THE ELIZABETH CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION
4601 North Park Avenue
Chevy Chase, MD 20815
Minutes of Board of Directors Meeting January 21, 2010
Board Present:
Woody Cunningham ....................President
Alexandria Kielty .........................Vice President
Monique Fridell ...........................Treasurer
Judith Barth ................................Assistant Treasurer
Jeffrey Axelrad ............................Secretary
Charles Bressler ...........................Director
Dr. Alfred Muller .........................Director
Others present:
Scott Murdoch ............Community Manager, Legum & Norman
Michael Horan ............Property Manager, Legum & Norman
Rebekah Hutton ................Recording Secretary
Call to Order: Mr. Cunningham called the meeting to order at 7:36 pm.
Approval of Minutes:
MOTION
Ms. Kielty moved, Dr. Muller seconded, to approve the November 16, 2009, meeting minutes. The motion passed unanimously. [NOTE from Karren Alenier: The Board erroneously was reported to have approved the November minutes.]
President’s Report: Mr. Cunningham thanked the Energy Committee and residents for their continued efforts to reduce utility usage. He reported that in the first five months of this fiscal year, the Association has reduced gas and electric usage each month compared to last year. He stated that peak usage is usually in February and encourage residents to continue conservation efforts.
A RFP will be drafted to seek the services of an engineering consulting firm to assist the community in determining what energy efficiency measures/equipment, including window and balcony door replacements, are appropriate. The three companies previously interviewed by the Energy Committee will be invited to submit bids.
Treasurer’s Report: Ms. Fridell reported that 2009 audited fiscal year financial statements were distributed to all residents. She reminded residents of a workshop on February 2, 2010, at 7:30 p.m. to go over the audited statements with residents.
Ms. Fridell also asked for three owners to volunteer to assist her over the next two months to identify and clear fully depreciated or no longer existing assets from ECA’s balance sheet in advance of adding new assets relating to the refurbishment project. The result of this project will be a write-off amount to be approved by the Board and ECA’s auditors which will be reflected on the 2010 audited balance sheet. Two owners volunteered.
Old Business:
a. Funding major projects: Mr. Cunningham asked Ms. Fridell to explain her proposed process for decision-making regarding identifying, prioritizing and funding major capital expenditure projects such as window and door replacement.
Ms. Fridell reported that the Energy Committee began preliminary due diligence last year regarding the identification of energy conservation projects, including the replacement of windows and balcony doors. She has also been researching financing options for such multimillion dollar projects for over a year. On 8/27/09 she had presented to the Energy Committee an outline of considerations for such a project and a collective decision making process regarding analysis, due diligence, and funding. She stated that the Board has been criticized for lack of transparency in issues such as management company selection and refurbishment project. In order not to have this criticism leveled at the Board again, she stated that it would be important to explain in public and in writing, a transparent decision-making process agreed upon by the Board and explained to owners. The outline of steps associated with this process is as follows:
“OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this meeting is threefold:
1) to outline issues relating to financing large-ticket energy saving equipment and capital expenditures
2) to describe several possible financing options
3) to identify next steps in the due diligence and decision-making process
1. KEY ISSUES RELATING TO ANY FINANCING OPTION
1. Bylaws
2. Five Year Plan as determined by Board of Directors
3. Quantify costs/benefits
4. Owners support for action plan
a. Supermajority vote, if required by Bylaws
b. General information and “buy-in”
5. Amount to be financed, net of applicable tax credits
6. ECA Annual Budget/ability to service debt
7. Management capacity to manage project
8. Timing
a. Size/cost/benefit/urgency versus other critical expenditures
b. Staging of expenditures/construction
c. Availability/deadline of applicable tax credits
9. Financial Conditions
a. Interest rates
b. Availability of credit
c. Tenor of financing
d. Structure/collateral required
e. Amount/conditions of applicable tax credits
II. POSSIBLE FINANCING OPTIONS
1. Reserves
2. Capital Assessments (requiring 75% supermajority owner vote)
3. Bank Loan
4. Private Placement Bond Issue
5. OEM financing
6. Municipal assistance
7. Voluntary/individual purchases
8. Some combination of the above, depending upon total project cost
III. SUGGESTED NEXT STEPS
Energy Committee
➢ Due diligence on consultants/advisors
➢ Propose consultant to Board of Directors
➢ Due diligence on project costs/equipment to be purchased
• Due diligence on applicable tax credits
• Quantify cost/benefits, establish timing/phasing of project(s)
• Make proposal to Board of Directors
• Public presentation w/Treasurer to Owners of project features, costs/benefits and financing plan
Board of Directors
➢ Engage legal due diligence on Bylaws, applicable tax credits
• Approve/contract consultant/advisor
• Receive advice of consultant/advisor
• Prioritize projects recommended by consultant
• Approve project dimensions/costs
• Approve financing structure from Treasurer
• Propose capital assessment to Owners vote, if necessary
• Approve Annual Budget, including financing of project costs
• Include project in ECA Five Year Plan
• Approve ECA Five Year Plan
Treasurer
➢ Analyze/determine viable financing options
• Receive total project cost
• Solicit debt financing proposals, if necessary
• Design alternative financing structures and propose to Board
• Present Board-approved financing structure to Owners in conjunction with Energy Committee project presentation
• Adjust Annual Budget to take into account financing of project costs
• Include project into ECA Five Year Plan for Board approval
• Negotiate, document and close financing in conjunction with ECA counsel
Owners
• Participate in and assist Energy Committee, Treasurer and Board of Directors in professional due diligence
• Attend presentation regarding project costs/benefits and financing plan and raise issues/questions
• Vote on proposed capital assessment, if necessary
• Review Annual Budget and proposed project financing and raise issues
• Attend Annual Meeting”
Ms. Fridell verbally reviewed each point of the document and briefly explained each to ensure common understanding.
Regarding financing options, Ms. Fridell stated that it is likely that for a large project such as the replacement of windows and balcony doors, a combination of several available funding options will likely be necessary and that all possibilities must be explored and considered.
