Open Letter to ECA Board of Directors

To: Elizabeth Board of Directors

From: Molly Frantz, Apt. #1007

I hope that each of you is reading and--more importantly-- reflecting upon the numerous postings to the Elizabeth Blog regarding the urgent need to replace the building’s energy-inefficient windows and balcony doors. I want to add MY FULL SUPPORT to undertaking such an endeavor. Not only has the Elizabeth Condominium wasted thousands upon thousands of dollars through excessive energy bills, the comfort, and in some cases health, of the residents has been totally disregarded.

The Board’s reason for undertaking a $1.2 million partial refurbishment of the Building was to enhance the marketability of our individual units, as well as make the Building a more pleasant place to live (as expressed in numerous public meetings). Doesn’t it stand to reason that reducing the drafts and coldness in the units in the winter makes an equally important--if not greater--contribution to achieving those very same goals. There is also the benefit of reducing our energy bills. The Board of Directors budgeted $763,176 for Natural Gas and Electricity in the current ECA budget–this represents 29% of the budgeted operating expenses. If the Board wants to hold down the condominium fees (a position often stated by the Board), savings and/or cuts have to be made where the expenditures are. As helpful as energy-efficient lighting is, the small changes already undertaken by the Board are insignificant when compared with the energy savings that would result from eliminating the wasted heat and air conditioning caused by our defective windows and balcony door seals.

It is beyond the pale why this Board of Directors has not addressed this significant energy inefficiency. For two years I have watched the Board rebuff both the Energy Committee's and individual owners’ suggestions, inquiries, pleas, and offers to help move forward on the window and door issue. Instead, the residents are told that replacing the defective windows and balcony doors is too costly. Mr. Jeffrey Axelrad, in responding to one of the blog postings wrote, " We should seek simple, efficient solutions before spending millions on new windows." I couldn’t agree more. EXCEPT, the Board has never identified those simple, efficient solutions, nor has it ascertained the cost of any corrective/mitigating action (simple or not). If there are simple, efficient solutions I would asked why the Board has not already undertaken them! The use of putty (as suggested by Mr. Axelrad to an owner) and the installation of scotch tape in one apartment (as overseen by management) are simple and efficient--just not effective solutions. It is a sad commentary on the Board’s performance that you do not have any data to rebut my statements.

I ask that the Board of the Elizabeth Condominium (1) begin to take this issue seriously, (2) immediately adopt the Energy Committee’s December 21 proposal to the Board to request RFPs from three engineering consulting firms so that the Board will know exactly what needs to be done and what the cost will be, (3) seek definitive answers about who should pay for these energy improvements (individual owners or the condominium) in order to qualify for the tax credits and rebates from the Federal Government, the Maryland Energy Administration and PEPCO, and (4) engage a firm in a timely manner so that the owners/building can take advantage of the (a) tax rebates and credits, (b) low interest rates if we take out a loan to do the work, and (c) lower cost for doing the work while the economy is still depressed.