone....this is serious and needs everyones help to make this a community we wanted to live in instead of the hornets nest that it has become.

I wonder if these people that have done so many devious things have ever heard of karma and what goes around comes around.

Mark Cook, you are exactly right. Many people I have talked to, believe the nasty rumors that Bob Frank " must have done something terrible..or the Board wouldn't have done this". I am advising them to read the editorials on this web site and all of these comments. The truth must be heard . All of you,right on!!!!!

I love it here, and I am appalled that a group of self serving, power hungry "leaders" are trying to control us, suppress the truth and spoil this wonderful community.
And g-d forbid residents believe the twisted, ranting comments of that petty , dirty mouthed , little man on another blog. His lack of integrity and credibility must be exposed!!!!!

Kay, after pointing all of those items out regarding Berman, Dwyer and Berg, would you please remind me what it was about our insurance that Mr. Dixon claims your husband put us at risk of.... was that, uh, being sued? I think he is looking at the wrong board members ya think... and then sneaking up again... drum roll please the villa agreement.. but it's Bob Frank that's the bad guy???? Gosh, sign me confused!

Chuck, the Business Development Club(BDC) was told by Bob Berman, David Weil and Kay Dwyer that the Trumpets agreement and converations about the agreement were confidential. The BDC reviewed it and concluded they were wrong. They or someone else may have given you a copy before July but they were telling the BDC and most non-favored homeowners the Trumpets lease could not be released to homeowners and was confidential. (note--the lease contained a non-disclosure statement as did the villa agreement)

Two BDC members(Bob Frank and Ron Morse) were required to meet with Kay Dwyer and David Weil to establish the rules for discussion. The BDC position was that the agreement was not restricted from homeowners. Those two board representatives reluctantly agreed that was true and set up conditions that the BDC could go ahead with the Trumpets lease training seminar on July 12th on what the lease said, and on 24 July, on how to enforce the lease. The value judgement of whether the lease was grossly unfair to the association was not covered under the ground rules. Kay Dwyer,at that meeting, agreed that homeowners could obtain a copy of the lease from the CAM office.

Side note: Before the orginal meeting with Kay Dwyer and David Weil, Bob Frank was contacted by three board members and asked for a favor--don't cover the Trumpet lease. Bob Frank said he would cancel if directed by the board, but would not cancel a club meeting as a personal favor. He asked that the request be put into writing. The board refused to put it in writing. So, the secrecy goes on and on.

Results from the BDC seminar proved that simply enforcing the lease was not only possible, but legal and fically responsible. The board did not do that and where are we today? We had over one additional year of losses while we subsidized the mega millionaire owners of S&D cafe. We might have collected our past rent if S&D cafe had wanted to stay. Today's results prove that was true for the past three years, and we have lost hundreds of thousands of dollars by our board ignoring simple lease enforcement rules and we are being sued by a dead-beat tenant. Why did the old board including this year's board members, Bob Berman, Kay Dwyer and Lanie Berg not do their fiduciary duty and evict S&D or collect?

Why should we allow them to raise our dues to cover those losses and expenses? Why did they allow those mega-millionaire owners of S&D cafe to be treated to charity while homeowners pay more dues? Why are past and present association board members allowed to be so generous?

Are you trying to nit pick Kay Frank's post Chuck? So a contract
was on your desk, big deal, why didn't you tell us what you did with
it for those 'several months'? Did you look for, or find and reveal
any problems? Did you see any flaws in it? The truth now Chuck, please
don't skip the issue.

Kay Frank,

Regarding your statement: "...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...."

That, not so secret, contract had been on my desk several months before you and Bob moved into the community. I placed it on the SCA-HOA Web site on July 28, 2006.

There have been too many things that just don't make sense. Why would this board risk this bad public relations move? They had to know something like this was going to happen. For me, it makes me question their motives and has nothing to do with being a Bob Frank supporter or not. In fact, I went to the board meeting with no knowledge what was going to take place. I was in total shock, like many others. I stood in the back after the meeting just watching what was taking place. The one major vision that sticks in my mine is of one man standing up front, shaking his finger, flinging his arms and screaming at everyone. I was standing in the back of the room and could hear him. Most of you can guess who that was.

Surprise, surprise, the very next day at another meeting it was announced that our fees would increase over 50% in three years. I have a lot of questions now! I don't care who gets to the bottom of this - I just think it's time.