Mr. Cunningham asked the Board to vote in principle to support the process, emphasizing that it would be suitable for any major project. Discussion ensued.
Mr. Bressler cited another funding option. The Green Briar Condos executed a window replacement project recently. The Board of Green Briar negotiated a bulk rate with the vendor for individual owners to purchase windows over a set period of time. Owners then had the option to purchase the windows at the bulk rate at the time of their choosing. There could also be a requirement that if replacements are not made during the life of ownership, then no sale of a condominium could occur without the windows being replaced Dr.Muller expressed support for Mr. Bressler’s suggestion, citing a similar suggestion from one of the The Elizabeth owners.
Ms. Fridell will add to the process document Mr. Bressler’s individual funding option and other edits requested by Board members.
(R) Mr. Axelrad moved, Dr. Muller seconded, to approve as amended, and as a general practice, the due diligence decision-making process outlined by Ms. Fridell for execution of major projects. The motion passed unanimously.
b. Lobby horizontal piping: Mr. Horan reported that the lobby horizontal piping project was almost complete. All piping is in place, and the insulation should be completed by February 12, 2010.
c. Emergency generator: Mr. Murdoch reported that there was a bidders’ conference on January 14, 2010, and final bids were due January 22. Two bidders requested an extension until January 27. Once all bids have been received, members of the Board will convene to review the proposal with bid comparisons.
d. Garbage room light sensors: Mr. Murdoch reported that there had been a significant reduction in gas and water usage in the previous two months. He has added to the Management Report a utility consumption chart comparing usage from 2007 to the present. Dr. Muller asked Mr. Horan to explain the light sensors in the garbage rooms. Mr. Horan reported that motion sensors had been installed in the garbage rooms to save energy consumption. The light will stay on as long as there is movement in the room.
e. Lobby renovation project: Ms. Barth reported that last week, Hartman Design Group completed work on documents to submit to the County and contractors. The designs have already been sent to the architect for review. The architect has two weeks to review and then will submit to the County. Simultaneously, Hartman is preparing a letter to ten contractors with whom the firm has previously worked. The bidders’ conference will be held in February, and Hartman will conduct a walk through and set a date for bids to be returned. The hope is that both the County approval and the bidding process will be completed in early March. Hartman has worked on many similar projects with other communities and reported that contractor bids had all come in lower than expected. A presentation of the design plans to all residents will be made at the end of February or early March.
New Business:
a. Energy Conservation Consulting Firm RFP: Mr. Cunningham reported that at the last meeting the Energy Committee recommended three engineering consulting firms which could be capable of performing the energy conservation analysis for ECA. Mr. Murdoch has prepared RFP with proposal requirements and scope and requested a quick response from bidders. The Energy Committee chair subsequently reported the committee had been interviewing engineers for the in depth energy conservation study. The committee recommends that bids be solicited from three organizations: Metro Engineering; LS Grimm Consulting Engineers; and Mendoza Rebas. All three contractors indicated they could do the work for $10k-$20k
Mr. Cunningham reported that while the reserve study was helpful, it was largely based on useful life standards for various types of equipment and not generally based specifically on the actual state of ECA’s common elements. As a result, the Board is now seeking a consulting firm to assist the Board in decision making regarding energy consumption and possible replacement of windows and doors. He recommended that the Board approve the RFP. Discussion ensued regarding possible expense which may range from $10K - $20K.
Ms. Fridell requested that part of the consultant’s scope include the possibility of submetering. She stated that ECA’s cost structure is higher than those of other condos because the Association pays for utilities. This presents a “moral hazard” issue in the sense that individual interests are not necessarily aligned to conserve energy costs. The Association as a whole pays for utilities and there is no way to tie individual costs to individual usage. Mr. Axelrad suggested that the cost of submetering may decrease dramatically within a few years due to imminent technological developments. The Board’s consensus was to obtain expert advice on this topic.
Mr. Axelrad had prepared an Analysis of the Window/Door issue and requested that it be included in the Minutes. The Board agreed. Mr. Axelrad’s Analysis, which follows, should be considered to be an integral part of these Minutes:
“ OUTLINE OF Axelrad’s WINDOW/DOOR ANALYSIS
• Some residents have substantial draftiness in their units. This problem has persisted since The Elizabeth was first occupied and has not been corrected.
• Because the problem is not new, the problem is unlikely to be related solely to the age of windows and doors. In fact, as an experiment a long time ago, the Board installed new windows in one unit. The owners report that the new windows did not solve the problem. Whether the original windows and doors are faulty, whether installation is a cause of the problem, whether façade construction is a source of the problem or whether some combination of causes or additional cause for the problem exists is not known.
• The Final Report submitted by Reserve Advisors, Inc. on January 13, 2009 to The Elizabeth Condominium Association does not recommend immediate replacement of windows and doors. This Report proposes that the windows and doors be replaced in steps over a four year period, commencing in FY 2021.
• The Preliminary Energy Audit prepared by American Renovators for The Elizabeth, dated January, 2009, says that the windows and doors “have held up well considering their age.” This document goes on to “recommend that thermal efficient, double-pane insulated glass windows and balcony doors be specified for replacement within the near future.” The document’s projection is that this action could result in $34,303 in annual energy cost savings, at an installation cost of approximately $2,394,800. At present our “Five Year Plan,” used in determining owner monthly fees, does not include any amount for such a cost.
• The Energy Committee arranged a meeting for residents of The Elizabeth to hear the views and suggestions of the Montgomery County official charged with encouraging energy savings. This official opined that replacement of The Elizabeth’s windows and doors at this time would not be cost effective.
• Although I am not a tax lawyer, my understanding is that for last year and the current year, if a person makes energy-conscious purchases that reduce the amount of electricity or other energy resources used in one’s home, a tax credit of up to $1,500 is available. The instructions to IRS form 5695, for claiming this credit, recite that “[i]f you are a member of a condominium management association for a condominium you own . . ., you are treated as having paid your proportionate share of any costs of such association or corporation.” The tax credit is allowed to offset only a fraction of the cost (up to 30 % at most).
