David, If it's too good to be true, it probably is. Sounds like what you got was a pig in a poke. Good luck to you and all your 'loyal' readers. Richard

and the result was???????????????? Sandy was the only one?????????? I find that very hard to believe!

David, maybe I'm overly sensitive, but I reserve any comparisons to vile pedophiles in the same category with Nazis and other scum of the earth. Perhaps we could dial this back a bit, and stick to the issue of the right of people in this country to disagree, peacefully if possible, without fear of being attacked and defamed. I for one, am tired of battle over dust mites.

David, comparing the recall petition to pedophiles is a stretch, even for you. Besides, the recall effort isn't a moral issue at all, just perceptions. Let's be a little more realistic and compare it to going to the dentist when you have a toothache. There's a time to wait, and a time to take charge of the situation, and get the darn thing pulled before it gets any worse. I'm probably just wasting my breath here, but to forecast dire destabilization smacks of fear tactics rather than an valid argument for continuing the SCA status quo.

David, your blog is yours to do with as you wish, and of course I respect that. Keeping in mind there are always at least two sides to every issue, I trust you will consider the fact that the 'loyal opposition' exists in our society only to keep everything on the 'up and up'. I think we both agree that raising the bar during this episode in SCA's turbulent transition period will be a benefit to all concerned. Thanks for your consideration, our paths will eventually cross.

David, perhaps we are both wanting the same thing, but from different sides of the aisle, as it were. As we age, and are far nearer the end than the beginning, time seems more of the essence than ever before. It seems in the digital age of instant results, many have lost the patience for the normal selection processes to take place; hence talk of recalls and votes of no-confidence are prevalent both here and abroad. Hopefully, both factions here have the best interests of SCA residents foremost on their particular agenda. May the best man, or woman, win this little scuffle so we can return to the good old days of watching paint dry. There's enough good here to go around.

Dear Anonymous, You have hit the nail on the head; the so-called elite in SCA consist of a few power-brokers and their minions who feast on the crumbs they often drop. To suggest otherwise is a favorite tactic of the deniers of this fact, in an effort to present an alternate version of what has gone on here for years. Never, and I defy anyone to post their names, has any SCA BOD been comprised of ordinary folks looking to improve the lives of residents, not just themselves and their gaggle. Deny it, poo-poo it, act offended, whatever, a small group of manipulators have controlled SCA for years; hopefully, that will soon change. Don't be fooled by a slick used-car salesman into believing a bullet-riddled car has just been driven by a little old lady to church on Sundays; we all should know better. LET'S MAKE SCA GREAT AGAIN.

John, Before we give you the passcode to our bank account, we would appreciate you spending your own money, not ours. Perhaps you feel so strongly about this, that you will pony up the $714,400 all by yourself, and save us the pain of further depleting our own reserves. Maybe OSCAR will chip in? Fat chance.

Carl, Talk about the pot calling the kettle black; you have raised lying to an art form. Our numbers are far greater than your feeble mind can comprehend (more than voted for you last election, I'm sure), and are growing every day. As well, there's nothing non-factual about our excessive SCA management compensation, dues increases (call it by whatever name you chose, it's still an increase), needless lighted signs, etc. We see things differently than you, but we're not all liars as you so crudely stated (we have just considered the source), and are extremely offended by your crass remarks and attacks. I rest my case with you; you and your ilk no longer exist in my world.

David, I'm not into self-flattery, I'll leave that up to you. I thought you weren't into censorship; where did my comment go that spoke of the " ACE reign of terror"? How about the good old days of chair-throwing? The alternate to FAKE NEWS is not revisionist history; i.e., who's REALLY responsible for the $2M Liberty Center fiasco, etc.? There's enough blame around here to pave a stairway to heaven; I rest my case..........

David, Until you acknowledge that not everything is so idyllic here in SCA, that most elections have been somewhat contentious, that resident comment periods in most BOD meetings revolve around complaints, not praise, that we're seeing a level of discontent not seen here before, and that we're not trying to make out we're living in a cesspool, it's that we don't want to continue down a path we feel will put us in one for sure, your position is untenable. You predict a bad end for the recall and firing of Ms. Seddon, but far stranger things have been happening here of late. Revisionist history is best left growing in Texas.

Gentlemen: From the perspective of SCA owners and residents since 2003, we have never witnessed a harmonious BOD meeting; heaven only knows what goes on behind the closed door planning (plotting) meetings we don't know about. We have been misled, given half-truths, told to "shut up and sit down", plagued with distrust and apprehension of what else could possibly go wrong. The common thread here seems to be an endless succession of inept BODs elected through the efforts of a relatively small group of activists opposed by another small group of activists. The similarities to our present national political scene is striking. Perhaps we are all living in the "modern day" era of endless protests and turmoil at every turn. Perhaps we have reached our limit of sitting back and being abused by our leaders. Perhaps it's time for us to throw the baby out with the bathwater and start fresh with a clean slate. If the federal and/or state governments can stand and profit from a shut-down, perhaps SCA could profit from one as well. Let's MAKE SCA GREAT AGAIN!!!

Bernie, We're sure you and the other volunteers are doing your best in the face of constant flak; however, we don't think your solution to some SCA resident's discontent is very good at all. Since 2003, there has been a source of first amusement, then mild concern, and now we regard your views that some residents should leave as a thinly veiled threat or overt form of intimidation; at the least, an attack on our views. Maybe it should be you who leave and make room for the change that's coming as our numbers grow dramatically.

