I'm sure that there are a lot of questions regarding my Blog since it was issued. So I am happy to report that the Blog was very successful, and I have to give thanks to Kathy Corey who sent emails to all the owners of whom she had an email address. The Blog got widespread attention because of Mrs. Corey's actions, which occurred before I wanted to release it. I sent it out to a select few owners to get feedback on whether those owners thought the Blog was of some value and if it should be continued. Mrs. Corey beat me to the punch and released the Blog link before I was ready. It helped that the rant that Ms. Corey sent along with the Blog address, probably got the owners attention and curiosity which helped increase the viewing numbers. To date, the statistics show that the Blog has been viewed over 110 times.
I'm happy to report those numbers because, for better or worse, it highlighted the interest that the owners are taking in the business of the Circle. Our owners are the bedrock of the community - engaged and participating owners are the ideal and necessary if we are to keep the community together, thriving and making our home a better place to live!
Today's editions is a combination of news and views of events following the last Board Meeting.
The Building Painting Project. Our own Wikileaker, sent me a copy of a memorandum authored by Janet regarding many things but in particular, the Painting Project. There is one interesting item in the memorandum which gives me pause. If my reading of the memo is correct, it appears that Janet has already started the process of painting the building without Board approval.
The portion of the memo in question is reproduced below:
Water/Moisture Issues - Units 110/113 - Kim has had 3 contractors and an engineer come out to try and determine the cause of the water/moisture. Of course, they have varying opinions and uncovered the potential issue of footings under the FL rooms. Unit 113 doesn't seem to have a problem in the back of the unit; it seems to be concentrated on the side and front of the unit. Units 113 and 213 are being painted and sealed with the Dyco product as it has been speculated that the moisture may be coming through the walls and not up from the ground.
This is a very contentious issue as we have 2 male owners in the Circle that have been associated with the construction industry, that are adamantly opposed to the paint project. As highlighted above in the memo, her own experts apparently do not agree with the cause of the problem. Additionally, the owner of 213 insists that he does not want his unit painted and he does not wish to see $60,000 spent on what he says is not a solution to the problem.
When you look at this problem logically, the units that Janet has cited as having water intrusion issues due to paint chip problems - 104, 105, 110, and even 113 - are really issues from water coming into the units under the slab. I say that the money can best be spent on the sealing the buildings against the growing issue of mold, mildew and water arising from water intrusion under the slabs.
There is no emergency associated with this problem. A Board Meeting should be called and a serious discussion of the issue should be done before action of any kind is taken..
Foreclosure of 214. Janet has informed me that that there was indeed a report on the foreclosure in the May Board Meeting, which is contrary to what I reported in my Blog. I had checked (and rechecked) the minutes of that meeting and found no mention was of 214. She tells me that it was reported that there was no new information in the foreclosure process.
And that, to me, is news, very troubling news. At the March meeting, IIRC, the last meeting that I was a Board Member, we had a very animated discussion about 214 and the role that Ms. Hathorn had played. I had reported that Anne had admitted to me that the filing had been held up because an assistant who was supposed to do the filing, did not do so. Also, she had received a payment plan from the owner of 214, so she was holding up the process until she was able to determine if the plan was legitimate. Both the Board and the audience was outraged at the delay and many felt that Ms. Hathorn should be fired at once. It was decided that she should be allowed to finish the process and then alternative legal representation should be found. The status of the foreclosure was still: not filed!
So in the Board Meeting of May 2016, it seems that somebody did contact Ms. Hathorn to check on the status. However, it seems very definite that the $64,000 question was either not asked or not answered: Has the foreclosure been filed?
Failure to ask that question and to bring the answer to the Board Meeting resulted 2 months delay in the processing. Somebody was asleep at the wheel!
C Roof Contract. The Board approved a contract with ThunderBay to repair C Roof. My personal belief, is that that was a poor decision. And I really have only myself to blame. I received both the Martin proposal and the ThunderBay proposal during my period as President. And, unfortunately, I passed those proposals along to the new Board, never thinking that when the details of two contracts were compared, that ThunderBay would emerge the winner! I should have trashed the ThunderBay proposal.
The details of the contracts are starkly different:
ThunderBay was proposing a repair contract, to spray foam over the roof to: "elevate the surface as required to reduce the amount of ponding water on the roof surface." The proposal was designed to give the original roof an additional 10 years of life - more than that was a bonus. They would not be removing the drains, a consistent source of leaks in roofs in the circle. The warranty was for 10 years but didn't cover any leaks resulting from drain problems. The financial terms were changed to spread the cost over a longer period. The cost was $37,772.
Martin Roofing was proposing a new foam roof. They offered a new roof warranty of 10 years with a warranty extension available at additional cost. As a new roof, it was designed to give us 20 years of life. The drains would be removed eliminating a potential leak problem. They offered no change in their payment terms. The cost was $27,400..
Martin's proposal was the same as their proposal to Buttonwood and their Circle elected to have all 6 of their roofs done with foam by Martin. We had a foam roof on B Building which gave us satisfactory performance for 20 years. Since we are dealing with foam in both contracts, it appears that the difference was the fact that ThunderBay proposed to put 2 coats of protective coating on the foam surface. Two coats of coating is a deal breaker? Then get Martin to put on 2 coats in his proposal - it would probably still be a lot less expensive than the ThunderBay proposal.
In my little world, the new roof offering 20 years of life trumps a repair roof offering 10 years of additional life. However, there was very little discussion of the merits of either proposal except for the comment that Kimberly made that Eric had told her that there was a problem with Martin's roof due to bird pecks. The contracts had been distributed to the Board Members giving them an opportunity to read and, hopefully, understand the contracts - I doubt that they did since you have to look close to see the word "repair" in the contract. The details of the contracts were not read to either the Board Members or the audience. No discussion of the relative merits of the proposals took place, The approval process took five minutes or less from introduction to approval. And the Circle got stuck with, in my opinion, a bad contract. My bad!
Another bad is the statement that I made in the 1st post re: C Roof Contract. Kimberly has stated that there would be more foam coverage in this contract than the repair contract that I got from ThunderBay last year. That appears to be true and I was incorrect in the statement that I made regarding that issue. But what does that mean? Well, apparently the roof will be closer to being completed covered with foam - but it still leaves the building vulnerable to those drain leaks. The point of the contract proposal was to eliminate the ponding - this contract will do that.
That's it for today. I plan on continuing this Blog and posting as issues of importance arise. If you are interested in following the Blog, you might want to bookmark this page.
Andy Johnson
No comments:
Post a Comment