• The Elizabeth’s Board should now take every reasonable action to assist unit owners to resolve the drafty apartment problem. The Board should immediately ask management to survey engineering or other competent contractors able to determine the source of the problem and propose effective action, and provide this information to the Board at or before the Board’s next meeting. The Board should then decide to retain a contractor to propose specific options for the Board to select; these options would include options requiring Board action or action, if desired, by the owners of individual units. If the solution warrants expenditure of Condominium Association funds (rather than arranging a fee schedule with a contractor for individual unit owners to utilize if they wish), the Board should take Monique’s Energy Committee presentation into account if it intends to retain a contractor to implement the solution.”
Ms. Kielty asked if the RFP will address the issues raised in this meeting such as the cost/benefit of owners replacing windows individually, as the case of the Green Briar condo mentioned by Mr. Bressler. She expressed concern that the contractor would address the contract differently due to the scale and scope of doing the replacements individually versus collectively.
(R) Ms. Barth moved, Mr. Axelrad seconded, to issue an RFP to three or more companies with two weeks time frame to respond with proposals. The motion passed unanimously.
b. Water detectors: Mr. Horan showed residents a water leakage detector, various models of which ranges from $7-$30, all with similar functions. Zircon Co., offered a bulk rate of $7.00/unit if the Association purchases at least 400 detectors un-packaged. Purchasing 400 would provide for one per Unit with extras to be available for purchase by owners who wanted additional detectors in their apartments.
(R) Mr. Axelrad moved, Ms. Kielty seconded, to authorize management to purchase 600 Zircon water leak detectors at a total cost of $4200 ($7 each); and to distribute one to each unit. The remaining units are to be made available to residents at cost. The motion passed unanimously.
c. Contracts: There were no contracts outstanding that required Board attention.
d. Pet registration form: Dr. Muller thanked Ms. Fridell for providing the proposed form. Ms. Fridell asked Management for details on the plan to execute and manage the database of pet registrations. Mr. Horan stated that he has a list of known pet owners and will send letters with registration form with a date for return request. They also have a camera to take pictures of the pets and their owners. Ms. Barth asked how the weight of animals would be determined. Mr. Cunningham stated that it would be the honor system for residents to report the weight of pets. Ms. Fridell said that Management would have to confirm the pet’s Montgomery County license number and vaccination record. Mr. Horan will edit letter to request that owners bring copies of the license and vaccination record when they have their pictures taken. Mr. Cunningham stated that the letter should go to all owners, not only to known pet owners.
(R) Dr. Muller moved, Mr. Bressler seconded, to approve the pet registration form and proposed registration process. The motion passed, all Board members voting affirmatively except for Mr. Axelrad, who abstained.
e. Landscape design: Mr. Horan reported that Valley Crest put together a proposed landscape design for the front and back of the building complete with computer generated before/after images. Ms. Fridell stated that she understood the plan was to request a second landscape designer plan. Mr. Horan stated that Valley Crest’s designer came to the property and made the proposal. The need to consider a second proposal was discussed. Mr. Bressler commented that the Valley Crest proposal was obtained at no cost but a second proposal can be obtained if the Board desired. Ms. Kielty stated that the proposal process needed to be completed quickly in order to ensure that a plan was in place in time for planting season. Mr. Horan was directed to obtain at least one additional proposal from another landscape design firm and that such proposal ought to include a similar computer generated design for consideration. Mr. Horan agreed to make this request the following day.
(A) The Board directed Mr. Horan to provide the Board with a list of all landscaping proposals received with a list of each contractor’s proposed plantings; and to include his recommendation.
(R) Ms. Barth moved, Mr. Bressler seconded, to direct management to obtain second bid at a cost of no more than $750. The motion passed unanimously.
Ms. Kielty noted that in some cases there seems to be a communication breakdown in terms of who is responsible for taking follow-up actions – e.g., committees, the Board and/or the Management. Mr. Murdoch stated that it is Management’s function to facilitate the committees in the performance of their functions as assigned by the Board. He stated that Management can equally assist committees with RFPs and due diligence as it does for the Board.
f. Auditor proposal: Mr. Cunningham reported that the Board received a proposal from Deleon & Stang, ECA’s current auditor, for the FY 2010 audit at a cost of $12,500. Ms. Fridell asked Management to research how long the firm had been conducting the Association’s audits. She mentioned Sarbanes Oxley requirements that require audit firms be changed periodically; however, there would be a benefit to maintaining D&S for continuity since this will be L&N’s first audit with ECA. It is expected that Treasurer Fridell will provide further guidance on this point.
Committee Reports:
Energy Committee: Discussed earlier in these minutes.
Social Committee: Ms. Barth reported that the Holiday Party had been a success. Mr. Murdoch reported that the financials reflect that the Social Committee is over budget for the month; however this is only due to timing difference for the month and is not expected to be the case for the year. Ms. Barth reported that they were actually under budget by $300 for the holiday party. She stated that the only upcoming event planned is for the presentation of the renovations in late February or March.
Dr. Muller reported that he has monitored the TV room and found it to be used frequently but not in a disruptive manner.
Election Committee: Mr. Cunningham reported that the Board had appointed a committee to look into the election process and the process for identifying new candidates. The committee has met but has not yet made its recommendations to the Board.
Fitness Committee: Ms. Kielty reported that last month the Board voted to ask Hartman Design Group develop plans for Exercise Room. Hartman will be out in the next few weeks to develop a design for the Exercise room.
Mr. Murdoch formally apologized for the lateness of the Management Report this month. He stated that he and Ms. Fridell had been working on correcting the financial statements, and it took some time to get the final version of the financials from L&N Accounting.
He also reported on the change to a new bank for ECA’s lockbox account. L&N is moving all lockbox banking services from BB&T to Community Association Bank (CAB), effective April 1, 2010. He stated that assessments collection for April, May and June will go to CAB. Some of the advantages of CAB are that it specializes in association banking services; facilitates bill payer systems; and pays interest on lockbox account balances. He stated that owners will receive a new coupon book for April, May and June 2010 condo fee payments. Owners who pay via coupon will simply need to send payment to CAB with the new coupons.If residents use their bank’s bill payer system, they will need to instruct their banks to send payments to the new account at CAB. Changes in direct debit payments will be handled by L&N with no action required on the part of the residents who have their condo fee payments debited automatically by ECA.
