PLAZA EAST ASSOCIATION
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MONTHLY MEETING OF THE BOARD OF
DIRECTORS
September 28, 2005
1.
CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
President Terry Marcum
called to order a duly constituted meeting of Plaza East Board of
Directors on Wednesday, September 28, 2005 at 7:35 PM in the
Recreation Room. President Marcum led the Pledge of
Allegiance.
2.
ROLL CALL
Present: Ismet Baker, James
Brady, Charlotte Gazzana, Richard Loarie, Jerry Marcial, Terry
Marcum, Allan Pell, DiAnne Shumard, Timothy Smith and John Toklucu.
Also present were Willy Lopez, Manager and Richard Madey,
Secretary.
Absent:
None.
Quorum?
Yes.
3.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MOTION
1: Baker (Toklucu) moved
(seconded) to approve the minutes of the regular monthly meeting on
August 31, 2005, subject to verification that rules for using the
barbeque grills are printed correctly in the 2005 edition (purple
book) of “Guide for Community Living”. Passed
unanimously. .
MOTION
2: Shumard (Baker) moved
(seconded) to approve the minutes of the special meeting on August
24, 2005. Passed unanimously.
4.
NEW BUSINESS
4.1
DISCUSSION OF WINDOW REPLACEMENT
MOTION
3:
Marcum
(Pell) moved (seconded) that we accept the ruling of our attorney
that Unit Owners are responsible for replacing windows. Passed with
Brady dissenting.
Brady:
Our
attorney is absolutely wrong in his interpretation of the
responsibility for the windows. If we ask who places all windows
uniformly, then the Association is responsible. If the
responsibility is left to the discretion of Unit Owners, an Owner
may choose not to replace a cracked window. Then if a storm breaks
the weakest link in the chain, the storm is inside the building.
The Association should be responsible --- just as if there were a
break in the concrete block wall. Suppose we decide t spend one
million dollars on common areas (which I will vote against), then
if windows are breached by a storm, the one million dollars is in
jeopardy. I don’t know how to suggest that we ignore our
attorney’s advice. If the consensus of the Board is that
there is a gray area, then the Board should ask our attorney to
review his decision. I am confident that a Court would reach a
different conclusion.
Marcial:
I am not apposed to seeking a second opinion. The Association pays
insurance for glass breakage.
Smith: if windows are not
considered a common area, then I can replace a window by plywood;
if so, our attorney would likely change his opinion.
Pell:
I believe
that our prior attorney rendered a similar opinion. These are my
windows. Let me do what I want.
Gazzaana:
Why question the opinion of our attorney if we had confidence in
hiring him.
Baker:
I
haven’t heard of any Condo Association paying for
windows.
Shumard:
I replaced
my windows. My questions would be: How would the Association
determine the assessment amount for those owners who replaced their
windows?
Brady:
There are
two opposite opinions as to who is responsible for replacing
windows: our prior attorney said the Association is responsible,
and then two weeks later changed his opinion. In a Court, the Judge
rules in favor of one of two attorneys who each claim their
opinions are right.
Re trusting our attorney: attorneys are not infallible.
There is a provision in
our Declaration that we can’t do anything that is not
uniform. The rule states that the Association must buy all windows
at the same time.
Re window replacement by some Owners: Owners could have challenged
Association.
I don’t know of any case where all windows in any one
apartment have been replaced.
Lopez:
As long as I have been Manager, we requested Owners to replace
windows subject to the building code (and without changing the
outside appearance of the windows). When we replaced windows, we
charged Owners. This is a gray area for the Manager. We have been
collecting money from Owners for window repairs for the last five
years.
Smith:
Reflecting on Brady’s comments; the answer you get depends on
how you ask the question. You get the answer anticipated.
Loarie:
Look at history. Original Owners sued Developer to replace kitchen
windows; but Owners did not use money received to replace the
windows.
Windows are expensive [e.g, $80-100 /sf]; for 14,871 sf of glass,
cost @ $100 /sf is $1.49 million. In 1998, Owners voted down
replacing kitchen windows.
Q.Smith:
What is the code now if original Owner wants to replace
windows?
A.
Loarie: You must replace
frame and glass and reinforce corners. The code varies with the
height and location of the building. The code does not care about
shutters.
Marcum:
I ordered storm shutters that meet today’s code.
Q.
Do we have experience with insurance companies re lost
windows?
A.
Lopez: When a window frame
blew out, the insurance company said that the window is not
repairable. The cost to replace to replace is $ 3k for two panels.
Association insurance covers only glass (and not the frame); the
insurance company covers up to $75 only to repair a frame.
