A Funny Thing Happened ...

At our All Members Meeting held on January 20, 2014, three quotes for our auditors were presented.  Members were not shown these quotes.  One quote was $9,200., our present auditors quoted $9,000. and after rummaging through her paperwork our Property Manager stated that the third quote from our previous auditor came in at $10,000.

A Director made a motion to accept our previous auditor's quote.  The Treasurer strongly interjected saying that our previous auditor never had the Financial Statements in on time and on and on.  So strong was her objection that the Director who had suggested voting for our previous auditor shrunk back in her seat and said (paraphrasing) 'OK, OK, not him'.  Members laughed and voted for our present auditors.

I would like to say at this time that the reason why our previous auditor had difficulty in preparing the Financial Statements was because the Board of Directors was so dysfuntional that he couldn't get the appropriate paperwork.  The co-op was semi taken over shortly thereafter.

This auditor's name was bandied about in a negative fashion for more than five minutes.  And here's the point of this blog entry - the auditor in question did not submit a quote to do our Financial Statements.


 

Special Delivery

Yesterday members received another WITHOUT PREJUDICE YOUR IMMEDIATE ATTENTION IS REQUIRED notification from our Property Manager.

It was a scolding for either not submitting or partially submitting a Composition of Member Household and Annual Information Form.

Ours acknowledged receiving proof of vaccination for our pets, but reprimanded us for not providing proof of liability insurance or our policy's expiration date.

The original DEMAND for information asked for PROOF OF CONTENT/HOME INSURANCE ... AS PER THE OCCUPANCY BY-LAW.  We duly submitted a letter from our insurance company acknowledging the renewal of our policy as of March 25, 2013.  In March of this year we will receive another renewal letter.  A person can cancel their home insurance at any time, so proof of an expiration date is meaningless.

On January 6, 2014 I submitted these documents to our co-op and notified them by email that:

Although we've always had household insurance, I cannot find any mention of the necessity for same in our Occupancy By-law.  Article 5.5 Insurance refers to co-op's insurance, not to member household's insurance.

(This is definitely a tip off to the By-law Review Committee) 

The final intimidating paragraph of our Property Manager's follow up states:

If you do not complete and return this form, your household will be in breach of the policies and by-laws of the Co-operative.  Failure to provide this information will result in reporting to the Board of Directors for further action.

There is also no policy demanding that members carry household insurance.

The deadline for submission is tomorrow.  Our Property Manager loves deadlines!

Oh, can I possibly have a copy of the co-op's insurance policy?  After all, I'm paying for it.

MEETING ENTRAILS

The Board Members were in good spirits when the meeting commenced, one of them having  just received her last new window installation.  All was warm and cozy.  The WITHOUT PREJUDICE letters having been duly distributed, the Agenda was approved.  Two sets of Minutes dated July 25 and October 15, 2013 were approved, with certain amendments.

Next up was a Resolution to have a member previously slated for eviction, sign a 2-year Performance Agreement.  I stated that this was the first time that a Performance Agreement Resolution had come before the Membership for approval.  A discussion ensued - that it was for the betterment of the co-op.  I stated that I objected to this Performance Agreement in that the Property Manager could then make the member sign an agreement before a Judge, make the member pay for the co-op's legal fees and that fictitious charges could put the member in arrears, thereby violating the Performance Agreement.  I stated that if the Property Manager didn't get her way the first time, she'd try again. 

The Chairperson (a Board Member) ruled me out of Order according to the Roberts Rules of Order.  I then stated that they could kick me out of the meeting, but that I would speak my mind.  The meeting bumbled on.

The Property Manager gave an update on the Dotmocracy Planning Session - fixing the non-existent 60 back decks in Phase 1 and all.  It didn't matter that the Capital Expenditures totalled $100,000. for this year alone - everything went as planned.  Later during the meeting the subject of tearing down the fences and sheds came up.

Sheds for the 3 & 4 bedroom units will remain as they are tucked underneath the balconies in the front of the units.  I shudder to think of what the co-op will look like stripped of the back yard sheds and fencing.  There will be no privacy and in its place will be free-reining BBQ's, garbage containers, junk of all kinds, and members' dogs running at large.  Of course, preferred members will be able to keep their fencing and archways, but members will not be allowed to discuss this tiny discrepancy at a member's meeting.   Further discussion of sheds and fences will be held at our next Members Meeting.

