So to recap, the hot discussions so far on this blog are about:
1. Michael's resignation or dismissal and his new attempt to get (again) in the Board and eventually,if successful, and with the help of Seamus and others to attempt to overthrow Taft -- if this interpretation is wrong please post comments and refer to #1.
2. Seamus controversial attitude
3. The 22% reduction in CEA fees announced by the Board which NOBODY so far seemed to be happy about (even Seamus raised this complaint during the sub-metering info meeting, if you remember). Most owners believe a 40%-50% reduction would be closer to reality. Unfortunately, no one seems to have been able so far to explain it. If Slobodan is following the blog then he is kindly invited to come up with an explanation (different of the one he gave during the aforementioned meeting)
4.The intrusion of Taft and of the lawyer in the business that ONLY concerns the owners (i.e. the forthcoming election of the new board members and the voting of new budget).
Just to make it clear : TAFT is our employee and is supposed to do what we (actually the Board) tell them to do. And so is the law firm. The problem is that if we fire these guys (Taft and the lawyers) who the hell is going to pay for it. Of course it's again us. Is it really worth it? Or, we can make these guys work the way WE WANT (and not what some dubious board members or owners want).
If there's anything else please add your comments or post new topics.
I DON'T THINK ANYONE REALLY WANTS TO FIRE AFT JUST MAYBE HAVE AN ONSITE MANAGER NOT ONE WHO SHOWS UP NOW AND THEN... WHAT WE NEED IS A MANAGER THAT IS HERE MAKING SURE THAT CONTRACTORS, SUPERS AND OTHERS ARE DOING THEIR JOB... AND MAKING SURE THE WORK IS DONE TO THE PROPER STANDARDS,. NOT COMING IN AFTER THE WORK IS DONE.
ReplyDeleteWHERE IS MICHAEL? HAS ANYONE ASKED HIM WHAT HAS BEEN GOING ON? IF WHAT IS SAID IS TRUE THEN THERE MUST BE A GOOD REASON FOR THIS. SOMEONE SHOULD ASK HIM. I CAN’T BELIEVE HE WOULD DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS WITH OUT A REASON.THIS SHOULD BE CLEARED UP,AND WHY DID MANAGEMENT AND THE BOARD BOB, DAN FROM CATHERINE’S BOARD AND NANCY ) WAIT UNTIL NOW TO PUBLISH THIS WHEN HE HAS BEEN GONE FOR FOUR MONTHS.. YOU ALL KNOW THAT HE HAS BEEN THE ONLY BOARD MEMBER TO BE SEEN AND YOU KNOW HE WILLALWAYS LISTEN TO YOUR COMPLAINTS AND TRY TO FIX THEM.
ReplyDeleteSO PEOPLE DON’T BE TO QUICK TO JUDGE SOMEONE!
HE STILL HAS MY VOTE.
B BUILDING
Maybe someone should send him this post and see his comments.. but I wouldn't hold my breath.. contact Michael see if he will.
ReplyDeleteiT DOES SEEM HIGH BUT MAYBE THE NEW BOARD CAN CALCULATE IT ... IT REALY ISH'T THAT HARD.../
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone know if the proper checks were done for wiring??? Are we ( you ) paying for someone elses hydro???
ReplyDeleteHow can we prove or disprove it???
They say they did (the proper checks for wiring) but honestly I doubt they did it 100% correct - you could have felt it if you attended the sub metering meeting. It's true, they probably tried but I'm positive they cannot be sure they succeeded. Actually, if you care about your property, its value and your expenses related to it you should attend all of the AGM's and all the other important meetings you are invited to. If you don't, than let the Board and the Management company do to you what they please or what their smarts dictate them to do and DON'T COMPLAIN anymore. We could also take advantage of this blog to help us go better prepared and better informed to the future condo meetings so that we, the owners can debate the issues more smartly and overcome possible future disasters.
ReplyDeleteIts interesting
ReplyDeleteI was in the last meeting and was concerned about the rate decrease like everyone else. One thing I noticed though was the nice relationship between our lawyer and our property manager. I want to know when the contract with them is up? Regarding Taft management, they have done good things but I don't like Justin's answers to my questions at times. I prefer to change him with someone else at Taft Management as they have more than one manager! So when is the contract with the lawyer and property company over???
There is no contract with this Lawyer..
ReplyDeleteTaft's 2 year contract ends in May/June 2012 unless a board removes them and that costs us money....BUT I DO AGREE WITH YOU WE NEED A NEW MANAGER HERE ONE THAT IS PREFERABLY FULL TIME AND IS ON SITE TO HELP THINGS RUN SMOOTHLY. He would take the place of the girl in the office and would see to ALL DAY TO DAY FUNCTIONS HERE AND WOULD DEAL WITH CONTRACTORS AND SEE THAT THE SUPERS AND CONTRACTORS WERE DOING THERE JOBS PROPERLY. NOT SOMEONE THAT DROPS BY OCCASIONALY..
tHE LAWYER AND JUSTIN DO SEEM A LITTLE TO CLOSE....HE SEEMS TO LOOK TO JUSTIN TO SEE IF HE SHOULD COMMENT AND WHAT HE SHOULD SAY..nOT THE FIRST TIME PEOPLE HAVE SEEN THIS...