Comments from the floor:
-A resident asked about Green Briar’s handling of their window replacement project. She expressed concern that if The Elizabeth followed a similar plan, it could violate the bylaws; it could result in a situation where only some windows have been replaced and others had not. She also expressed concern that if some windows were replaced by owners and others opted to wait, the same style of window may not be available at a later time. Mr. Cunningham stated that before any plan is approved, the Board will submit it to counsel to ensure that it meets the bylaws.
-The resident also asked if L&N could be of assistance in large projects as discussed in Ms. Fridell’s plan since L&N has likely worked with other communities on similar projects. Mr. Murdoch stated that L&N can provide advice and recommendations
.
-The resident also commented on submetering. Mr. Cunningham stated that such questions were best directed to the energy-efficiency consulting engineer once a firm is selected.
-A resident asked if Management could have a sign up sheet for water detectors to ensure that owners who want more than one are able to reserve them and to ensure that the amount ordered will accommodate demand. Mr. Cunningham agreed and asked Mr. Horan to ask the contractor if it would be willing to make additional units available at the same price at a later date if it became necessary to order 200 or 300 more.
-A resident asked about the process for window replacements if the individual option is chosen. She asked if the owner would be responsible for paying for the scaffolding, etc. Mr. Cunningham stated that it would be a question for the consulting engineer. Mr. Bressler stated that if the individual option were chosen, it would likely be done by tier, and residents would have a set timeframe to opt in.
-A resident expressed concern that the tax credit for energy improvements may only be applicable to those improvements which are completed in 2010. Brief discussion ensued regarding definition of cost benefit as it relates to the window replacement project.
-A resident suggested that comments from the floor be moved to the beginning of the meeting.
-A resident expressed concern regarding the individual option for window replacement. He stated that he had spoken to a contractor who suggested that even if a resident replaced a window, the window would have to be replaced again when the whole tier was replaced because of structural issues.
-A resident asked what would happen regarding common area windows if the individual option was chosen.
The resident also asked about the replacement of the balcony doors on Tier 14 due to the soffits (the underside of a building).
-A resident reported that she heard a continual loud grinding noise in her unit. The issue has been reported to management.
-A resident expressed concern about the relationship between wind/temperature problems and leakages because some of the balcony doors leak. Mr. Horan stated that some balconies slope towards the building rather than away from it and cause water to run back into the unit instead of washing away.
-A resident asked about residents who are currently replacing their door locks. She asked if the locks would have to be changed again at the time of the refurbishment project. Mr. Cunningham stated that one reason for the delay was to ensure consensus between the designer and the future availability of the same model of locks. He also stated that he felt it was the Board’s responsibility to ensure equitability.
Adjournment: The President adjourned the meeting at 9:45 p.m.
The initial draft of the minutes, upon which these minutes are based, was prepared by Rebekah Hutton of On the Record.
Respectfully submitted,
Jeffrey Axelrad, Board Secretary
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Summary of January 2010 Elizabeth Condo Board Meeting
Present at the meeting: Woody Cunningham, Jeffrey Axelrad, Judi Barth, Charles Bressler, Monique Fridell, Alexandra Kielty, Al Muller, Scott Murdoch, Mike Horan, recording secretary.
PRESIDENT’S REPORT
--ECA has reduced use of gas, electric, water. The figures show about same usage as last year. Improvements to electrical systems have helped. We haven’t seen the peak use yet. That happens in February and March. We are below budget at this time. Scott Murdoch will provide a two-year analysis of energy use. [Note: Auditor’s Report made in the December Board meeting said that for 2009 we were notably over budget by 19 percent.]
--We want to bring on board a consulting firm to evaluate our current systems. Need approval. It will include a field (onsite) inspection of windows and balcony door evaluation.
TREASURER’S REPORT
--February 2 Treasurer Monique Fridell will discuss the new audit report.
--She asked for volunteers for help in identifying whether fixed assets listed in our inventory have been fully depreciated. This will respond to Auditor’s Report made in December and answer the question about what has been fully depreciated.
--Treasurer discussed a process for undertaking such projects as window replacement. She called it a possible roadmap for how to achieve a major project.
Key Items:
• What do the bylaws say about assessments?
• Evaluating whether benefits outweigh the cost. [This isn’t explicitly a dollars and cents evaluation. This would include intangibles.]
• 75% of owners have to agree on an assessment.
• Annual budget – can we afford to pay interest, does management have the capability to handle this project, the timing, size, urgency, the staging of such a project, availability of applicable tax credits,
• Interest rates, availability of credit --- we can get money since some groundwork has been done, the structure of the deal [percent interest and payback] and the collateral needed, we need to look into Federal and State/County assistance, and we need to keep open mind.
• Need a public presentation to get owner buy in.
• Design a financing structure.
• 5-year plan needs to be updated.
• Work with legal counsel for financing.
• Responsibilities of owners.
Jeffrey Axelrad suggested if we can make owners responsible for paying for window/door replacement then would not the number of steps in the process be reduced?
Bressler suggested that owners be given the option to replace their windows at their own cost. He said the Greenbriar on Mass Ave in DC did that. He said this would avoid the assessment and need to get 75% buy in. Greenbriar owners would be given a waiver to replace windows at a later time. He suggested that we let anyone who wants to replace their windows and pay now, pay at a reduced price (it costs less to do in bulk), but for the other residents who wish to defer replacing windows and balcony doors, we get something signed that says that upon their death or the sale of the apartment, the windows and balcony doors will be replaced. [Note: later discussion about doing piecemeal window/door replacement would result in prohibitive costs to individuals doing replacement, major disruptions to residents over a much longer period of time, and windows and doors that would not be the same as technology changed over the years.]
MOTION: Approved the Treasurer’s process for major project.
