Fellow Anthem Homeowners:

Unfortunately, like most homeowners in Anthem Country Club, I have left it to others to determine the fate of our community, trusting that those who choose to volunteer will always act in our best interests. Volunteering for a seat on an HOA board is usually a pretty thankless task, and I rarely criticize decisions that are made by those volunteers. I give them a lot of credit for putting in many hours of unpaid labor on our behalf. Plus these are our friends and neighbors, and I enjoy the company of those Board members that I know on a social basis.

But after receiving a disturbing communiqué from Secretary Kathy Gillespie relating to the recent activities of the HOA Board, I decided to attend the March HOA meeting to see for myself what was really happening. I definitely do not always agree with Ms. Gillespie about either the issues or in particular with the way she handles things - she can be way too outspoken, and unfortunately her rhetoric often gets in the way of her message. But I do know her to be well meaning and honest in her business dealings, and I am glad she was there to be the "whistle blower" and bring to light things which we as homeowners should be aware of. I do think that we should have an HOA Board that can work together harmoniously in carrying out the will of the majority of the homeowners. Our HOA Board should also be able to negotiate and work in tandem with the Golf Club to promote our fine community as the best in the Las Vegas Valley. But all this needs to be accomplished by following the proper procedures first as set out by NRS statute governing Las Vegas homes.

While I don't claim to know what has gone on before, I can relay specific issues that I personally observed at the March HOA meeting and the subsequent April HOA meeting. The following are my own observations and/or opinions:

1. At the March meeting HOA President Rich Raines publicly announced over the microphone to more than 170 homeowners, including myself, that he was taping the meeting and that a copy of the tape would be made available to ANYONE who wanted it later. But at the subsequent April meeting when asked for copies of the tape, Rich claimed that he made the tape as a "private homeowner," not as a board member, and that he would not give anyone a copy of the tape. No apology was made or any explanation given for why he reneged on his promise to provide copies of this tape. I have to say, this did upset me, and I still have to ask, "Why not, Rich?"
2. At the March meeting it was brought up that there was an almost $11,000 debt owed by the club to the HOA. The majority of the Board members deemed this debt uncollectible and a deal was struck with Paul Anderson to exchange the $11,000 debt for a $2,500 food and beverage credit. I do not question the right of the Board to deem a debt uncollectible and to attempt to negotiate a settlement on our behalf. The Board is there to make the best decisions it can based on the information it has at the time. But unfortunately this deal was negotiated WITHOUT the benefit of an official resolution by the board. A resolution was only made after the deal was negotiated. Whether or not the members who made the deal assumed they had the backing of the other Board members is immaterial - there are certain procedures that must be followed to preserve the Board's integrity. Furthermore, it has been discovered that some members of the Board have used this credit to consume food and alcoholic beverages while conducting HOA business. When called to task by homeowners at the March meeting about using the HOA's money to consume alcoholic beverages, none of the Board members involved denied using this account in that manner, nor did they apologize to the membership for doing so.
3. At the March meeting it was also brought up that the Board had decided to lease space for HOA offices rather than letting the property management company provide such space as in the past. Again, I do not question the Board's decision to make such a choice. But again they failed to pass a resolution to lease that particular space until AFTER the deal was negotiated. The original resolution passed by the Board specifically called for a smaller, much less expensive space to be rented at Windermere on a 7 month sublease. Several members of the Board decided on their own to lease a larger, much more costly space for a three year term without a specific resolution to do so. (Hmmm...why does the remind me of the Las Vegas schools system?!!)
4. Then at the April meeting, again in front of over 150 homeowners, the majority of the Board voted to ratify a set of incorrect meeting minutes. The fact that they were ratifying a set of incorrect meeting minutes was pointed out to them by Ms. Gillespie in front of all the homeowners. But despite this the Board members STILL went ahead with this vote, although an accurate set of minutes was available for ratification as well.
5. At both the March meeting and the April meeting, the Board retained the HOA attorney to be present to defend and explain their actions. (Two different attorneys were retained, as the first one quit in between meetings.) The HOA attorney is supposed to defend the HOA, not the individual Board members. We paid $275 an hour for what many feel was the Board members' personal defense at two separate meetings. It is my opinion that this was an inappropriate use of HOA funds and should be reimbursed by the Board members involved to the HOA.
6. The Board sent out two separate politically oriented mailings, explaining/defending their actions and denigrating Ms. Gillespie's actions. Again I do NOT question their right to do this - Ms. Gillespie sent out her own political mailings as well. (Plus there was a highly inflammatory "anonymous" mailing that did not come from Ms. Gillespie personally, but most likely did come from one of her cronies.) The big difference is this - Ms Gillespie paid out of her own pocket for her mailings, but the Board used HOA funds for their mailings to the tune of literally thousands of dollars. I would like to officially ask these members to repay this money to the HOA. It is my opinion that it is inappropriate for the Board to be using HOA funds for political mailings.
7. In addition, the Board again indirectly appropriated HOA funds in using an issue of the Viewpoint to further their political slate by printing a letter from the former HOA attorney, expressing his opinion. (An opinion, by the way, that is not necessarily shared by other attorneys or the Ombudsman's office who have been asked to review these issues.) Again, in my own opinion, this was an inappropriate use of our HOA funds. The Viewpoint is supposed to be used strictly for community news, not as a political platform.
8. At the April meeting the suggestion was raised that since there seemed to be such divisive feelings within the community, ALL Board members should put their seats up for re-election and we would start over with a clean slate. This would allow the Homeowners to evaluate their position based on the most recent facts and hopefully elect a new Board which would be able to work together in harmony. This suggestion came, by the way, from the previous attorney whose letter was quoted in the Viewpoint. But members of the Board, who pointed with alacrity to the attorney's letter in the Viewpoint when they felt it supported their cause, declined to accept this suggestion from the same attorney. Again, just my opinion, but I feel that accepting this suggestion would have gone a long way toward defusing the situation and restoring calm and decorum to the election process.
9. At the April meeting the Board decided to limit the Homeowner's Forum to 30 minutes total. In a random review of minutes of previous meetings going back through 2001 from the association web site, I was unable to find another instance where the Board limited the Homeowner's time to question Board decisions and give input. Many homeowners were unable to voice their opinions and/or ask questions of the Board members as a result of this restraint of open Forum time.
10. In addition, the Golf Club Board has now decided to intervene in HOA business. At Golf Club member expense, a mailing was sent out asserting the Golf Club Board's opinion that the current HOA controversy may lower our Las Vegas real estate property values. The Golf Club Board also published this same letter in today's Libretto. The first part of the letter would have been fine, as it exhorted Golf Club members and HOA members to work together. But then the Golf Club Board specifically directed Club members to vote AFTER visiting the site www.anthemhoa.org to read the ex HOA attorney's opinion. Besides the fact that it is inappropriate for the Golf Club Board to post anything using official Golf Board venues about HOA business or take a stand on HOA politics, www.anthemhoa.org is a public web site and NOT password protected. If the Golf Club Board or HOA Board members are concerned about protecting our property values, this information should not have been posted on a public site. Potential buyers are already accessing this site and making the decision not to purchase in our community, even for the best deals on Las Vegas foreclosures'
11. ], until they see how our internal issues are resolved. Except for this site, these buyers would have no access to this information, which does not even appear in HOA minutes. It would certainly behoove us as an association to make this site password protected and accessible to "members only" in the near future.
12. Lastly, a question - Why are the February, March and April 2008 minutes not posted on the HOA web site for all to read?