My last comment is to Rana. You'd better watch out. Someone might turn you in for having a pit bull in your house. I thank you and everyone else for their efforts to get to the truth! I love my home. I resented it when someone told me after the board meeting, if I didn't like the actions of the board I should just move. No, I just want the TRUTH and am very tired of the so called secrets!

“Thank goodness there may still be a few of the Bob Frank supporters who understand that grownups don't act in such an immature manner”. Dave Berman, can we hope by making this statement you have FINALLY come to your senses and will start behaving as such? Of course we know you are not a Frank supporter, but one can only hope that you will, since we are all mature adults stop being petty and start worrying about petty things like someone’s pets start dealing with our quickly rising dues, our insurance risk that must have slipped your mind, or you didn’t wish to mention in your report. Did Mike ask you not to for some reason?

This is a superb forum to address and solve the very serious problems in Sun City Anthem. But, and this is critical to achieving a solution, most of the residents reading these words of wisdom already know there is something terribly wrong, and the real solution lies in spreading the word throughout the community so the lazy ones also know. The majority will lie back and do nothing, as they did under the previous board. Hopefully, when the large increase in dues arrives in their mailbox they will be shocked into action. So get out there and spread the word among the masses all you whiz kids.

David,
We have far more important issues to resolve in our community than how many animals someone has. We have serious problems and that's where the attention needs to be. Your behavior doesn't engender respect and shows how petty you are when you don't get your way.

The reason that the board doesn't like Bob Frank is because he has uncovered problems that exist that they want covered up.....they have a lot to lose if the homeowners find out what really has been going on.

The reason our dues are going up is because of impropriety of the last Board. If things had been done correctly and legally we wouldn't have the dues raised at this time. The Trumpets fiasco
is one thing that is costing us money. Why is the Board (minus Bob Frank)so intent on keeping things secret? What is it they are afraid of? And why is it so important that Pulte be protected.....what have they done that they don't wwant homeowners to know?

I used to look forward to reading your website and blogs but it appears that it is nothing more than an editorial for your opinion. It would be best if you would keep your nasty remarks on your website rather than muddy up this one.

There is a continuing epidemic running rampant within Sun City Anthem. It seems to be limited to most of those that serve on the board. The symptoms of this disease are:
1. Unit Owner be damned, we don’t care what you think.
2. Have to play nice with the developer and not make him angry.
3. I don’t have to listen to what any Unit Owner has to say. (Are you reading this Kay Dwyer?)
4. I don’t like what the Unit Owners are doing, make this go away. (Are you paying attention
Bob Berman)
5. I am President and I can do what I want, I am the greatest and I can bend the laws to suit my
purposes. (Are you listening Mike?)
6. We all have to go along to get along. (At what cost to the community, Roz Berman?)
7. Well, if I sit on the fence, everyone will like me. (At what price and who will ultimately
be the loser, Barry?)

Now the latest fiasco is that our fearless leader (“Gotta check with John Leach”) has decided that even though the board is at high risk if they do nothing about sponsoring the plumbing defect committee, and because his sworn enemy, Bob Frank is sponsoring this committee, he will continue to block it. Oh, by the way, the high liability risk was made public by the association’s insurance representative.

My mother used to tell me, “All the sheepskin (diplomas) hanging on the wall does not guarantee one ounce of common sense.” Just look at the attitude and arrogance (as recently demonstrated at the last board meeting) and you can see my point. It isn’t Bob Frank that needs to be removed from the board, it is the others who need a mega dose of humility!

You might all want to also ask the 6 directors who would love to see Bob Frank OFF the board why they won’t do anything about the villa agreement and those responsible, which, according to our president, lets Del Webb/Pulte off the hook for ANY money owed to, not only the villas and Pinnacle Village, but possibly all of SCA. As I remember the quote it was “we are stuck with it”. The attorney I took it to saw things a little differently.