Pell:
I have had
experience with two windows. The insurance company said that the
windows were irreparable; but they were not
irreparable. Condo
insurance paid for broken glass.
Brady:
If windows
including frames are owner’s responsibility, why is the Condo
Association paying for insurance?
Pell:
Condo
insurance covers only glass.
Q.
Kitty: Did you read the
information I sent to Charlotte Gazzana about a prior
judgment?
A.
Marcum:
Our
attorney is in conflict with that prior judgment
Kitty:
We did not
pay. Who is responsible?
Gazzana:
I did not give your information to the Board. It should become
available to the Board.
Brady:
If a Court made a decision, than that decision is the law and we
need to abide by it. I will review the information to see if the
court has set precedent.
Marcum: I will distribute the
information to each Board member and to our attorney.
Kitty:
After weather-stripping her window, it was o.k.
Marcum:
We are not suggesting that everyone replace windows. The motion is
designed to clarify who is responsible if windows are
replaced/repaired.
Brady:
The
Association attorney concluded that Unit Owners are
responsible.
George:
Three attorneys have said it was the responsibility of the
Owners.
Brady:
Who is responsible for replacing tile covering and wall covering?
Our attorney said that the Association is responsible.
George:
Two attorneys said so.
Q.
Baily I read the letter from
our attorney, and I looked at the Condo documents. I am confused.
Is a window a wall or is it a window? The Board must interpret what
the documents say. I think that our attorney did not refer to the
defining documents.
Marcum:
I call for a vote on the motion. I am not going to accept
Brady’s recommendation to go back to our attorney. Motion
passes with Brady opposing it.
Madey:
How does
the Court case effect this decision of the Board?
Brady:
I will give Marcum my opinion after I read it.
Marcum:
I will pass the information to our attorney.
Kitty:
I object
that you don’t read the evidence I submitted.
ISSUE
1: Does Motion 3
conflict with the court judgment?
4.2
DISCUSSION OF LOBBY ASSESSMENTS
Shumard:
I am giving to each Board member a copy of the cost analysis that I
just completed at the request of President Marcum. My analysis
starts with the Casa Conde cost estimate for lobby 2 of $233.1 K,
which includes Conde’s 30% fee. Then I subtracted $40.1 K by
eliminating the large security desk ($21.6K) and the elevator cab
($18.5 K) to arrive at an adusted cost of $ 193.0 K for lobby 2.
Then I arrive at a lobby 2 cost per square foot of $67.39 after
dividing the adjusted cost of $ 193.0 K by the lobby 2 square
footage of 2864 s.f. Then I use this $ 67.39 cost/sf to arrive at a
total cost for the three lobbies, the mail room, the two restrooms,
and the office. The total square footage of 10,920 s.f. is the sum
of the following numbers: Lobby 1 (3574), Lobby 2 (2864), Lobby 3
(3724), mail room (208), restrooms (150), and office (400). Thus
total cost for this phase would be (10,920 sf) ($67.39/sf) =
$735,899. Adding a contingency allowance of about $64,100 brings
the total estimated cost to $800,000. An additional cost for the
recreation room (including the exercise room the bath room, and the
kitchen) is projected at
$280,800 [= (4,680 sf) ($60/sf)].
Q.
Smith: How did you get from
Conde’s lobby2 estimated cost of $ 113/sf to $67/sf ?
A.
In his (8/24/05) letter, Cesar Conde rounded up his lobby 2 cost to
$ 250,000 and used a lower lobby 2 square footage of 2200 sf
(instead of 2864 sf) to arrive at a rounded $113/sf. If we use
Shumard’s square footage, Conde’s lobby 2 cost would be
($233,100)/(2864 sf) = 81.67/sf.
ISSUE
2: Conde has given us
a lobby 2 cost per squarae foot that appears to be too high, and he
has used this cost to project the total cost for all three lobbies.
What is the correct square footage for lobby 2? Is it 2864 sf (as
used by Shumard) or 2200 sf (as used by
Conde)?
Brady:
Conde’s
“standard” contract is excellent for him, the designer;
but it is a catastrophe waiting to happen for Plaza East. It is
standard in the trade to charge costs plus a percentage. We want a
fair and honest contract under $ 1 million, which may be salable to
75% of Unit Owners. Because of the high price of oil, materials
containing oil will be expected to escalate the price.
Madey:
I suggest
that we back out Conde’s 30% fee to determine basic costs and
then negotiate a fixed fee.