The Treasurer presented the 2014-15 budget.  I asked why only $1,500. was budgeted for legal fees.  As stated in my previous post, the Board Member and Property Manager reiterated the fact that it was accurate and that all legal fees are charged back to whatever member is targeted at the time.  I asked who their lawyer was - the co-op has changed lawyers.

I asked why $3,700. was budgeted for By-law review.  The Board member said that the co-op's By-law Review Committee has linked up with a consultant from CHASEO - hence the fee.  I didn't ask who the people are on this committee, but I can well assume they were hand picked by the Board of Directors.
 
I asked why the Unit Maintenance & Repair line was only budgeted at $2,400.  The Property Manager stated that this little known line was questioned before.  (No, it wasn't this line - it was the Security line.  I said at the time that it pertained to the alarm system.) The 2014-15 budget was then unanimously approved.

Next up was the approval of our auditors.  Dissatisfaction with our auditors was expressed by the Board of Directors in that the auditors tacked on fees not initially agreed upon.  Three quotes were obtained, and to no one's surprise our auditors were re-approved.  These auditors are part of Cost Cutters, a kick back scheme for CHASEO.

Next up was a Resolution for the construction of a swing set to be placed in a common area which I shall call the Dumping Ground.  It is a known flood zone and unkempt.  This area was destroyed when a Board of Directors decided to turn a landscaped burm into a snow removal area.  To achieve this in the most destructible way possible, tons of rocks were unloaded on the flat surface and down the sides of this burm.  Evergreen trees have been ripped to shreds because of the massive dumping of snow and grit.  The Property Manager smoothed this over by saying that the trees were too close to a unit anyhow.

I mentioned that municipalities have done away with swings because of liability issues.  Not a problem - a Board member stated that our insurance has already gone up by $10,000. purportedly because of our new play park.  No one blinked about this, nor did anyone ask what kind of swings were going to be placed in this common area, so I did.  There will be two swings for older kids and one bucket swing.  Because the park is dedicated to First Responders, two new First Responder type spring toys will be constructed.  I didn't tell them that the police car spring toy doesn't work - it doesn't rock as the stones and wood chips are too high.

I had earlier raised the subject of squirrels and this was up next for discussion.  I said that the squirrels were misbehaving, that they were f---------- (not the F word - the other word) and reproducing - in other words they were not vamoosing from the co-op.  (As the whole meeting was tape recorded, it will be interesting to see if the F-word is transcribed verbatim.)  The members took up this subject with passion - one member suggested putting bleach in garbage bags, another person blamed members for continuing to feed squirrels and yet another member earnestly related how New Yorkers were now eating squirrels.  On two occasions I turned the discussion back as to why I brought the subject up.  I said that the Pet By-law and the Parking By-law will never work.  The Chairperson said that we were only talking about squirrels.  The squirrel discussion was addressed under the Agenda heading, Parking Lot Items.  He seemed to agree that squirrels fit under this category quite well.

Before the discussion was dropped entirely, I asked members to keep an eye out for the 'Cow-Cat'.  Some people knew the cat I was talking about - the black and white elongated, totally emaciated cat.  This cat was abandoned by a member (most probably in excellent standing).  I urged people to let me know about the cat because I would like to somehow save that cat.  The members didn't get that either.  In order to save the cat, I would be in violation of the Pet By-law by feeding a stray animal.  Squirrels attracted coyotes some members declared.  No one said anything about the Board member's half a dozen outdoor roaming cats attracting coyotes.  Common sense did not prevail.

The topic of vacancy losses came up near the end of the meeting.  The Chairperson said that it was a difficult time of the year to fill units - would anyone like to move in this cold weather?  Tell that to the subsidized people who received notices to downsize in 15 days just before Christmas and New Years.  No mercy was shown to them - in fact it was done to purposefully cause as much distress as possible - they were not afforded a 70-day notice.

And with that the meeting came to a close - not before being handed out Dotmocracy stickers though to place on wall mounted posters.  And with the quick-second placement of these stickers, our next Maintenance priorities will be declared.

Thursday vent insulation repair

Under the above subject line, the Property Manager emailed me on January 7, 2014 to say:
 

Would the contractor be able to enter on Thursday, January 9 at arund 10am to have a look and perhaps resolve the bathroom vent insulation?

We agreed that 10:30 would be fine. 

On January 8, 2014 I wrote the following email to the Property Manager:

When the roof tiling was replaced, the exhaust fan pipes were disconnected and never reconnected.  The bathroom exhaust fan pipe must be reconnected to the roof port and the insulation must be properly repositioned both as originally installed.  Our bathroom fan needs to be upgraded to open the flap to the outdoors.  To just slip insulation over the exposed pipe is futile.

