To: The FOA, ACT and The Club Sponsors of Ms. Seelen
The Posting is still in both places, so here is the rebuttal. Otherwise, you would have had a quiet weekend.
From: Mr. Duncan, who isn’t going anywhere, win or lose
I’ll begin with the last item in this posting and work my way to the top, if that’s all right with you.
The whisper campaign/attacks on myself and other non-golf supported candidates has emanated from at least one ACHOA committee chair, and a number of club members, who have walked through neighborhoods claiming among other things that we want to raise dues, we’re against the golf course, we’re against pickle ball, we’re behind the erroneous cards mailed by a group called Better Friends Of ArrowCreek, that I am the web master of arrowcreek411 and post despicable things about the club, that the CNA logo was copied from ACT (a fact that is absolutely NOT true as the CNA logo was made from MS Word clip art prior to any ACT formation), and that my vision of the community is a throwback to the developer’s 1997 vision. All of these untruths perpetuated in the latest posting by Joyce Seelen. It’s a little late to curb. To give you the specific names of the individuals spreading these falsehoods, which they most definitely can deny, isn’t worth my time.
So, let’s talk to the ‘conflict of interest’ that seems to have caught attention. Since there are two ‘communities’ within ArrowCreek, one centered around the golf club and then everyone else, the past representatives to the ACHOA Board were drawn from club members. When members competed for the board they could count on receiving sufficient support to become Directors. When non-members competed for the board they had to overcome members’ affiliations. So, now it comes to pass that the entire ArrowCreek community is involved and due to the past dominance of ‘The Club,’ there is suspicion that membership could be to the detriment of the entire community. Now, is that a conflict of interest? Not according to Ms. Segerblom and most certainly not according to the law. Is there an ethical line here? Perhaps. Scare tactic, not intended.
The Better Friends of ArrowCreek Postcards. I’m pretty certain that Ben Collins doesn’t check with Joyce when he posts a response on one of the web sites other than he’s going to do just that. So, Mrs. Duncan has that same freedom and flexibility and she has also been attacked on the Next-Door web site and I’m certain her response was the one you captured below. Yes, I know who did the cards and yes we attempted to steer them in a different direction to no avail. On-the-other-hand, I have yet to see any of the four club backed candidates disavow the ACT writings, flyers and Next-Door diatribes against myself, Roger or Carlos. We have certainly dis-avowed the post cards that your supporters continue to say we generated, WHICH WE DID NOT GENERATE.
Pickle ball. Why this continues to crop up is beyond me. I wrote a simple request to the BOD and you turned it into a major issue. The court is done and we have neighbors now at odds with one another via security calls and complaints. Why this wasn’t handled quietly and became public?? That wasn’t my intent or doing.
Water Rights. Once again ACT, like the blog post, comes forward with a statement from a member of the community saying we should obtain legal counsel based on a false premise that we don’t have Water Rights. This post was done in support of the same four candidates. My advocating a meeting with TMWA to discuss their audit findings and get data for review certainly saves the legal expenses of finding we are already bound by the Water Agreement referenced in our CC&Rs.
By the way, we are only talking about .029 acre-feet per lot.
So, let’s get the record straightened out and cease the Mr. Duncan is the evilest thing to ever walk the earth.
Ron Duncan – Who two years ago stated, “win or lose, I wasn’t going anywhere.” I’m at the end of the road. I still am.
🙂
ArrowCreek411 
Dear Mr. Duncan and Ms. McConnell:
Thank you for your comments and your support for your candidate(s) of choice. Others have disagreed and have been just as active in their support of their candidates. That is a great part of the process that the NRS 116 guarantees and our Bylaws allow.
We have numerous opinions that have been stated. Since I was one of the targets of Ron’s expressions of frustration, I feel that I have the right to respond. The Water Issue has not been properly vetted but yet Mr. Duncan decided to make it a campaign issue – Indicating that he and his running mates are better qualified to handle the water issue. I disagreed with his opinion about perceived expertise. I stated and still believe that all candidates are in the same position since this is a legal issue that requires legal opinions before going much further into the abyss.
The Water Issue should never have been made a political issue for this election. It should never have been breached until all the facts had been verified. This has not been vetted as I write this response. There are significant issues still in my mind as one of the parties involved in the vetting. The Water Agreement has been violated numerous times by Washoe County, Developer, and Truckee Meadows Water District. At no time has the ACHOA Board of Directors or the ACHOA Lot Owners or the owners of The Club at ArrowCreek been informed about the past calculations concerning water reserve allocation or shortages. The calculations and the four separate addendums to the contract were never shared with the governing boards or lot owners. This can be a breach of contract requiring legal counsel advice.