Carl: It seems to be a personality disorder that makes you yawn and scuffle your feet when confronted by anyone that doesn't cow down to your bluster. You are surely in need of a hug; any old bear or boa will do the job nicely.

Carl: As always, you missed the point entirely. I'm my post, the captain and crew represent a management company, hired and put in charge of running the ship correctly by the ship's owners. A self-managed ship would be one where the passengers go out and hire a captain and crew off the street, or possibly from under a bridge. Analogies are a complete waste of time on you; again, go take a nap.

David, We look forward to your forthcoming article; you are well known for telling it like it is, not biased. As an engineer by instinct as well as training, I know the worth of, and am an avid fan of, data-driven decision making. Facts are facts, and all the spin in the world won't turn a pigs ear into a silk purse. Revisionist history is best left to other blogs; we turn to you alone for true journalism. Regards, Richard

To anyone who can remember: When we moved here in 2003, Corry was our great salesperson who compared SCA to living on a cruise ship, and she was right. Well, if anyone out there can name a cruise ship that is self-managed, we'll treat you to a trip around the world on that bucket of bolts; good luck with that. Adult communities have such diverse populations, like passengers on a cruise ship, that they do best when there's a good crew in charge. Professional management is the key; are winning teams self-managed? We never in a million years thought we would be duped into trading a professional management company for a bunch of ill-equipped, high-priced strangers. This is not what we signed up for, and we're going to change how things are being done. Sit back, better days are coming.

?"FAKE NEWS"? Carl: Nothing fake about your rude and belligerent public behavior we have witnessed on several occasions. Good works don't compensate for bad behavior. Like it or not, many of us perceive a dangerous trend in SCA toward an authoritarian and fiscally irresponsible management team enabled by some of our BOD officers. Huff and puff all you want, it's our money, and we don't like how it's being frittered away. Not all elected officials deserve the job.

Carl: Hate to break the bad news to you, but the vast majority of SCA residents don't give a rip what you think; remember your crushing defeat? David and John: Compared to the $800,000 to $1M that Ms. Seddon and company are costing us each and every year coupled with a majority of our BOD that cave to her every whim ($15K for a lighted sign we don't need as we all know where we live, I think) and your obsessing over $7K to $15K seems a paltry sum indeed. On with the recall........, may justice prevail.

Carl: My apologies to Mr. Neuman for a comparison I made of you to him; you are much more weird. In fact, a far better comparison would be to one of the Coneheads from SNL. Even they might take exception to being compared to you, but if the shoe fits, wear it. Any way, many of us enjoyed having no increases, because as retirees on a pension, we haven't seen any increases in those same years either. What do you know about "dump" HOAs in NY? This place is in "the dumps" too, having to put up with your ilk. Go take a nap.

Carl: Whenever I read one of your posts here, it's just like going back in time and picking up an old MAD MAGAZINE. You're a perfect clone of Alfred E. Neuman, and possibly even more bizarre. Kudos are definitely in order 'cause that takes some doing. You're such an expert on all things having to do with living in an HOA; why don't you have a bigger following? Just sitting back and throwing stones at people who are actually doing things to improve our quality of life is best left to an idle child.

David, Our only desire is for more moderation to be the preferred method in SCA's management approach to all things that pertain to our residents. Rules and regulations shouldn't be burdensome, and cause us undue hardship in our efforts to comply. We are a very diverse community, and one size doesn't fit all. Regarding Ms. Seddon, were good customer relations and senior citizen specific people skills mentioned in her job description? Perhaps you could publish it for our edification as we're not exactly sure what she was hired to do; being better than FSR doesn't cut it for us. Bottom line, we're not getting what we paid for.

David, your post began with: "For months on end, a number of Sun City Anthem chartered clubs have been bedeviled by the imposition of some compliance requirements that they have complained are burdensome and unnecessary." One of the prime reasons we moved here in 2003 was the abundance of varied clubs that more than kept us actively involved in the community and kept our social skills sharp. A large percentage of us moved here to avoid the 'rules and regulations' that plagued us in our previous lives. We were sick and tired of the "endless drama", and just wanted to live out our lives in peace and quiet here in SCA. Well, as you observed, such is not the case since the arrival of Sandy & company and their endless stream of rules and regulations which seem to serve and benefit no one but them. Things should become simpler as we age, not more complex. It should be easy to form and enjoy a club, not fraught with peril. In my humble opinion, Ms. Seddon is well on her way to making our life a living hell because of her apparent fear of losing her death grip on a bunch of helpless seniors. This is OUR community, not hers, and she should be making this a fun place to live, not an old folk's home where you're told what to do every minute. Again, I don't think that endless rules and regulations improve our quality of life, they just add to our feeling of helplessness as we age; just sayin'

Well spoken, and we do not take any offense at your remarks because we do as much as we can to better our community with our continued presence. We are not part of the "if you don't like it here, move" crowd that continue to be a blight and curse on SCA; they should be the ones that move out, soon.

I guess we all have different criteria for measuring our yardsticks; thank God for variety and different perspectives on things. As well, I'm sure there are senior communities that are more expensive, and some that are less expensive (dues wise) than SCA. However, unless I'm planning on moving, that is an empty argument and moot point. I'm curious, was it the same bunch of BOD's that created our "mess" that managed to keep our dues down? If so, they deserve a round of applause. Let's see what the future holds before faulting how things were done before. Lastly, if the bocce courts had been put in correctly, repurposing wouldn't be necessary. Who was in charge when that project was implemented? Any connection to the Liberty Center fiasco, etc.?