February 13, 2022 at 11:03 am #6892Many of SCA’s residents who attend board meetings might remember the unceremonious way Nona Tobin was removed from the board several years ago, after she received, if my memory serves me correctly, more than 2,000 votes.
I remember walking into the meeting and noticing that Nona’s name plate was not on the long table board members sit at. Nona walked into the meeting to learn just then that she had been removed.
At that time, Nona said the she had been in conflict with the GM manager and the attorney Clarkson, and a couple weeks before that Board meeting, she had given them notices of intent to file; a complaint with the state Bar regarding SCA lawyer,, Adam Clarkson for sending her unlawful, threatening letters, and for approving the Board meeting in executive session to take actions specifically prohibited by Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS 116.31085) and SCA bylaws 3.15a.
Nona reported that Clarkson blocked her from putting her complaints on the regular agenda and put them on the executive session agenda and then removed her from the executive session so the six other Board members could discuss Nona’s complaints with their attorney.
Instead of the Board responding to Nona’s notices of intent to complain, when Nona entered the afternoon open Board session where her name tag had already been removed, she was handled a letter from Clarkson saying that she had been removed “by operation of law.”
Clarkson’s letter alleged to be the Board’s response to her complaints, but it actually removed her on the ruse that her being a party to a quiet title lawsuit over her late fiancé’s home (Nona was the executor and also a co-beneficiary with his son) against SCA filed because SCA’s former management company had unlawfully sold it without notice (by usurping the HOA’s statutory authority) for $63,100 to a Realtor in the listing office. That action came three months after Nona had sold it on auction.com for $367,500 but that the bank had not yet let escrow close.
Nona says she entered her name to run once again for the SCA board of directors, and was denied, eligibility to run by Clarkson again. Adam Clarkson’s “vetting” deemed her ineligible to run unless she corrected allegedly false statements and disclosed matters that Clarkson deemed to be a potential conflict, all of which Nona says are false and defamatory.
(Editorial comment) All candidates must fill out and sign a disclosure notice listing anything that “might” be considered a conflict of interest. So it’s a little odd in my opinion, that the attorney says he must “vet” candidates before they may be on the ballot.
When I saw Nona’s name on the candidate list this year I told some friends that I would “make book” on Clarkson disqualifying her yet again. Too bad no one took me up on that wager because he certainly did just that. To quote Nona when I asked her why, she said He demanded that I disclose 10 potential conflicts or correct allegedly false statements. Quite a defamatory overreach.
Note: In 2015, NRS 116 was amended to provide that an individual may not serve as a director if *…the person stands to gain any personal profit or compensation of any kind from a matter before the executive board of the association.” [NRS 116.31034(9)(a)(2)]” Nona Tobin had filed two intervention affidavits with the Nevada Real Estate Division (RED)’s Ombudsman Office after being removed from the Board for cause.“February 14, 2022 at 8:16 am #6900GARY THOMASParticipant
Sounds much like a bit of a “Star Chamber” operating behind closed doors. As a fairly new SCA homeowner I am concerned the more and more I hear that the SCA BOD operates so much out of the “sunshine” and when we bought we didn’t even know about the other regional “board” or association the the SCA HOA belongs to and that, apparently, we pay (via HOA fees) to be a member of but have little say.
February 14, 2022 at 12:25 pm #6902
- I hope any non-incumbents elected to the HOA BOD do their homework and become aware of any political dangers that might await them should they disagree with something considered status quo
- Perhaps any new BOD members can reach out to former members to get some insight
- Hopefully a new BOD will be less secretive and if there is an “old boys (and girls) club” operating the BOD the new members will be smart and strong enough to break it up and be more representative of the homeowners
- Any insider or sweetheart deal contracts be carefully reviewed prior to renewal
Gary, thank you for your comments, that was a good analogy, the Star Chamber. I have worked with a few different HOAs and have only run into 1 other HOA attorney that seemed to think it was perfectly OK to treat the BOD like children who knew little so he would lead them down the merry path letting him, in essence, run the board his way.
The problem with that is that NRED (the Nevada Real Estate Division) is the group that is designed to keep board members, owners and staff in line by making and enforcing the rules and laws past by the state legislature we must follow. Sadly, those who have filed formal complaints over the years found little to no satisfaction from the Ombudsman and investigators in charge.
The last time I was at their offices to meet with the Ombudsman I happened to see him chatting “buddy-buddy” with attorney Clarkson so I was not surprised that our complaints fell on deaf ears.. It made me feel that that office didn’t represent the home owners at all. We now have a new ombudsman, so time will tell.
As for our current board, Steve Anderson is doing a good job communicating with owners and is trying to make changes that help us all, as was Richard Pope. Forrest Fetherolf would be a wonderful asset and I hope he will win. I’m looking forward to learn more about David Meredith and Gary Swenson and will publish my thoughts at that time.February 14, 2022 at 12:38 pm #6904
Comment by: Lynda Parets:
I thought that Adam Clarkson was an adviser, not a decider.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.