The ACHOA and The Club at ArrowCreek are not parties to the Water Agreement. The only parties in the Agreement have been Washoe County and the Developer Southwest Pointe. Truckee Meadows asserts that is has the right to stand in the position of Washoe County but there is no developer to represent the ACHOA Lot Owners. This created legal issues as per the Water Agreement that must be addressed within this contract.
The ACHOA Board is limited by the Articles of Incorporation about its potential role in this matter -“The Association may have other purposes than those stated herein, but shall be expressly be prohibited from representing the lot owners and residents within the Subdivision on issues of land use, planning, municipal annexation, master plan amendment s, growth, area development of similar matters.” This potential limitation does require legal guidance for the Board that is being asked to participate in this discussion.
Because of the above issues, I have been recommending that it is prudent that legal counsel with water right experience be hired to provide proper advice to the Board. This is a legal issue that is outside the experience of the current board members and any candidates running for the Board. Mr. Duncan does not have the legal experience to deal with this issue and neither do the silent partners running with him.
Lastly, Mr. Sheppard and Mr. Duncan have disavowed the statements by the Better Friends of ArrowCreek but Mr. Mejia, Jr. as of this writing has not made any public statements. I believe that Ms. Seelen, Ms. Rakusin, and Mr. Leibman have made public statements disavowing the postcards forwarded on the behalf of Mr. Duncan, Mr. Sheppard, and Mr. Mejia, Jr. Since ArrwoCreek 411 has been in step numerous times with the Better Friends of ArrowCreek, the stink follows you Mr. Duncan. I guess you harvest what you plant and you have been a less than positive voice within the community based upon your past 411 posts and public statements at Board Meetings.
Mr. Duncan’s reputation proceeds him and if he wants to change those perceptions, he will need to walk a different talk. The above tirade is not a step in the right direction.
Many in the Community do not perceive Mr. Duncan as a positive community leader. Many view Mr. Duncan as a homeowners that cannot take the heat of a campaign and the criticisms that he would receive as a potential Board Member. He blames everyone for his negative image without looking at himself in the mirror and make the positive changes to be an effective leader. He views himself as the representative of the under represented within the community but as a Board member he will need to represent all in the community no matter what their beliefs or affiliations and he will have to temper his stated bias against anything related to The Club At ArrowCreek.
LikeLike
Mr. Burkett,
The perception of greatness in the response above is unwarranted. There was NO reference to yourself but since it was brought up, the vision put forward in your previous postings was thoroughly rejected and any attempt to drive the community toward that vision will be hotly contested.
There is NOTHING in my above defense of myself that advocated anything other than stating my facts and the absolute ‘FACT’ that your four recommended candidates have not disavowed any, repeat ANY, of the scurrilous comments, writings and ‘whispers’ of their supporters with respect to three candidates unaffiliated with The Club and running for the Board of Directors as community candidates. This deserves significant publication and redress.
As for the ‘post cards,’ that continue to be brought up, Carlos, Roger and I have disavowed them in their entirety. Then it comes to light that people associated with the FOA are supporting the four opposition candidates via a separate web site. Perhaps if there was open discussion, cards with fake news wouldn’t be necessary.
Unfortunately, the narrow view of ‘leadership’ espoused in the note above doesn’t or isn’t based on anything more than an individual notion. The vitriolic opposition to my candidacy may very well stem from me having a different vision of our community than has been prevalent for the past 11 years. We will move forward with the new Board to chart a new course and, yes, I will continue to support our community either as part of a ‘new’ majority or loyal opposition.
The contention that the ‘Water Agreement’ is a ‘contract’ fits perfectly with my background and training (it also fits with Carlos Mejia’s and Roger Sheppard’s). Getting at the real facts behind the TMWA assessment is a first step to resolving and understanding the issues. The legal layman’s perspective put forward above is the most expensive approach, although recognition of the Articles of Incorporation is a new twist. None of this would have probably come up if an FOA member didn’t go to TMWA in the first place – which is what triggered the audit in question.
We may disagree on the vision and the path to a better ArrowCreek but the above response doesn’t get us any closer to a common ground.
Ron Duncan
LikeLike
Mr. Duncan, thank you for writing this post. It is frightful that a few individuals have not only stomped all around our fine community spreading untrue information about you, Carlos and Roger, but they’ve also stood for hours at the community entry gate handing out flyers and misinformation. It truly makes me wonder why they are so very, very fearful that the 4 candidates they support for the Board might not be elected. It is indeed sad to see our community torn apart AGAIN this year by a few people who seem to be filled with self interest concerns. Whatever the outcome of the election this coming week, we must all unite to work for an even better community that is driven by ALL the various interests/needs of our residents, NOT just the interests/needs of a chosen few.
And….thank you for the endless hours of dedicated research you’ve spent to help guide our community as we revise our governing documents.
LikeLike