Good idea and it should not cost us more because he would take the place of the girl in the office that we are paying in addition to Taft's contract. I don't find problems with her but we do need an on-site Mgr. definitely not Justin. And we do need a new lawyer ...to cozy for for my liking
ReplyDelete#1 ABSOLUTLY WRONG
ReplyDeleteTHERE ARE FAR MORE PRODUCTIVE THINGS TO DO THAN FIRING A MANAGEMENT COMPANY... CATHERINE AND HER PEOPLE, DAN (RUNNING AGAIN) BOB (STILL THERE) THESE ARE CATHERINES LEFT OVER BOARD MEMBERS...WHO IS GOING DOOR TO DOOR WITH DAN COLLECTING VOTES FOR HIM??
ReplyDeleteSHOULD TELL YOU SOMETHING ABOUT WHAT TO EXPECT... IS THIS ANOTHE STEP BACKWARD?...
Anonymous said...
ReplyDelete#1 ABSOLUTLY WRONG
What do you mean by this comment :"#1 ABSOLUTLY WRONG"? Is it wrong interpretation or wrong as in what has happened (or maybe both?)!
absolutly wrong no one wants to over throw Taft
ReplyDeleteWe have had enough of this before when Catherine and Dan were there 5 MANAGEMENT CO. IN 4 YEARS!!! BTW BOB WAS THERE TO. we need an ONSITE Manager. not an ocassional one.
So I understand it must be one of the five on the aforementioned "flyer" who made the previous comment, as it looks that he/she knows for sure Michael and Seamus do not want to oust Taft.... Intresting to see how Michael (if elected) will again get along with Justin (who is not the nicest person in the wolrd to work with) and for how long. Or, how will they be able to determine Taft to bless us with another property manager not so Justin-like.
ReplyDeleteONE SHOULD NEVER ASSUME
ReplyDeleteI was told by a very reliable sounce that checks were done to see that the switch that was being Metered was the correct one and in all cases it was.....but no one did any checks to see if your power or your nieghbours power was crossed. It is possible that you or your neighbour are getting power from your neighbour. these buildings are a maze and this is a very good possibility.
ReplyDeleteInteresting about the wiring.... I understand units 166 & 167 recieved a notice that their heating wiring is wrong ....anybody know about this..... somebody should ask them ....are we all in the same condition...who's watching the store...they said at the meeting that this was possible...did they already know about this.
ReplyDeleteI saw Michael with the sub metering guys maybe he knows something about 166 and 167's wiring.
ReplyDeleteANYBODY WILLING????
HAS ANYONE HAD ANYONE COME TO THERE DOOR FOR VOTES???? WHERE ARE THEY ALL???
ReplyDeleteUNIT 167 IS # 2 ON THE CANDIDATES LIST (Michael Xie) - NOT SURE IF THEY POSTED YET ON THIS BLOG.
ReplyDeleteSend him the blog...
ReplyDeleteWhat building is 167 in ? Is it 20 or 10 Moonstone? Or other???
ReplyDelete20 moonstone byway
ReplyDeleteEast end of the building first door on your right.
ReplyDeleteJust went into 15 Pebble Byway west end... NO SIGNS.. NO DANGER SIGNS... HUGE HOLE YOU CAN TWIST AN ANCLE OR FALL WHERE IS THE MANAGEMENT COMPANY TO CHECK UP ON THEM WHERE IS THE CONTRACTOR... PEOPLE ARE RIGHT FIX THINGS QUICK WHO CARES IF SOMEONE GETS HURT JUST SO WE STAY ON THE BOARD
ReplyDeleteJust got home and found a letter in the mail box from of all people,Michael we could be in serious trouble if Nancy doesn't step down dont you think....anyone care to comment on his letter??? Why would the board insist on breaking the law???
ReplyDeleteI have no idea, do they believe they are right,
ReplyDeleteTime will tell..
EVERYONE ...I WISH AND HOPE WE GET A PROPER AND JUST BOARD THIS TIME.
Questions to Catherine and Dan Hu at our AGM
ReplyDeleteThis is the Condo Act Section--- 32
Conduct of business
32. (1) Subject to subsection 42 (5), the board of a corporation shall not transact any business of the corporation except at a meeting of directors at which a quorum of the board is present. 1998, c. 19, s. 32 (1).
Quorum
(2) A quorum for the transaction of business is a majority of the members of the board. 1998, c. 19, s. 32 (2).
For our YCC244 the board member of 5 ,the majority must be 3+. That means any transactions done by only 2 board members is illegal. Even if there were 3 Board members if the 3 rd one was appointed by the left 2 Board members.
So we must ask Catherine and Dan Hu and verify :
1. How many Board members were there on the Board when you signed the contract with the contractor NAN BEI for the swimming pool?
2. How many Board members were there on the Board when you signed the contract with NAN BEI for the stucco project of Building A & B?
3. Why did you sign such big projects with the same contractor NAN BEI and let NAN BEI to sub-contract the stucco project some one else?
4. Was it worth $100,000+ to do the swimming pool? Was it worth using out our Reserve Fund before you step down to do the stucco?
5. Did you guys get money from NAN BEI and other of your contractors, if yes how much? How much per unit owner?
6. Do you want to continue doing crazy things like that by running the Board again?