Clarification
Below is a summary of Green Plan's presentation at the board meeting and other CVHA board cogitations thereon.
From Board Mtg 1/8/7 with Joe from Greenplan:
Q: Why did it take so long to begin plowing?
A: Plows got stuck; Hiway 36 was closed. Once snow is packed down, no point, nothing they can do to prevent ice potholes.
Q: Why not have them in Denver beforehand?
A: Parking is only 10 mins from complex, still could not get through. Contract says don?’t have to plow till 6 inches.
Q: Why did shovelers (2) leave 12/21 after doing only ?‘91/s & ?‘93?’s? Why did they come back at 4 pm ?– after we had shoveled ?– and redid only 3-4 sets of units?
A: This is first time with this complex. [actually second]
Q: Why was there no sanding? Ice control?
A: Application of treatment was by request only.
Q: Plows came at 11:30 pm and did no plowing but woke us up, tore through complex and hit ice chunks at entrance, damaging plow? Then about 5 workers from 2 other trucks stood around 15 mins blocking entrance examining damage.
A: Yes, plow was damaged. That worker is unlucky, he broke his tooth also, but one of their best and oldest workers.
Q: Why shoveling sidewalks on Federal.
A: Misunderstanding from Pennant instructions.
GP Excuse: Do not have to do shoveling/plowing when conditions do not permit per contract.
Response: Contract also states that complex snow/ice cleanup must be completed when storm is finished.
Q: Will $17,000 [at that time] bill be adjusted for non-work.
A: Joe cannot do this; somebody at HQ must adjust bill.
Q: Why vehicles parked & not doing anything.
A: Sometimes they like to park their vehicles in their customers' lots overnight for their convenience.
GP: Tomorrow they will work on snow piles.
A: Please only clearing west mailboxes so we can park {still not done} and making roads drivable is all we want.
Board Discussion at meeting after Joe left
Pro: They could not get to complex.
Con: They did not try very hard & did not stay when they did get here.
Pro: It is only their first time, so they cannot be judged yet on one performance; did a great fall cleanup.
Con: They lied (12/21 work) and were not responsive when asked for reasons/bill adjustment.
Pro: Some side streets are this bad or worse.
Con: We still cannot drive our cars through the complex 3 wks later.
Pro: Plows could not get through early on b/c cars stuck in streets.
Con: No cars seen in streets other than in ?‘27?’s to prevent plowing.
Board post-meeting discussion re threats of non-plowing if not paid $15k
Pro pay: Certain board members were critical and are to blame for threats of non-plowing because of no assurance of full payment; these members shouldn?’t speak without ?“board approval.?”
Con: All board members represent homeowners and should be allowed to speak freely on their behalf; ideally a fair sampling of homeowners come to meetings and speak for themselves.
For paymt promise: Offer of 60% should be made so Mgr won?’t have to find someone else quickly & have us be plowed last; want to keep this co, not lose them.
v. paymt promise: Using the threat of another storm to lock in payment is blackmail; board already decided to pay for documented work done, negotiate the rest.
Payment: Knowing that snow coverage is promised this weekend, Manager makes offer to pay bill minus 12/21 obvious erroneous billing of $6k b/c she has 3 votes = quorum.
Con: Unanimous board decisions necessary outside of regular/special meetings, not just 3 as bylaws forbid this.
Below is a summary of Green Plan's presentation at the board meeting and other CVHA board cogitations thereon.
From Board Mtg 1/8/7 with Joe from Greenplan:
Q: Why did it take so long to begin plowing?
A: Plows got stuck; Hiway 36 was closed. Once snow is packed down, no point, nothing they can do to prevent ice potholes.
Q: Why not have them in Denver beforehand?
A: Parking is only 10 mins from complex, still could not get through. Contract says don?’t have to plow till 6 inches.
Q: Why did shovelers (2) leave 12/21 after doing only ?‘91/s & ?‘93?’s? Why did they come back at 4 pm ?– after we had shoveled ?– and redid only 3-4 sets of units?
A: This is first time with this complex. [actually second]
Q: Why was there no sanding? Ice control?
A: Application of treatment was by request only.
Q: Plows came at 11:30 pm and did no plowing but woke us up, tore through complex and hit ice chunks at entrance, damaging plow? Then about 5 workers from 2 other trucks stood around 15 mins blocking entrance examining damage.
A: Yes, plow was damaged. That worker is unlucky, he broke his tooth also, but one of their best and oldest workers.
Q: Why shoveling sidewalks on Federal.
A: Misunderstanding from Pennant instructions.
GP Excuse: Do not have to do shoveling/plowing when conditions do not permit per contract.
Response: Contract also states that complex snow/ice cleanup must be completed when storm is finished.
Q: Will $17,000 [at that time] bill be adjusted for non-work.
A: Joe cannot do this; somebody at HQ must adjust bill.
Q: Why vehicles parked & not doing anything.
A: Sometimes they like to park their vehicles in their customers' lots overnight for their convenience.
GP: Tomorrow they will work on snow piles.
A: Please only clearing west mailboxes so we can park {still not done} and making roads drivable is all we want.
Board Discussion at meeting after Joe left
Pro: They could not get to complex.
Con: They did not try very hard & did not stay when they did get here.
Pro: It is only their first time, so they cannot be judged yet on one performance; did a great fall cleanup.
Con: They lied (12/21 work) and were not responsive when asked for reasons/bill adjustment.
Pro: Some side streets are this bad or worse.
Con: We still cannot drive our cars through the complex 3 wks later.
Pro: Plows could not get through early on b/c cars stuck in streets.
Con: No cars seen in streets other than in ?‘27?’s to prevent plowing.
Board post-meeting discussion re threats of non-plowing if not paid $15k
Pro pay: Certain board members were critical and are to blame for threats of non-plowing because of no assurance of full payment; these members shouldn?’t speak without ?“board approval.?”
Con: All board members represent homeowners and should be allowed to speak freely on their behalf; ideally a fair sampling of homeowners come to meetings and speak for themselves.
For paymt promise: Offer of 60% should be made so Mgr won?’t have to find someone else quickly & have us be plowed last; want to keep this co, not lose them.
v. paymt promise: Using the threat of another storm to lock in payment is blackmail; board already decided to pay for documented work done, negotiate the rest.
Payment: Knowing that snow coverage is promised this weekend, Manager makes offer to pay bill minus 12/21 obvious erroneous billing of $6k b/c she has 3 votes = quorum.
Con: Unanimous board decisions necessary outside of regular/special meetings, not just 3 as bylaws forbid this.