The Property Manager replied that the contractor would "assess the issue and make the necessary repairs".

On January 13, 2014 I sent the following email to the Property Manager:
  

The contractors came by on Thursday to assess the upper bathroom fan issue, but immediately asked if they could go into the basement.  I said OK - several minutes later I went down to the basement and saw that the contractors had removed the steel slab covering the sump pit and one of the contractors was taking photos.  I went back upstairs and they remained in the basement for quite a while.  I went back down and the contractor was taking a photo of a ventilation pipe.

How many photos did the contractor take and why did he take photos?  The contractors were only supposed to reconnect the bathroom vent pipe.  Kindly provide me with copies of these photos and the reason why they were taken under the ruse of fixing our upstairs bathroom fan.

A few hours before yesterday's All Members Meeting, I finally received the following email from the Property Manager:
  

These contractors are also doing the sump pump inspections for the co-op.  They are the ones who replaced XX's sump pump.  I informed them that you have a sump pump and they knocked it off their list of pumps to inspect while they were there.

We are checking for make/model, back-up pumps, alarms, etc.  I will receive details of the sump pump inspections once they have all been completed.
 
It was a last minute discussion and I forgot to send you a quick message.

I replied:

The contractors took more photos than just the sump pit.  They went around the whole basement and took photos.

 The Property Manager replied:   

I just spoke to the contractor.  He took pictures of the floor and is providing the Co-op with a quote to fill in the cracks.

He is the type of contractor that sees potential work and goes ahead and quotes on it if it is in his scope.  He apologizes for alarming you in any way.

I replied:
       

The contractor came with instructions to take photos of the basement and that is exactly what he did - the walls and pipes included.  He did not take photos of the basement floor because of potential work, such as filling in the floor cracks  This is utter nonsense.

The contractors did not alarm me - they were very polite, but on a mission other than reconnecting our bathroom vent pipe to the roof port.  This was not a spur of moment sump pump check.

Kindly provide me with the photos the contractor took.

The Property Manager replied:

I do not wish to engage in your accusations.  You are free to believe whatever you wish.

I will not provide you with any pictures as I do not have any to offer. 

As I said before, when I receive the details of the sump pump inspections, I will provide them but I am going to amend my previous statement.  The co-op's lawyer will be provided with any information I receive, when I receive it, and he can provide it to you or your lawyer if he choses.

Enjoy your day

I replied:   

I have every right to ask for those photos and will continue to ask for those photos.

*****

This is in keeping with letters at least two other members received from the co-op's lawyer telling them that they must not talk about or criticize whatever our Property Manager does.  Because the Property Manager has total access to the co-op's lawyer, the co-op should budget more than $1500. for legal fees for 2014-15.  When I brought the low budget figure up at last night's meeting, the response was that this figure was totally correct in that the co-op forces targeted members to pay all the co-op's legal fees.

Oh, and what if the targeted member refuses to pay protection fees for the Property Manager?  Well, she will just put the member into arrears and evict the member that way.  

We have a Human Rights complaint against the co-op.  It is going forth to a Hearing based on the condition of the unit and the timing of the move.  

NAILED

There was an All Members Meeting last night.  There to greet me was not a forced sign up sheet to participate on a low functioning committee; instead the Property Manager handed me a letter.  What could this be, I thought to myself, a confirmation of subsidy?  No, it was a WITHOUT PREJUDICE - YOUR IMMEDIATE ATTENTION IS REQUIRED letter.

The letter stated that an AMM was called on January 7, 2014 (no quorum was reached), members must attend all such meetings and that the only way one can get out of going to these meetings is to notify the office, IN WRITING, "24 hours prior to the meeting that the you (typo included) are not able to attend by reason of health or work."

There was a whole stack of these letters to be handed out to delinquent members should they show up for this meeting.  

The letter was dated January 8, 2014.  Why weren't these letters delivered to all members prior to January 20th and not only to the members who attended the meeting?  Wouldn't it be more advantageous to intimidate all members and see who shows up? 

The Wish List

The co-op distributed a proposed budget for 2014-2015.  Administration costs are projected to be $113,350.  Maintenance costs are projected to be $157,100.  

Although not stated in this budget, our deficit for the year ended March 31, 2013 was $144,314.  Therefore, any surplus for the following years should go to pay down this large deficit. This year our surplus as at October, 2013 in the amount of $68,047. will (or should) be applied to pay down the deficit.  Nothing is budgeted in the year 2014-2015 to bring our deficit down to zero.