Dina Geba: You are 100% ,absolutely correct. David Berman is going absolutely bonkers in trying to prevent the "train on the track" from divulging the TRUTH to the SCA residents. He is fighting against the windmill that will eventually decide the issue that the residents have, regarding the association's resereve shortages. That issue is THE TRUTH. David Berman has no inclination to reveal the TRUTH about why the association reserves are underfunded at the present time. You might want to look at the minutes of the board meeting on Oct. 27, 2005. David Berman,and Bob Berman both voted to adopt the 2006 association's reserve budget and referrenced it to to an outdated five year old reserve study (the 2000 reserve study). What is the difference you might ask? Well for one thing the cost of painting the rec centers (and the Villa's). The cost had gone up from $0,47 psf (2000) to $1.59 sf (2006).That is a 200.3% increase in only ONE componant of the reserve study. Instead of using the CURRENT cost, David Berman and Bob Berman voted to accept the reserve budget based on the 2000 reserve study that used the $0.47 per sf number (David Berman moved and Bob Berman 2'nd to accept the neighborhood reaerve budget as well). As a result the Board of Directors reported to the entire community that the 2006 budget was 96% funded. That was a lie. If the reserve study had been done properly (as required by law) Del Webb would have been required to fund the shortage ($0.47 sf vs $1.59 sf). Is it any wonder that both David Berman and Bob Berman want to surpress the truth? Why are they BOTH trying to oust Bob Frank.? Was Bob Frank trying to shine a light on "the Truth"?

ASK THE BOARD, "HOW MUCH WAS THIS ASSOCIATION UNDER FUNDED ON JULY 1, 2005 AFTER DEL WEBB CONTRIBUTED HIS OBLIGATION (BY LAW?).

Ron Johnson:

Wow! What an impact your new venue has made. I was very reluctant to make another post on this subject (I am not really fond of prolific posting
However, I had to make this observation. Mr. Berman did a recent editorial on his blog. There are currently 18 posts - 5 of those are by Mr. Berman himself!

I find it very revealing that you have not felt the need to constantly "put in your two cents" in commentary to residents opinions on the issues. It tells me that your are coming from a place of confidence in your editorial. On the other hand, Mr. Berman appears to be obviously on the defensive, not only on his blog but also on your site.

Thank you for your service to the community, not only on this issue, but on some many issues that may the resident of SCA.

Kay Frank, excellent explanation that I can understand. Thank You

Animals are smarter than humans, they do not have to talk to communicate. Geez for fear that something may happen to one of the innocent animals, and perhaps set off bloodshed from who knows where, could we just please forget about the animals?

Has anyone located the handout from the Finance Committee/BOD workshop on the SCA website? I was at the workshop and no handouts were distributed to the members in attendance. David Berman stated at the workshop that the information would be posted on our website. I know Norman has a copy but I believe he got his copy during the meeting.

David Berman, what is your problem? Why are you so confrontational? You seem to have assumed the authority and the responsiblity to take a poke at everyone who disagrees with you, or anyone who just presents a comment on something of interest to the community. What makes you think the community wants to hear your opinion on every little thing that a resident says? Don't you know that opinions are like bungholes...everybody's got one! You are wasting your time, and ours, and it's certainly unbecoming. It's accomplishing nothing but wasting forum space which has so generously been provided by a concerned resident. Your actions, and your negative attitude bring discredit upon yourself and the Association. The closing of the Association Message Board was undoubtedly due in part to your prolific and confrontational posting. Stop it.

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?

By the way David, the advice of my closest friends is to ignore you, so yes, I guess I do ignore them in that respect. NOW I will pay heed to what they say.

THE SAGA OF DAVID BERMAN CONTINUES

Again, it seems that David has found time in his very busy schedule to insult two women and two men within a matter of hours. Way to go David! Your daily diatribe against Bob Frank continues ad infinitum. Now you have appointed yourself as soothsayer and have determined that Sen. Briggs has to tell Bob Frank what to do. It is obvious that you do not know either man as you would have people believe. Both of these men are upstanding, honest and have more fortitude than you will ever have. Neither one has ever called a female Unit Owner a piece of ---- and as far as I know neither gentleman has ever threatened a woman with a chair as you have done. As far as Rana and I are concerned we both are more than capable of standing our ground with the likes of you.

Oh, by the way, Ron Johnson has proven what a superb journalist he is and is highly respected throughout this community. Even young Jeremy Twitchell, of the South Valley News has demonstrated his skill at telling the story objectively. Can you say the same about yourself?

Correction, Rana:

Unless I misread Briggs' biography, he is not a retired U.S. Senator.