OLD BUSINESS
Piping project: to be finished Feb 12.
Renovation: Hartmann Group completed documents. Need to pass inspection by Montgomery County. Bidders conference in February. Presentation to the owners in last week of February or early March.
Lock Replacement: Work will start the week of February 8. [For people who want to disable old locks because they already have a deadbolt that will cost $145.]
NEW BUSINESS
Energy RFP: hands-on field inspection of our equipment to see what needs to be replaced, when. This would be major systems (i.e. heating and cooling, windows/doors, energy usage, etc.) This will go into the 5-year plan. There was also a request to look at sub-metering/remote sensoring. Energy committee has gotten the names of three consultant firms to whom they will send the RFP. [RFP was referred to in the President’s Report.]
Judi Barth suggested that the ECA is bumping up against a deadline involving tax credits and technology that is failing, including our McQuay units. Ms. Barth asked for a two-week turnaround on answering the RFP. She wants the Board to be able to vote on a consulting firm at the next Board meeting. She said she doesn’t want to waste any more time—there would be only 10 months left to get tax credits.
MOTION: Approved RFP to get Engineering consultant.
Water detectors: The Association would buy 600; give one free of cost to each unit. Additional water detectors would cost owners at $7 each. There will be a signup [The detectors emit a loud noise and so someone has to be home to hear it.]
MOTION: Approved purchase of water detectors.
Pet Registration: Moving ahead with pet registration. Cover letter must go to everyone in condo. Mike Horan has a camera to take photos of the pet owner with his or her pet if the owners cannot provide photos. Monique Fridell instructed Mike Horan that owners provide documentation about pet inoculations.
MOTION: Approved moving ahead with pet registration.
Landscaping: still up in the air. Bressler turned design over to onsite manager Mike Horan who just went to the maintenance landscaper for a free proposal.
MOTION: Approved moving ahead to get a third proposal from a landscape designer.
Auditors: There was a general discussion about hiring new auditors, which is a good general business practice to employ new auditors after an extended period of time.
Exercise Room: The Exercise Committee continues to explore obtaining new equipment.
PRESIDENT’S REPORT
--ECA has reduced use of gas, electric, water. The figures show about same usage as last year. Improvements to electrical systems have helped. We haven’t seen the peak use yet. That happens in February and March. We are below budget at this time. Scott Murdoch will provide a two-year analysis of energy use. [Note: Auditor’s Report made in the December Board meeting said that for 2009 we were notably over budget by 19 percent.]
--We want to bring on board a consulting firm to evaluate our current systems. Need approval. It will include a field (onsite) inspection of windows and balcony door evaluation.
TREASURER’S REPORT
--February 2 Treasurer Monique Fridell will discuss the new audit report.
--She asked for volunteers for help in identifying whether fixed assets listed in our inventory have been fully depreciated. This will respond to Auditor’s Report made in December and answer the question about what has been fully depreciated.
--Treasurer discussed a process for undertaking such projects as window replacement. She called it a possible roadmap for how to achieve a major project.
Key Items:
• What do the bylaws say about assessments?
• Evaluating whether benefits outweigh the cost. [This isn’t explicitly a dollars and cents evaluation. This would include intangibles.]
• 75% of owners have to agree on an assessment.
• Annual budget – can we afford to pay interest, does management have the capability to handle this project, the timing, size, urgency, the staging of such a project, availability of applicable tax credits,
• Interest rates, availability of credit --- we can get money since some groundwork has been done, the structure of the deal [percent interest and payback] and the collateral needed, we need to look into Federal and State/County assistance, and we need to keep open mind.
• Need a public presentation to get owner buy in.
• Design a financing structure.
• 5-year plan needs to be updated.
• Work with legal counsel for financing.
• Responsibilities of owners.
Jeffrey Axelrad suggested if we can make owners responsible for paying for window/door replacement then would not the number of steps in the process be reduced?
Bressler suggested that owners be given the option to replace their windows at their own cost. He said the Greenbriar on Mass Ave in DC did that. He said this would avoid the assessment and need to get 75% buy in. Greenbriar owners would be given a waiver to replace windows at a later time. He suggested that we let anyone who wants to replace their windows and pay now, pay at a reduced price (it costs less to do in bulk), but for the other residents who wish to defer replacing windows and balcony doors, we get something signed that says that upon their death or the sale of the apartment, the windows and balcony doors will be replaced. [Note: later discussion about doing piecemeal window/door replacement would result in prohibitive costs to individuals doing replacement, major disruptions to residents over a much longer period of time, and windows and doors that would not be the same as technology changed over the years.]
MOTION: Approved the Treasurer’s process for major project.
OLD BUSINESS
Piping project: to be finished Feb 12.
Renovation: Hartmann Group completed documents. Need to pass inspection by Montgomery County. Bidders conference in February. Presentation to the owners in last week of February or early March.
Lock Replacement: Work will start the week of February 8. [For people who want to disable old locks because they already have a deadbolt that will cost $145.]
NEW BUSINESS
Energy RFP: hands-on field inspection of our equipment to see what needs to be replaced, when. This would be major systems (i.e. heating and cooling, windows/doors, energy usage, etc.) This will go into the 5-year plan. There was also a request to look at sub-metering/remote sensoring. Energy committee has gotten the names of three consultant firms to whom they will send the RFP. [RFP was referred to in the President’s Report.]
Judi Barth suggested that the ECA is bumping up against a deadline involving tax credits and technology that is failing, including our McQuay units. Ms. Barth asked for a two-week turnaround on answering the RFP. She wants the Board to be able to vote on a consulting firm at the next Board meeting. She said she doesn’t want to waste any more time—there would be only 10 months left to get tax credits.
MOTION: Approved RFP to get Engineering consultant.
Water detectors: The Association would buy 600; give one free of cost to each unit. Additional water detectors would cost owners at $7 each. There will be a signup [The detectors emit a loud noise and so someone has to be home to hear it.]
MOTION: Approved purchase of water detectors.
