Warmth

This is one of the lampshades I've made over the years.  I'd spend hours and hours beading fringes, sometimes up to a metre in length.  I'd browse through second-hand stores for old glass lamps, disassemble them and rebuild them anew.  On this particular lamp I handbeaded black seedbeads over the separator couplings.

I love the intimacy of Victorian and Flapper-style lampshades. In period movie settings, replica lampshades are like product placements - sometimes three or four are featured in a single camera angle. 

Lately, I've been going through my beads and supplies, not letting go just yet.  Maybe, just maybe, I'll find the passion once more to feel and see these lampshades come to life before my very eyes.

The light is beckoning me . . .

WHEW!

DEAR BOARD:

This is the letter I emailed to the Board of Directors of our co-op on October 30, 2012:


*****

The placement of the play structure slide is extremely dangerous for children as it is built right out to the roadway and is not fenced in.  When ____ Housing Co-op was built back in the 1980s, the architect designed a buffer zone (greenspace) in front of the play park for two reasons:  safety and visibility.  You will note that these buffer zone greenspaces are also around all the units in the co-op.  The architect's design enclosed the play park on three sides for a reason - children's safety. 

Children dart about in frenzied delight when they play and without a moment's hesitation will run into the roadway.  Children love to tightrope walk on wooden beams and last night I saw such an activity -  a car came within inches of a 7-8 year old child while she was balancing herself on the beams.  Children could be clipped by passing cars if they play or sit on these beams.

The greenspace buffer zone also allowed for a margin of error for cars, delivery and garbage trucks.  The co-op has experienced on occasion, cars careening in and out of the co-op squealing their tires. The exposed play park is at the helm of  the U-shaped track used for this illegal and hazardous activity.  The park is the co-op's legal responsibility.  As it now stands, the park's lack of protection for children is negligent in the extreme.  It is incumbent upon the co-op to move the play structure into the centre of the park where the old structure was, and fence in the entire play area.  Many members are in disbelief with the present location of the structure because of the danger it presents for children.

The wooden beams will soon be covered with snow.  Snowplows and/or cars could very well destroy these beams, damaging their vehicles in the process. 

On a visual level - the location of the large structure has no aesthetic appeal.  It is not pleasing to the eye and does not flow with the existing structures.  The natural play park in ___ Park has such a flow.

On a financial level - the co-op must publish the names of the play park sponsors and the amounts they donated.  It does not suffice to merely acknowledge the donors' names in a speech.  Standard bookkeeping methods must be adhered to, including the cost of the play structure and any monies owing thereunto.  The co-op has a judiciary duty to its members to produce such information, with no exceptions.

Thank you.

Playing On The Edge

The play park build day was today and this is what occurred.  The playground is a small tract of land shaped like a peninsula with Reserved and Visitor Parking on either side.  The road turns on a sharp 90º angle at the narrowest edge of the play park.  The architect who designed the co-op had made a landscaped buffer zone at this narrow edge outside the chain linked fenced area. The children's slide and climbing structure was deep within this peninsula facing a grassy common area.  The approach to this fenced in play park was from this landscaped side. 

The narrow portion once had two 'springy-thingies' for the children to sit and rock on.  They were eventually removed because of constant breakage.  Visibility was excellent on either side of the narrow part of play park.  People driving on our side of the play park could easily see vehicles approaching the buffer zone on the other side of the park.  The problems we've had over the years are cars speeding around the corner and the wear and tear of the landscaped buffer zone by garbage trucks and snow plows.

The play park committee has today set a precedent for absurdity.  Gone is the buffer zone, gone is any safety fence whatsoever.  They have constructed a slide play structure at the narrowest part of the peninsula, right up to the edge of the U-shaped road with no protection barrier, leaving only a few feet between the child at the bottom of the slide and a parked car, or cars zipping around the corner.  The committee outlined the perimeter of the play park with one-foot high wooden beams.  This does not provide any protection whatsoever for children, it is merely for decorative purposes.  Because the play park is built right up to the roadway, children balancing themselves on the beams, or sitting on the beams could be clipped or killed by passing vehicles.  When children take turns going down a slide, they have to get out of the way for others and could easily dart out into the street.

I cannot think of a parent alive who would not be alarmed with this play structure configuration.  The co-op's architect had placed the original play structure deep inside the peninsula for a reason and had left a buffer zone, with clear visibility, for a reason as well.  The new play structure completely blocks visibility for drivers, which creates another level of danger.

Members of the committee are stating that the play park is not the co-op's responsibility.  Who's responsibility is it?  The individual committee members?  The playground equipment provider?  Of course not, the co-op is responsible.  Public play grounds, which this one is, are subject to preliminary and yearly safety inspections by The Canadian Standards Association.  As well, our insurance agent must be apprised of this new play park, in addition to filing a change to our site plan with the City of Ottawa.  

Apparently, this is just Phase 1 of the new play park.  Phase 2 (for older kids) will be built in May and that one will be where the original structure was - deep within the play park.

I took some photos of this play structure this afternoon.  The property manager snidely remarked as she passed by behind my back:  'Are you going to send this to CMHC too?'

I might.

MANNA

The play park committee specifically stated on their web site that donors would have their logos/banners and names prominently displayed on their web site.  No such logos, banners or names of donors appear, so I posted a query as to why this information is not available. The Property Manager, who is also one of the members of the play park committee, stated to me in an email that the committee will be thanking each sponsor as a whole.

