REMEMBER THIS LONG DRAWN OUT SECRET MESS?
IS THE REPAIR OF OUR GATE HOUSE, HISTORY REPEATING ITSELF?
As I began to look at the events of the February WPA Board Meeting, I was intentionally looking for a report regarding the ever struggling, almost two years in coming, gate house fix. There wasn't an update. WHY? I'm suggesting that it will follow the same deceptive path that the old dock did. The Water Amenities Committee, once the project was approved, quickly reported on the project completion, but failed to report on the fact that despite the fact that it was suppose to be dragged up on shore, cut up, and hauled away, that it was sitting in the canals. Month after month, the Water Amenities Committee had reports, but the reports did not include the dock in the canals resolution. It was only after a questioning board member, requested information each month, that we were given convoluted answers, as the rest of the board assisted in ignoring, or verbally abusing the questioning board member.
As reported earlier, during the January meeting, McMillin motioned, and it was approved, for $350 to replace the gutters, and properly take water away from the building. Members were reminded that the board had decided to fix the gate house, with volunteer man power, and expertise (??????). This board continues to claim expertise to almost all things known to man. It was stated during board meetings that water had run under the carpet and down the walls, and that there was a mold problem. Additionally, at least one of the contractors who had bid in the last round, had included charges for the professional mold removal.
I've taken pictures of the current state of the gate house (Provided at the end of the article. Deplorable!) I've observed McMillin outside the gate house, with a female volunteer, sweeping up debris around the gate house, with a trailer packed with what looked like old mold stained dry wall. I've looked in the windows and dry wall has been pulled down, and in some places there are areas where the brick is exposed. Yet, we don't have the new gutters that were approved at the January meeting.
What is more important, is that at the end of the January meeting, a resident asked the board whether our insurance allowed and covered volunteers, working on these projects. Garrison said he didn't know. Mold is hazardous to health, and should be removed, and deposed of properly. Did the board hurry in and work inside, failing to check the insurance? We don't know, because they haven't bothered to answer. The question presented by the member, should have been one that any conscientious board member should have presented, before they began this project, and several prior projects.
I tend to believe that once again, like in the case of the dock, they will do what they want to do, and just not talk about it, unless questioned at the board table. The problem, not one person on this board questions anything. The other major, but repetitious problem is, there is no comprehensive plan, total plan, with associated costs, to fix a land mark of our association. In fact, we have new windows, ordered by our president's company, almost two years ago, laying around.
On Tuesday, I will send a letter to the board with my questions, and publish the letter on the blog.
IN THE MEAN TIME, HERE ARE THE PICTURES I TOOK TODAY, OF THE CONDITIONS AT THE GATE HOUSE.
As reported earlier, during the January meeting, McMillin motioned, and it was approved, for $350 to replace the gutters, and properly take water away from the building. Members were reminded that the board had decided to fix the gate house, with volunteer man power, and expertise (??????). This board continues to claim expertise to almost all things known to man. It was stated during board meetings that water had run under the carpet and down the walls, and that there was a mold problem. Additionally, at least one of the contractors who had bid in the last round, had included charges for the professional mold removal.
I've taken pictures of the current state of the gate house (Provided at the end of the article. Deplorable!) I've observed McMillin outside the gate house, with a female volunteer, sweeping up debris around the gate house, with a trailer packed with what looked like old mold stained dry wall. I've looked in the windows and dry wall has been pulled down, and in some places there are areas where the brick is exposed. Yet, we don't have the new gutters that were approved at the January meeting.
What is more important, is that at the end of the January meeting, a resident asked the board whether our insurance allowed and covered volunteers, working on these projects. Garrison said he didn't know. Mold is hazardous to health, and should be removed, and deposed of properly. Did the board hurry in and work inside, failing to check the insurance? We don't know, because they haven't bothered to answer. The question presented by the member, should have been one that any conscientious board member should have presented, before they began this project, and several prior projects.
I tend to believe that once again, like in the case of the dock, they will do what they want to do, and just not talk about it, unless questioned at the board table. The problem, not one person on this board questions anything. The other major, but repetitious problem is, there is no comprehensive plan, total plan, with associated costs, to fix a land mark of our association. In fact, we have new windows, ordered by our president's company, almost two years ago, laying around.
On Tuesday, I will send a letter to the board with my questions, and publish the letter on the blog.
IN THE MEAN TIME, HERE ARE THE PICTURES I TOOK TODAY, OF THE CONDITIONS AT THE GATE HOUSE.
THE FOLLOWING THREE PICTURES DISPLAY GAPS BETWEEN THE BRICK WORK AND THE ROOF