David, David, David, you need to learn to read. First of all I never wrote that the age of my dogs had anything to do with the restrictions, I just mentioned it as fact.. The 5th “pet” living with me, as Shirley Cheri (president of the Pet Club will tell you) I have been attempting to place with someone who will love her for some time now, before you ever started this attack on me. Everyone she is a pure bred smoke Persian cat with enormous yellow eyes. However, it is difficult to place a 13 year old pet, so until then we snarl at each other, much like you and I do. The difference is I take care of her, feed her and will look after her until she reaches her end if I must. The problem is I am a dog person, not a cat person, but until I find someone to love her, we are stuck with each other.
As for note on the rules of dogs being allowed in Anthem Center, slight correction, it is in the rules and regulations, NOT the by-laws. In case you intend to call Henderson animal control, please remember Monday is a holiday.
As for current events, Marcia is NOT a member and has never even attended as a guest so what the heck are you talking about there? When it comes to hostility in current events, of late I’d say you lead the charge. The disrespect that you showed in reporting some of the things that Senator Briggs said was totally out of line. A senator retired or not, publicly is always addressed as such out of respect to the office, just as one would introduce a medical doctor. You would not introduce a doctor as John Doe, you would say this is Doctor John Doe. You said” John Briggs, I think he was a senator or something” You know darn well he is a retired U.S. Senator from CA. who served in the legislature for many, many years and should be given the respect he deserves. He can recite our state statutes chapter and verse blindfolded and we are lucky to have him as an active SCA resident.

Rana, Rana, Rana ...

Once again I point out to you that it is not a matter of your being an outstanding owner of those lovely dogs. It's the hypocrisy that is the issue, as you are choosing to disregard the advice of even some of your closest friends.

And unless things have changed, you have more than the four dogs. Five pets or more and you may find that you are also in violation of a Henderson City ordinance.

You recently demonstrated your lack of knowledge of our govening documents when you advised me that you could find nothing in our CC&Rs stating that animals are prohibited from our recreation centers. I was happy to help you out by directing you to our By-Laws, where the prohibition is clearly spelled out. So now maybe you can assist me by directing me to the section of the By-Laws that grants waivers on the number of pets allowed based on the age of the pets, which seems to be the case you are making.

To all: What's different this time around is the absolute personal viciousness of the attacks from the Bob Frank supporters. This community never saw anything like this when we were trying to change the Favil West Board. To see supposedly mature adults getting so vicious toward their fellow residents is a very sad thing for this community. No one is interested any more in sitting down and trying to reason with each other, and the personal hostility is even seeping over to the Current Events Club, where we used to be able to express disagreements and still emerge from the meetings as friends. Now we see hostile people like Marcia deciding that attacking people over such ridiculous things as visiting Green Valley Ranch is fair game. Thank goodness there may still be a few of the Bob Frank supporters who understand that grownups don't act in such an immature manner.

Change is engineered through the election process, and a group of issue-focused residents proved that it is not that hard to do. I'm sure the Frank supporters will be gearing up for a similar approach in the next election, as will others, and that's how it should be.

Michelle:

ALL infractions are important to address, no matter how large or small. But apparently there will be one rule for the Bob Frank supporters and one for everyone else.

For those who label Roz a turncoat, I wonder if anyone recalls who she voted for as Board President, and then as Board Vice President.

It's one thing to support someone for an office and then have to start working with that person and discover that maybe -just maybe- that person is a bully in the mode of Favil West.

And I certainly can't do anything about people labeling me the 8th Board member. Time will prove, however, that the real 8th Board member is a gentleman named John Briggs, who tells Bob what to do.

I'm glad to see that there is now a place where homeowners can express themselves where what they have to say isn't removed or censored.

I would like to point out some FACTS, taken from the handout of the "Workshop" between the BOD and the finance committee.

Fact No.1. On page 4, under ASSUMPTIONS 1b it states that the "goal" of the association is to:

"ACHIEVE 90% FUNDING LEVEL FOR THE RESERVE FUND."

Fact No.2. On page 9, it has a table that shows the following:

At the end of this year, our reserves should be funded at 64%

At the end of 2010 our reserves should be funded at 58% ( 6% LESS than the end of 2007 ).

Will some one please remind me how that old saying goes about "When your are at the bottom of a hole"? I forget the rest (senior moment AGAIN darn it).

I have a question for David Berman, as our 8th board member, which infraction of our CC&Rs do you think it is most pressing for enforcement to take care of; Rana Goodman’s 1 dog over the limit, under age renters, squatters, no landscaping, yards that look like swap meets, SHALL I GO ON?

Ron,

I do not know any reason why we should not sue the previous board, becaues they did not handle their fiduciary responceabilty. We should sue for triple damanges against Berg, Berman Bob, Favil West and Kay Dwyer for the Trumpets problem. The board should have sued Trumpets 60 days after they stopped paying thier rent bud did nothing. Now the new board for whatever reason does not want to look into this matter. Something smells and it is not Bob Frank. Now the old board has 4 new members to
work with Mike Dixon. Barry Friedman, Roz Berman, and the 8th board menber David Berman.