The Replacement Reserve Contribution is set at $70,417. and a Special Reserve Contribution is set at $43,948. for a total of $114,365.

Many things in the proposed budget are strikingly odd, such as the measly sum of $2,400. for Unit Maintenance & Repair and $4,500. for Paving, Grounds & Landscaping (we have LOTS of potholes!).  Tree Removal and Trimming scored much higher at $22,700.

As no quorum was reached for our All Members Meeting held on January 7, 2014, a new Agenda was distributed to members, along with a Co-op Priority Chart which outlines proposed spending in 2014-15.

This Priority Chart is based on a Dotmocracy planning session.  Windows garnered the most votes (27).  Next came Furnaces, By-law Review, Lighting, Fences (back decks) and Balconies.  

The Chart states that 3 out of 60 back decks in Phase 1 were completed.  The co-op only has 9 back decks in Phase 1.  Nevertheless, $10,000. is slated for repair of these non-existent back decks.

The total cost of the projected work in 2014 rounds off to $100,000.   Our Replacement Reserve and Special Reserve contributions as of October, 2013 total $45,707.  In order to pay for all this work to be done in 2014, we would need to raid our Capital Reserves to the tune of $100,000., leaving nothing for roof repairs, for example.

This dream list seems to be off the chart.
 
 

Because We Can

There's special treatment for those members on OW/ODSP who renew their subsidy.  In 2011 these members would merely write the name of their agency, the number of beneficiaries, the name of their worker and the worker's phone number in Section 5 of the application.

Since the hiring of our Property Manager, the form has been streamlined:  One must now fax that part of their subsidy application to their worker to fill out and  have it faxed back to the co-op office.  It is completely 'out of the hands' of the member so to speak.

The co-op has developed another way to degrade members on OW/ODSP - the co-op forces the member to have their housing charges deducted directly from the agencies.  That way the co-op can increase their housing charges or claim fictitious arrears without any interference from the member whatsoever.
 
Over the years I've often wondered to myself:  How low can the co-op go?  And it never reaches bottom!

 

THE MESSAGE

Our Property Manager loves to write in all capital letters, along with multiple use of bolding and underlining.  Mind you, I do quite often write the title to my blog posts in capital letters to highlight the topic.  The Property Manager has another tactic in mind though - it's a screamingly loud way to intimidate members,

The Declaration affixed to the application for subsidy renewal uses the same wording as of old, but now takes up a whole page.  It reads:

DECLARATION: 

I DECLARE THAT THE INFORMATION GIVEN IN THIS ENTIRE APPLICATION IS ACCURATE, TRUTHFUL AND COMPLETE IN EVERY RESPECT AND FULLY DISCLOSES MY GROSS ANNUAL INCOME FROM ALL SOURCES.

I AUTHORIZE [CO-OP] , CMHC, THE MINISTRY OF COMMUNITY AND SOCIAL SERVICES, ONTARIO MINISTRY OF HOUSING, REVENUE CANADA AND UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE TO VERIFY ANY AND ALL OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS FORM IN ANY MANNER DEEMED APPROPRIATE BY THE CO-OPERATIVE, AND I AGREE TO CO-OPERATE IN ANY EFFORT TO VERIFY THIS INFORMATION TO THE EXTENT REQUESTED BY THE CO-OPERATIVE.

I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE TERMS OF THE CO-OPERATIVE'S HOUSING CHARGE ASSISTANCE BY-LAWS AND TO REPORT ANY CHANGES TO INCOME OR FAMILY SIZE AS SOON AS THEY OCCUR.

I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I AM A LEGAL RESIDENT OF CANADA AND THAT I HAVE NO OUTSTANDING DEBTS TO THE ONTARIO HOUSING CORPORATION.

I UNDERSTAND THAT MISREPRESENTATION OF MY HOUSEHOLD INCOME OR FAMILY SIZE, ILLEGAL RESIDENCE IN CANADA OR OUTSTANDING DEBTS TO THE ONTARIO HOUSING CORPORATION, GIVES THE MINISTRY OR THE CO-OPERATIVE THE RIGHT TO TERMINATE MONTHLY HOUSING SUPPLEMENT PAYMENTS IN ADDITION TO ANY OTHER REMEDY PROVIDED BY THE LAW.

*****

I love writing in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS - it gives one such power and authority, notwithstanding the inherent authority given to the co-op when members are forced to sign such a Declaration.