Pet Registration: Moving ahead with pet registration. Cover letter must go to everyone in condo. Mike Horan has a camera to take photos of the pet owner with his or her pet if the owners cannot provide photos. Monique Fridell instructed Mike Horan that owners provide documentation about pet inoculations.
MOTION: Approved moving ahead with pet registration.
Landscaping: still up in the air. Bressler turned design over to onsite manager Mike Horan who just went to the maintenance landscaper for a free proposal.
MOTION: Approved moving ahead to get a third proposal from a landscape designer.
Auditors: There was a general discussion about hiring new auditors, which is a good general business practice to employ new auditors after an extended period of time.
Exercise Room: The Exercise Committee continues to explore obtaining new equipment.
Saturday, January 23, 2010
December 2009 Minutes of ECA Board Meeting
THE ELIZABETH CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION
4601 North Park Avenue
Chevy Chase, MD 20815
Minutes of Board of Directors Meeting December 21, 2009
Board Present:
Woody Cunningham ....................President
Alexandria Kielty .........................Vice President
Monique Fridell ...........................Treasurer
Judith Barth ................................Assistant Treasurer
Jeffrey Axelrad ............................Secretary
Charles Bressler ...........................Director
Dr. Alfred Muller .........................Director
Others present:
Scott Murdoch ............Community Manager, Legum & Norman
Tracy Geiger ................Deleon & Stang
Call to Order: Mr. Cunningham called the meeting to order at 7:35 pm.
Approval of Minutes:
MOTION
Dr. Muller moved, Charles Bressler seconded, to approve the November 16, 2009, meeting minutes. The motion passed unanimously.
President’s Report
Woody Cunningham thanked Judi Barth for her efforts in rearranging the holiday party in light of the snow storm. Woody Cunningham thanked the staff for rising to the occasion and taking the initiative in doing what needed to be done, commenting that we are fortunate to have such dedicated personnel.
Woody Cunningham mentioned that, at the last meeting, he raised the topic of appointing a committee to deal with nominations and elections and how we can encourage more of our qualified residents to run for the Board. The committee will consist of Jerry Feldman, Peg Downey, Sharon Bobb, and Karren Alenier.
Auditor’s Report
Tracy Geiger, audit manager of Deleon and Stang was present to report on, and answer questions, about the FY 2009 audited financial statements, which were to be presented to the Board for approval. We received an unqualified, “clean” opinion. Monique Fridell will schedule a presentation, anticipated to take place during January, 2010, to review the audited financials after they are approved and distributed to owners.
Tracy Geiger commented that it takes a lot of work to transition from self-management to a management company and it’s nice to hear that the work is progressing. She said that it is good that ECA received an unqualified audit opinion.
We had more payables during FY 2009. It was impressive that delinquencies were only up a little as of FYE 2009. Ms. Geiger emphasized that this compares favorably to delinquency levels at other condominiums.
Also, from a financial standpoint, our reserve funds look “pretty good.” Ms. Geiger discussed expense fluctuation. Electricity, however, was notably over budget, a 19 per cent increase, compared to a FY 2007 to 2008 increase of 6 per cent. Woody Cunningham commented that this was primarily due to rate increases.
Ms. Geiger said that the “new normal” for timing of the audit report will be this time of year, after explaining the procedures to be followed to prepare this report. Ms. Geiger responded to questions about delinquencies by saying our rate is below the industry norm, which is 3 per cent of total annual assessments. Monique Fridell advised that ECA’s delinquency rate has risen since FYE 2009 and currently is approximately 1 per cent.
Responding to Monique Fridell’s question about clearing depreciated fixed assets from ECA’s fixed asset inventory prior to the renovation, Ms Geiger explained that many of the items on ECA’s fixed asset list may not even exist anymore, and that prior to the renovation ECA may want to match the current inventory to items on the fixed asset list in order to clarify this record prior to taking on more fixed assets tied to the renovation. She stated that this would take a small team approximately one week of work to trace every item on ECA’s fixed asset list. There was considerable discussion of parking space depreciation. Ms. Geiger observed that there is no advantage to maximizing depreciation expense for condominium associations.
There being no further questions, Woody Cunningham excused Ms. Geiger, who departed.
Motion: Al Muller moved to approve the audit report and Judi Barth seconded this Motion. Passed unanimously.
Charles Bressler asked Woody Cunningham whether the Nomination and Elections Committee members were precluded from running for the Board. Woody Cunningham responded that he had discussed this explicitly and each member of the Committee understands that he/she can not remain on the Committee if he/she intends to run for the Board.
Treasurer’s Report
Monique Fridell reported that we had received an Opinion of Counsel dated 12/18/09 from Lerch Early confirming that the Bylaws provide the Board with the ability to undertake borrowings, if necessary, to fund ECA’s capital expenditures. This opinion was sought as a result of the approved motion from the November 2009 Regular Meeting.
Monique Fridell called the Board Members attention to the proposed “Reserve Expenses and Investments Processing Procedures” dated December 7, 2009 which she had prepared in conjunction with the Community Manager and which had been sent previously to each Board member. Monique Fridell provided an explanation of the proposed procedures. Monique Fridell had previously provided a copy of the proposed procedures to each Board Member. Judi Barth asked about paragraph two’s requirement that invoices be held until the end of the month. Scott Murdoch said that there should be no undue delay and, when Judi Barth expressed concern about late fees and interest penalties, Mr. Murdoch said he would endeavor to avoid late fees. Monique Fridell proposed to change paragraph two by adding “closing on or about the 22nd of each month.” Al Muller said that the names of individuals should be removed from the procedures and Judi Barth said “secretary” should also be deleted. It was also observed that “and” should be inserted between the two required signatures.
Motion: With the specified changes, Al Muller moved that the procedures be approved and Alexandra Kielty seconded the motion. Approved unanimously.