Two other things have occurred which concern me, and I have no idea who is responsible. But hopefully this type of behavior is not sanctioned by any current or prospective Board members:

1. I chose to put a sign up in my yard supporting a slate of candidates who are running for the vacant seats on the HOA Board. That sign was stolen from my yard and others like it were taken from the yards of other residents in the community. Several other homeowners who put up signs were threatened that their homes would be vandalized, and one actually had his sign spray painted - unfortunately they overshot and spray painted a portion of his wall too.
2. Printed material was put directly into homeowner mailboxes endorsing a slate of candidates rather than mailing it through the US postal service. This is a violation of Federal law and hopefully our association will not be held accountable for this action. Perhaps the parties who took this action were unaware that they were violating the law, but will now be informed that they cannot do this in future.

The above facts only take into account what I actually know and have observed myself. They do not take into account any of the many other items that have been addressed at the latest HOA meetings, including the fact that the 2008 budget appears to be incorrect and that there have been no finance committee meetings to speak of. Also from what I understand, there has not been a set of HOA financials approved since August of 2007? Since I am not a finance expert, I am relying on others for the accuracy of this information. But all seven current HOA Board members did at least admit that the 2008 budget was incorrect, and that they were all collectively responsible for not seeing that it was done properly and in a timely fashion.

The above also does not address the issue that, as per HOA minutes, in January of 2008 Terra West tendered its 90 day notice of resignation as the property manager for Anthem. Since ACCA was one of their biggest accounts, I am sure it was a hard decision for them to consider resigning. Yet later the HOA Board claimed it "terminated" Terra West. Nowhere could I find in previous minutes any reference to the HOA Board being dissatisfied with Terra West's performance. This, along with the sudden resignation of our previous attorney, bothers me greatly. Attorneys and property management companies do not often drop huge accounts for no good reason. That would be similar to Bank of America deciding all at once that they did not want to give out Las Vegas mortgage loans.

My main concern in all of this is that currently our HOA Board does not seem to be following the guidelines of proper procedure. This is not the Board's fault - it is the fault of all of us who have not actively participated in making sure the Board follows the will of the homeowners. Our apathy has led to the HOA Board's assumption that it can pretty much behave as it wishes. At the Candidates Night, one thing I did pin down with EVERY single prospective Board member by individual verbal poll was the specific promise to tape record ALL future HOA meetings, and post them immediately to the HOA web site. This way there can be no doubt about what transpired and how each member voted.

My new personal resolution is to volunteer for one of the HOA committees and take an active part in creating policy, as well as becoming a contributing member of our community. I hope that others will do the same so that we can restore harmony and pride to our neighborhood. Anthem Country Club really IS the best place to live in the entire Valley - we just need to remind ourselves of how lucky we are to be here. I hated the fact that certain members of our community were rude to one another at the HOA meetings. This needs to stop, and we need to be respectful of each other's opinions, especially when we differ. It is my sincerest wish that once we get beyond these elections that we can again function as one and proceed without any further finger pointing or acrimony. We are neighbors, and blame has no place in these proceedings - rather we need to rectify our shortcomings, elect HOA Board members that are responsive to the goals of the majority without interference from the Club Board, and just "get ‘er done."

Sincerely,

Diann Tonnesen
39 Plum Hollow Dr.
Henderson, NV 89052
Anthem Country Club's first permanent resident March 1999