Joyce, I know what Leach's new firm has done because:

1. The Board President advised the community through public statements that Leach's firm was handling the eviction proceeding.

2. Unlike you, I was in the courtroom to see Leach's partner argue the case.

David Berman, how would you happen to know about what Leach has done? As a resident, you are not permitted to contact him. I know that for a fact, because when I asked management for the name and address of our attorney, I was told flat out, you are not permitted to have contact with him. They absolutely refused to give me his name and address. So, what is the source of your 'inside information'? Not a leak from one of the board members I hope.

To David Berman: Let me repeat what I told you on the telephone since you now seem to THINK your veiled threat here might fool some of our residents. And for those readers who do not understand what is going on here, David Berman is simply dying to find someone among our population to report me to Ms. Wycoff (I hope I spelled it correctly) because I have 4 dogs. He has even gone so far as telling people I am running an “animal shelter” David, you claim I keep saying I insist people obey the rules yet don’t myself. Let me correct you, I insist they obey the LAW, NRS 116. As anyone who has ever heard me speak at meetings will tell you, and has even poked fun at me about, I preach NRS 116, in fact, I believe some refer to me as “resident expert” but I defer that to Senator John Briggs. Rules in SCA are another thing and they need a major overhaul in my opinion. I have NEVER hidden my dogs; I walk them on Anthem Parkway all the time. When I moved here I had 2, one my mother’s one mine, both of whom are rescues. A couple of years ago my best friend was diagnosed with cancer and the last thing she asked of me, after we were able to adopt out all of the pets left on her sanctuary (she ran a rescue operation in Simi Valley CA. was to take her personal 2 dogs, a 3pind Maltese mix and a Shitz Shu. My dogs rage in age from 10 to 13, so if compliance wants to take me away in chains, come and get me. David, you have been sceaming this story to everyone who would hear you since last Thursday that I am aware of, now I have told anyone reading this blog… CAN WE GIVE IT A REST?

The above comment clearly demonstrates several points I have been making in the past. (1) John Leach has been scrambling to demonstrate he can be productive even though he has done nothing but enforce previous and present misdeeds including the Trumpets issue in the past. To little, too late! (2) The above commenter should practice what he preaches as far as respectful disagreement and not run ragged spewing his hatred of our Vice President. Where he gets all that energy to handle his blog, spew vengence and finger point at all who disagree, and spend so much time at his favorite haunt, Green Valley is beyond me. (3) I hardly think the new web site needs his "plug" for support. (4) If
the above commenter has a personal vendetta against a "female" about rules and regulations, then I suggest he be a man and talk to her directly instead of using other sites such as this to shoot from the hip!

Unfortunately, Marcia, your statement about Jones Vargas is false.

The bulk of the work on the case heard in court this past week was not by Jones Vargas, but was mainly the product of John Leach's new law firm. Sean Anderson, a partner in that firm, is a top-notch litigator who was truly outstanding in his courtroom presentation and rebuttals. The eviction action was handled by Leach and Anderson, and the only reason it took from April to August to get the result is that there were negotiations that proved fruitless. In fact, as was stated in court, we required that 16 conditions had to be met for a successful surrender agreement to be finalized, but S&D came up way short.

Jones Vargas will now move forward with the separate litigation, filing the Association's counterclaim in the near future.

A couple of other notes: I am pleased to learn about the new site/blog which is getting ready to launch. As SCA communicators such as myself and Chuck Davis have long and repeatedly advocated, a community of our size and complexity needs as many voices as possible doing outreach to our residents. I have looked at the site in its present condition, and it looks like it should work very well. I will certainly give the new site a plug when it launches.

As for my own blog, I challenge the other Internet communicators to come close to me in the area of covering the news at Sun City Anthem and reporting as objectively as possible. If other bloggers really want to keep the community informed of what is happening at SCA, maybe they will start attending more meetings and events and reporting the news. But perhaps their goal is simply to have a place to vent, which is up to them. -- In my case, I will continue to allow respectful disagreement with my own postings; I always have. But some controls were needed because the personal attacks and near-defamatory comments were not in keeping with my objective of staying focused on news and events as much as possible.

A final word: Not everyone speaking against the cu