Monique Fridell then summarized the due diligence/analysis provided to Board members in her memo dated 10/16/09 regarding line of credit options (see attached memo). Jeffrey Axelrad asked whether he was correct in stating that approval of a line of credit does not mean that the Board is committing to borrowing any sum. Monique Fridell responded that this is correct, there is no commitment or intention to borrow, the purpose of the line of credit is to backup liquidity as reserves are drawn down to pay for the renovation. Monique Fridell further explained that a fee must be paid for obtaining a committed line of credit. In response to a question from Judi Barth, Monique Fridell said that any Condominium funds serving as collateral for a line of credit will continue to be fully insured by the FDIC. Al Muller asked Monique Fridell which option she viewed most favorably. She replied that the Morgan Stanley product, while requiring higher levels of collateral, offered more competitive pricing and no transaction fees.
Motion: Because of its lower costs, Al Muller moved that we obtain the line of Credit from Morgan Stanley, Judi Barth seconded this motion. Approved unanimously.
Management Report
Scott Murdoch said horizontal pipe replacement is proceeding. The emergency generator bids are due by January 20.2010. Turning to the architectural services contract. Scott Murdoch obtained two bids, from Preston Partnership Group for a total of $27,500 and NSA for a total of $15,100, both of which have been provided to each Board member. Alexandra Kielty asked about looking at replacement of pipes in the exercise room. Woody Cunningham expressed concern about the potential additional expense.
Motion: Judi Barth moved that NSA’s bid be accepted; Alexandra Kielty seconded. Passed unanimously.
New Business
Woody Cunningham said that because of the good results of the lighting project in the garage he proposes to extend to the light replacement contract to offices and other common areas. Jeffrey Axelrad asked whether the existing contract was still in progress, as far as stairwells are concerned. Woody Cunningham said it was.
Motion: Al Muller moved that the proposed contract with Derick Lighting to this effect in the amount of $12,513 be approved. Charles Bressler seconded. Approved unanimously
Woody Cunningham says that Mike Horan will report in the future about the potential for purchasing a bulk order water detectors for owners to purchase for use in their units.
Alexandra Kielty spoke about fitness room improvements. Alexandra Kielty spoke of an initial space planning contract for the exercise area.
Motion: Alexandra Kielty moved that we approve the $2600 Ad-On Services contract with Hartman Design Group. Monique Fridell seconded the motion. Judi Barth commented, in response to a query, that the proposal would not interfere with renovation. The motion passed unanimously.
Committee Reports
Landscaping: Charles Bressler reported nothing has been done yet as far as seeking additional landscape design contractors. In response to Judi Barth’s question, Charles Bressler said he would seek at least one additional bid by the next Board meeting which will require additional funding for the proposal. Jeffrey Axelrad commented that the Board needs to consider all potential bids before selecting a landscape design firm. Charles Bressler agreed. Addition discussion ensued concerning landscaping maintenance.
There was discussion of snow removal. Woody Cunningham said that we do have a contract with the same contractor who does the work for the Village. Al Muller made the point that the snow removal contract should be added to the list of contracts provided to the Board. Monique Fridell asked why the contractor did not do driveway snow removal promptly over the weekend snowstorm. After discussion, it seemed apparent that the contractor did not notify the plow driver to plow our driveway. Scott Murdoch commented that the contractor had been contacted on Friday December 18th by Management in advance of the snowstorm.
Energy: Joan Rosenbach reported that the Committee met on December 16 and submitted recommendations to Woody Cunningham regarding three engineering firms that could provide energy efficiency consulting services to ECA and recommended that the Board write an RFP for them so that a detailed energy audit and could be put out for bids by January 2010. David Drazin will be heading the Energy Committee during Joan’s absence between January and April 2010. Joan emphasized the potential value of “Cash for Caulkers” proposed legislation which may provide incentives for all kinds of energy efficiency purchases. She suggested asking our attorney to keep us apprised of this legislation and for an opinion on whether it could apply to condominiums. Joan also reminded people that CFL’s make wonderful stocking stuffers. Jeffrey Axelrad asked about caulking windows and doors and suggested that management be tasked with performing a survey of how many apartments are affected by a draft problem so that the potential for caulking to ameliorate it be ascertained. Woody Cunningham said that management should perform this task.
Social Committee: Judi Barth reported that due to Peg Downey’s leadership 248 boxes and additional gifts were supplied to So Others May Eat (SOME) for needy persons. Judi Barth also reminded everyone about our December 22 Holiday Party, rescheduled due to the weekend snowstorm.
Renovation Committee: Judi Barth reported that the proposed designs are being tweaked. The County’s approvals will be sought during January and are expected to take about one month. We will then go out to bid to at least ten contractors, all of which have partnered with the Hartmann Design Group in the past. There will then be a bidders’ conference. Judi Barth hopes that a contractor will be selected and on board by March 1 but it will probably be April 1 for the work to commence and then it is expected to take six or seven months to complete the work. We will seek two types of bids: the project as a whole, and individual pieces such as party room, bathrooms, etc. This way we may be able to benefit from volume work. Judi Barth and the committee have seen some of the finishes. Judi Barth says that Hartmann plans to make the areas inviting and to have functional (not hardwall divided) areas within the west lobby. Judi Barth provided additional, general descriptive commentary in the course of her presentation. She hopes that photographs and samples will be available for review at the February 2010 Board meeting.
Monique Fridell asked whether the Board has approved the plans that are going to the County. Judi Barth said that the June 2009 Board meeting amounted to approval. Jeffrey Axelrad reviewed and read relevant portions of the June Regular Meeting and Executive minutes and commented that no Board approval was obtained. Monique Fridell raised the issue of whether the Board actually approved a design. Woody Cunningham suggested that approval is a “technicality.” Charles Bressler said approval is not a technicality and that he has reservations about portions of the proposed designed. A discussion of details of the design ensued. Alexandra Kielty then commented that we must have approved Hartmann going forward and Monique Fridell reiterated that approval was for the HDG contract but that it seems that no vote on the proposed design product was taken. Jeffrey Axelrad said that Judi Barth’s comments about the June minutes not being accurate were not well taken in light of the care and attention each member of the Board typically gives to the draft minutes, which was followed by Board approval of the final minutes. Judi Barth said discussion took place at the Executive Session. Jeffrey Axelrad said the Executive session minutes did not reflect that and he had consistently objected, along with Al Muller, to Executive Sessions where such public matters were discussed. Judi Barth said that the Board had ignored the law for years. Jeffrey Axelrad reiterated that the Board must follow the law and, in his view, Judi Barth’s statements were not well taken. Jeffrey Axelrad also commented that he had said that he previously had asked that the Board be given options that meet its prior commitment not to exceed $1.2 million. Monique Fridell then commented that approval must follow careful attention to each detail in the plan before a vote is taken. Al Muller said that he thought that there had been some opportunity to object in June 2009. There was considerable discussion between Charles Bressler and Judi Barth about the esthetics and appropriateness of a dry bar. Woody Cunningham discussed the order in which renovation may proceed.