[Note:
Using
Shumard’s lobby 2 adjusted cost of $193.0K which includes
Conde’s 30% fee, the lobby 2 cost (without the 30% fee) is
$148.5 K or $ 51.8/sf. The total cost for the three lobbies, mail
room, office and bath room would be ($51.8/sf) (10920 sf) = $ 565.7
K. The total cost for the recreation room phase is $ 242.4 =
($51.8/sf) (4680 sf). The total cost for both phases is $808.1 K
without a fee. The budget figure of $ 950 K approved in Motion 4
ahead leaves $141.9K [or 17.5%] for Conde’s fee plus
contingencies. Shumard estimated $930K based on a cost of $60/sf
(including fees and contingencies) for a total square footage of
15, 600 sf].
Toklucu:
In our special meeting with Conde, I asked him if he would be able
to do the entire job for $ 800K.
Dave:
Patching ends up costing us more money. To do lobbies right, we
need to spend $4 to 5 K/ Unit Owner, and we should expect to get
back ten- fold in the value of our unit.
Kitty:
I believe we should have the best building. We are talking about
quality --- not money. Conde’s consulting fee of $ 150/ hr to
talk to a contractor is unacceptable. Frolich estimated a total
cost of $ 1 million for 17,000 sf.
Marcum:
Can we complete the entire job for $1.3 million? The contractor
would include his fee within that scope of work. Even $ 1.3 million
may be too high because we also have to replace elevators (cabs and
mechanical) at a cost of more than $ 1 million. [There is about $
500 K currently in reserve for elevators].
Rothenberg:
It seems like it is a marketing job to 266 owners.
Marcial:
We need a number that we believe 75% Owners will buy.
Pell:
I have great respect for the Lobby Committee. The designer was
chosen by a majority of the Board. I did not concur with that
choice. I did some spot checking on prices given by Conde and find
his prices to be unacceptable. Here are some examples. Conde is
charging $70/sy for one sample fabric; I found it for $15/sy. Conde
is charging $21 K for 4’ x 16’ desk (or 328/sf); the
cost of granite of $80.32/sf is the highest price/sf for granite.
Conde is charging $4.7k for each chandelier. I will not pay these
kinds of prices.
ISSUE
3: Can we understand
the discrepancies in the prices charged by
Conde?
Jean:
I agree with Mr. Pell about Conde prices. The Board should rethink
its decision re selecting Conde as the designer.
Baker:
I wrote a letter about the contract. The fee of $ 150 / hr is out.
I interviewed 20 people in my tower and found 15 out of 20 were
against spending $1.3 million.
Kitty:
“Are
you going to stay with these robbers?”
Brady:
Probably 85% of Unit Owners would vote for quality. This percentage
would drop after putting in a cost number. There is something wrong
with the pass-along cost of $ 70/sf. If there is smoke, we should
investigate to see if there is a fire.
Moriconi:
Conde is leaving on Oct 1 for one month. Currently, he is working
on three projects. We need commercial grade (not residential)
fabrics.
Smith:
We need a product if we want to sell a budget to
Owners.
MOTION
4: Toklucu (Loarie)
moved (seconded) that we recommend a total budgetary sum of $ 950K
for the total job of the three lobbies (plus office, mailroom, and
baths) and the recreation room (including the exercise room, the
bathroom and the kitchen). The elevators cabs are not included;
they would be part of the elevator job. Passed unanimously.
Rothenberg: What are we going to
get for $ 950K? We should have an answer to this question before we
pass the motion.
Marcial:
We need
Conde to tell us what we would get for this budgetary amount of
$950K.
Marcum:
If Conde agrees, then the Board can go to Unit Owners for a
vote.
Moriconi:
Marcum will talk with Conde first; then I will speak with Conde
about several revisions. It is still necessary to send a formal
letter to the other two Designer firms.
5.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
5.1
SCREENING: (Report Attached)
Marcial:
Apartment
5F (1br) sold (unfurnished) to Chris and Nancy Rabold for $
415,000.
MOTION
5: Gazzana (Toklucu) moved
(seconded) to accept the report of the Screening Committee. Passed
unanimously
5.2
BUILDING/ MAINTENANCE
Loarie:
We expect a firm bid from Otis Elevator in two weeks, and we expect
a firm bid from Schindler in about one
week.
6.
OLD BUSINESS
Gazzana:
We need to structured plan of action.
Pell:
I am
confused also why we are doing lobbies before elevator
Loarie:
Most of the work for the elevators occurs on the roof above the
pent house.
7.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION
6: Brady (Marcial) moved
(seconded) to adjourn the meeting at 10:10 pm. Passed
unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
Richard Madey
Secretary