She stated that they 'are likely to receive sponsors up until the build day and beyond'. I responded that playground equipment has to be paid for weeks before the build day.  If the committee is still receiving funds and hope to receive more after the build day, that means that the committee had to borrow money to pay for the equipment.  I asked where had they borrowed the money from.  The Property Manager answered 'No it doesn't'.

I then asked how much the co-op was on the hook for.  The Property Manager answered, 'Nothing'.  I responded that if the committee does not receive enough in the way of donations, you can be sure that our co-op will be on the hook for the rest of the money owing to the playground equipment company.  The Property Manager responded: 'Not true'.

I then asked how much money has the committee raised for the play park so far.  The Property Manager answered that the committee was going to sort it out at their meeting last night.  The build day is next Saturday and the committee doesn't know how much money they've raised?

The committee, in all likelihood, has not reached their fundraising goal and may only have garnered a fraction of the monies needed for the play park.  That is why they haven't proudly displayed their donors' logos, banners and names.  They are hoping to receive funds up to and after the build day.  Where did they get the money for the playground equipment and who is ultimately responsible for the remainder of the funds owing to the playground equipment company - the co-op!  This is perhaps the reason why the co-op has been nickeling-and-diming members lately and subsidized members have had their utility and other credits reduced.

As I stated in my previous blog, members will never be able to track any monies from the co-op's coffers to pay for this play park, because of propped up fictitious entry lines.  Members are being told by maintenance staff that the co-op has no money to do repairs.  Windows, porches, decks and fencing are completely rotten. Many long-standing members have had no unit upgrades for 20 years - carpets are threadbare, linoleum worn through - yet, it was decided right from the start that the pet-project play park would go through no matter what.  A playground committee member stated at an All Members Meeting that they had raised only $400., but that their playground equipment company's coach assured them that they could raise $80,000. in four months.  This mode of thinking is based on The Secret - envision the outcome and it will happen. 

The Property Manager stated that I was welcome to attend their meeting last night, but that I would have to adhere to the coach's admonitions.  I declined the offer as the company's dictates are cult-like.

AND THE WINNER IS ...

Our Co-op

Those were the first words we heard back in the spring.  The prize was a new play park for the kids in our co-op.  The "win" wasn't free and clear - it had strings attached.  The co-op had to fundraise to the tune of $50,000. - $80,000, which sums would then be matched by a playground equipment company.  As stated in my previous blog, the playground committee raised approximately $4,000. from various co-op events.  Large corporate sponsors were to foot the balance of the funds needed to replace our original park.

A notice from the office was delivered today to co-op members re sundry matters and in very small italic font was the build day for our play park.  No mention was made as to who our corporate sponsors are, nor how much was raised.  This is most peculiar, because one would expect in big, bold letters:

A Great Big Thank You to ____, whose generous contribution of $20,000. is very much appreciated by our co-op and all of our children.  We'd also like to thank ____  for their $10,000. cheque, without which this play park could never have been built.  And last but not least our appreciation to  _____ for their $30,000. cheque, which will allow children to enjoy this park for years to come.

Photos would have been taken of the corporate donors holding one side of an over-blown prop cheque, with an ever grateful co-op member holding the other side.  These photos would be replicated over and over again in our local and federal co-op newsletters.

As no such information, nor photo ops have been forthcoming, I ask this very pertinent question:  

Where did this money come from?  Did it come from one of our contractors?  If so, that is a blatant conflict of interest.  Distribute to the members the corporate donors letters.  Would this money by chance be coming from our co-op's capital reserves, or buried in our operating budget?  

This information must be provided to co-op members immediately.
 
 

The Players

There has been a fundraiser underway for the past six months to build a new play park in our co-op.  Let's be clear though - it is not for the kids.  Our present play park has never been maintained over the years, nor do parents clean up the park.  The Property Manager stated that the co-op would not contribute to the cost of the new play park.  The fundraising committee raised approximately $4,000. from different co-op events.  Sponsors would have to commit additional sums in the order of $50,000+, which would then be matched by a playground organization.  Most of the fundraising committee members quit, leaving about three main organizers.  Many members have been extremely skeptical as to the prospect of the committee receiving any donations whatsoever, as we are not a large enterprise, nor do we have a notable presence in the community.  This past week a sod-turning event was held in the co-op for the launching of the new play park.  Members were not notified of this event, so the attendees consisted only of the key organizers and some members who happened to be passing by.

Where did this miraculous amount of money come from?  Who are the supposed sponsors? Produce the signed letters of committed corporate donors.  The Property Manager is on side with the Board Members who are on the fundraising committee.  If the money has come from the co-op's coffers, members will never be able to find it in our Financial Statements, because of propped up fictitious entry lines.  If the Board states that the co-op has merely loaned the money to the play park committee, members should have voted on it.  In addition information on the debt owing will become so diluted, it will dissipate into thin air.  

Word has it that the Board of Directors has stated that replacing rotten windows is high on their agenda.  Is this a diversionary tactic to appease members who might be irate that our limited funds might be illegitimately diverted to the play park fund?

Members of the Board of Directors, who are also on the fundraising committee, have been suspiciously silent on the financial aspects of the play park, but they absolutely glow under the media spotlight. 

All is not what it seems in kiddie land.