Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • Author
  • #3758

    The anger and outrage at both the board of directors of Sun City Anthem as well as at the general manager has now manifested itself into two distinct petitions against both entities. We can now report some of the “go to”  people to receive any personal questions answered from homeowners they may have as well as find out how to sign the petitions and perhaps secure signatures on your own set of petitions.

    There are two; one calling for the removal of 4 members of the Sun City Anthem Board of Directors, and a second (non-binding) “No Confidence” in General Manager, Sandy Seddon petition to present to the Sun City Anthem Board of Directors for consideration.  Once this was a happy and ideal and active retirement community that we all bought in to is at stake. Unless we all band together to take back the community we live in, more and more lives and existence will be unfavorably altered with outrageous expenditures, rules and edicts very much unnecessary to turn this community into a gulag with a few in charge behind these turn of events. Think of yourself as a serf forced to do the bidding of an oligarchy of thoroughly selfish and inept self-proclaimed royalty.

    Here is what you can do to stop this insanity.  You may either sign one of the growing numbers of petitions out there, and/or obtain copies of the two petitions and secure signatures from your friends, acquaintances.  Each petition has a cover sheet(s) which lists the incompetent things which negatively affect the lifestyle you bought into.

    If you want to sign a petition or secure them to collect signatures, here is a list of contacts:

    Robert N.
    Renee R.
     Assistant Coordinator      
    Marcia K.
    Assistant Coordinator
    Charlie W.
    Contact Person
    Erlinda P.
    Contact Person
    Dave C.
    Contact Person

    Eleanor S.
    Contact Person



    Gerry M.
    Contact Person



    Steve L.
    Contact Person



     This list continues to grow daily and we  will add names as they are revealed to us.
    Here are seven guides to signing correctly:
    1.    There are 4 directors being potentially removed.


    2.    As a result, there are separate signature sheets for each individual director listed for recall.


    3.    If a unit owner wishes to remove all, they must sign all four sheets, one for each director.


    4.    Use a pen, blue or black ink, not a  pencil.


    5.     Only ONE person per home (unit owner only…not a renter) may sign the petition(s).  If you own more than one home in SCA, you may sign for each home you own.


    6.     The person presenting the petition(s) should examine the signer’s  SCA ID card.  Signers must have that card with them.


    7.      Those with the petitions should contact the coordinator or assistant coordinators to deliver a full petition. 

    Within the first three days that the petitions were circulated, over 400 signatures were obtained.  There has also been some backlash from some against them in the form of telling people you cannot be in certain places in Anthem Center to obtain signatures.

    This should cut their bullying effective immediately.  This is the law:

    NRS  116.31036

    The association shall not adopt any rule or regulation which prevents or unreasonably interferes with the collection of the required percentage of signatures for a petition pursuant to this subsection.

    Norman McCullough

    Ron Johnson has recently published his opinion of the Recall Effort and he is against it. At the same time he publishes his own scathing opinion of Our General Managers (and the Attorneys the Residents pay for) actions and HE REPORTS A THREAT MADE AGAINST HIM BY OUR ESTEEMED ASSOCIATION. Here is what he reported regarding the ethics of some of our past Board Members and our new manager.

    On a different and more personal matter, affecting me and members who would like to believe that the Board always acts honestly and ethically, I maintain that the current Board has grossly abused their power in refusing to permit members to access certain records which legally should be made available to any member under existing law but which are being hidden from view by outright denial under the guise of attorney-client privilege in order to avoid embarrassment, at the least, an accusation of malfeasance, or potential criminal conduct, at worst.

    In November 2016, I participated in a formal hearing pursuant to Nevada’s Alternative Dispute Resolution process. The hearing was held before a mediator, who had a thorough knowledge of the statutes that affect homeowner associations, General Manager Sandy Seddon and CAM Lori Martin, who primarily observed the proceedings, and legal counsel. The purpose of the hearing was to ascertain whether the Association and I could reach a mutually agreeable resolution to my request for access to certain association-prepared tax audit records that the Association had submitted in 2012 to the IRS in an offer to settle a disputed $1.345 million IRS claim. The hearing did not result in a mutually agreeable resolution.

    The completion of that hearing process, which followed extensive administrative efforts by me to acquire access to those records, was a necessary requirement prior to my initiating a court proceeding to have this matter adjudicated. While an aggrieved homeowner has a right to bring such legal action in court, the exercise of that right might be constrained by very practical considerations related to the high cost of court proceedings.

    What I did not count on, however, was the extent to which the Association was prepared to thwart my future efforts to gain access to those tax-audit records. Before three hearing witnesses, the Association made it abundantly clear what I would be faced with should I pursue this matter in court. The Association threatened to sue me for malicious prosecution in the event that I filed a complaint in court.

    One might reasonably conclude that the Association did not want those requested tax-audit records to see the light of day.


    It becomes clearly evident that our Board Members and our new Manager are jointly participating in a “Cover Up” to protect some of our past Board Members who (Quote) “grossly abused their power in refusing to permit members to access certain records which legally should be made available to any member under existing law” (Un-Quote)

    Question: Where else in America can a person be threatened to be sued by their HOA for malicious prosecution for exercising their rights?



Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.