Steve Guderian, Sierra Canyon Owner and Sierra Canyon Association Board member, provided the following comment in response to the previous SU Post entitled “Sierra Canyon Bullying Policy”.
SU, ask and you shall receive. The part about having an SC Board Member respond. But, I think you knew that I would. So, I am just going to address the SU Post first and then I will address the other posts individually as separate posts. Lets start with the bullet points:
1. Given the existence of NRS 116.31184, this policy document is not necessary
My Response to this, absolutely this policy is necessary. In your opening you mentioned that subsection 2 was not included in the bullying policy….. that is because this section makes NRS 116.31184 a misdemeanor crime. So my question to SU is this how does the SC BOD enforce a misdemeanor crime…. IT CANNOT. In order to use NRS 116.31184 the INDIVIDUAL who believes that they were a VICTIM of this CRIME would have to call the police, get a police report filed and then have it reviewed by the city attorney. (NOTE: Notice my use of the term INDIVIDUAL here and not BOD.) Odds of all of this happening are not very good, which means that home owners can pretty much get away with anything if this were the only recourse.
2. Owners were not consulted on or properly advised of its existence.
My response to this, I am surprised that SU is going down this path. SU is very much aware of what GOVERNING documents require home owner input and what documents do not. This one clearly falls under the section of home owner input not needed. Taking this a little further, SU is also very much aware of NRS 116.31085 which sets CONFIDENTIALITY for the home owner unless the home owner submits IN WRITING that the hearing be held as an OPEN HEARING. So, there is no way that the SC BOD can legally discuss the need for this type of policy as that would be violation of home owner confidentiality.
3. The Policy is meant to stifle opposition to BOD proposals or decisions.
My response to this, I really have to believe that SU is now following the words of somebody else here because this claim is completely unsupported and very much out of the well thought out information the SU normally puts out. There are so many safe guards in place for this it is not even funny. The 3 minutes to speak before and after every board meeting, the right for a home owner to have an open hearing on any complaint….. Here is my position on this, if the BOD can file a complaint in order to “stifle” opposition, then anybody can file a complaint against a BOD member for being stifled. According to the SC atty any formal complaint has to be in writing. And, if the SC BOD were to stifle a home owner that owner would have cause to go to NRED for a violation of NRS 116.3103.1 and its associated sections. And, this position is flawed on its face, the BOD cannot file a complaint under this policy.
4. Penalties and process are harsh and not consistent with other SCA controlling documents.
My response here is wait, wait wait a minute. #1 above starts out with the SC BOD not following the sections in NRS and now the SC BOD is being hammered again when it specifically followed NRS. I would refer you to page 2, section 2(b) that says fines will be established in accordance with NRS 116.31031. SC BOD is still following the NRS as it should!
5. Policy oversteps the power that the Board should have with respect to the conduct of members.
My response, first how so? Refer to #1 above where is was stated that the SC BOD should be following the NRS which specifically address the topic… little bit of a conflict here, you can do it as stated in the law but you cannot do it when you simply remove one section that allows the SC BOD to actually follow the law…..On a personal note…. I would so love to be able to share with the SC and SOA community all that I have been put through and some of the documents in my possession…. but as stated above NRS.116.31085 is protecting the home owner and prohibits me from saying anything. And, I really do not care what people say or do to me. I knew what I was getting into when I VOLUNTEERED to be on the BOD. But, drag my wife into some of these things, this is going to far as she does not do anything to anybody in the community. Involve my wife and I will fight back. Let me give you an example of what the BOD faces, this was a quote taken from a post on Nextdoor, “This is BS. Why do these people have so much power. We need to start a petition and have everyone sign it. Can’t we impeach these Nazis?” Really, this person does not know me or the board members but they can judge based on a single partial story from one person. Oh and by the way, I am not filing a complaint on this and neither is the SC BOD.
6. The BOD is accuser, judge and jury. What protects SC members from BOD Bullying?
My response, this is categorically false in all aspects. The BOD cannot file a complaint under the bullying policy, only a person can. And, if a BOD member files the complaint, they will have to by other parts of NRS 116.3103 recuse themselves from the hearing. ANY HOME OWNER can file a complaint under this section not just an INDIVIDUAL BOARD MEMBER. It is also important to keep things in perspective as the policy also includes the words/actions THREATEN, HARASS, CAUSE HARM OR SERIOUS EMOTIONAL STRESS and HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT.
Lets be clear about this, board members are also home owners and have all of the same rights as EVERY OTHER home owner in the community. Simply because they volunteered to be a board member does not make them a target for any reason. AND LETS BE PERFECTLY CLEAR, the SC BOD does not have the authority to file any type of complaint against any home owner for a violation of this policy. Only another home owner as the right to file under this policy, the fact that this home owner is a board volunteer is completely immaterial.
As I said earlier, I would love to give every home owner in our community all of the facts associated with the happenings in SC… but I cannot. My request to the community please do everything you can to get all of the facts and don’t judge a fellow home owner, board member or not, based on a single piece of information.
Note: SU appreciates the preceding response from Mr. Guderian. It is not often that either a SOA or SCA Board Member, will participate in discussions on the SU website pertaining to community issues.