Motion: Al Muller moved that the design plans Judi Barth has provided at tonight’s meeting, previously presented to the Board at the June 2009 Executive session, be approved; further, that we move forward in the contractual process including obtaining bids. Alexandra Kielty seconded the motion. Considerable discussion ensued with all Board members participating. The motion carried 6-1 with Charles Bressler voting against the motion.
Monique Fridell said that it is important to observe that any future changes to the existing design plan will cost us money. Judi Barth reiterated a point that Woody Cunningham had made earlier in the discussion that, while we can decide not to do all or a portion of the refurbishment for which we have plans, we own the plans and can use them in the future.
Comments from the Floor
A resident asked whether there was an architect on any of the committees working on refurbishment. After he was informed that Alan Lockman had been a member of the refurbishment committee before moving out of the Elizabeth earlier this year, he commented he wanted to see plans he could understand and a representative from Hartmann to be available to take questions. The resident was informed by Judi Barth and Woody Cunningham that his comments were consistent with the Board’s intent and that these presentations were planned for early 2010.
A resident commented that residents should be more involved in the refurbishment process and that the Board needs more quality communication with owners.
A resident asked the Front Desk personnel be requested to call her unit when visitors are on the way to apartments. Monique Fridell noted that this has been a recurring problem over several years. Woody Cunningham concurred and repeated that this is established Board Policy. Management was asked to ensure that this is done consistently in the future.
A resident asked about the management report not being made available this month. Woody Cunningham responded that this was a “one off” event due to the Site Manager’s absence on Friday and the report will be made available very soon. It was emphasized that copies of the Management report are ordinarily available at the Front Desk prior to the Board meeting. The resident then joined in the comments about the plans for refurbishment that two prior residents had made. Some discussion of the lack of availability of all of the technical drawings ensued.
A resident commented that she is a member of the refurbishment committee interfacing with Hartmann and explained some of the procedures.
A resident commented that it’s unfortunate to see the disrespect Board members show each other. She commented that the discussions about a dry bar were too extended. The resident further commented that the condition of the building at present is “deplorable.” The resident also commented that the landscaping needs work and that the Christmas decorations seemed timid. The resident further commented that the Board and its committees are entrusted with making decisions for The Elizabeth and residents sometimes do not appreciate that necessary fact.
A resident commented about extensive dust due to façade work on the 14th and 15th Tiers. She made the point that other buildings’ contractors place a protective shield to avoid dust entering units and our contractor did not. She requested that the contractor be requested to clean up the dirt and dust in affected units. Woody Cunningham asked the resident to discuss this problem with management.
Woody Cunningham adjourned the meeting at 10:22 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Jeffrey Axelrad, Board Secretary
4601 North Park Avenue
Chevy Chase, MD 20815
Minutes of Board of Directors Meeting December 21, 2009
Board Present:
Woody Cunningham ....................President
Alexandria Kielty .........................Vice President
Monique Fridell ...........................Treasurer
Judith Barth ................................Assistant Treasurer
Jeffrey Axelrad ............................Secretary
Charles Bressler ...........................Director
Dr. Alfred Muller .........................Director
Others present:
Scott Murdoch ............Community Manager, Legum & Norman
Tracy Geiger ................Deleon & Stang
Call to Order: Mr. Cunningham called the meeting to order at 7:35 pm.
Approval of Minutes:
MOTION
Dr. Muller moved, Charles Bressler seconded, to approve the November 16, 2009, meeting minutes. The motion passed unanimously.
President’s Report
Woody Cunningham thanked Judi Barth for her efforts in rearranging the holiday party in light of the snow storm. Woody Cunningham thanked the staff for rising to the occasion and taking the initiative in doing what needed to be done, commenting that we are fortunate to have such dedicated personnel.
Woody Cunningham mentioned that, at the last meeting, he raised the topic of appointing a committee to deal with nominations and elections and how we can encourage more of our qualified residents to run for the Board. The committee will consist of Jerry Feldman, Peg Downey, Sharon Bobb, and Karren Alenier.
Auditor’s Report
Tracy Geiger, audit manager of Deleon and Stang was present to report on, and answer questions, about the FY 2009 audited financial statements, which were to be presented to the Board for approval. We received an unqualified, “clean” opinion. Monique Fridell will schedule a presentation, anticipated to take place during January, 2010, to review the audited financials after they are approved and distributed to owners.
Tracy Geiger commented that it takes a lot of work to transition from self-management to a management company and it’s nice to hear that the work is progressing. She said that it is good that ECA received an unqualified audit opinion.
We had more payables during FY 2009. It was impressive that delinquencies were only up a little as of FYE 2009. Ms. Geiger emphasized that this compares favorably to delinquency levels at other condominiums.
Also, from a financial standpoint, our reserve funds look “pretty good.” Ms. Geiger discussed expense fluctuation. Electricity, however, was notably over budget, a 19 per cent increase, compared to a FY 2007 to 2008 increase of 6 per cent. Woody Cunningham commented that this was primarily due to rate increases.
Ms. Geiger said that the “new normal” for timing of the audit report will be this time of year, after explaining the procedures to be followed to prepare this report. Ms. Geiger responded to questions about delinquencies by saying our rate is below the industry norm, which is 3 per cent of total annual assessments. Monique Fridell advised that ECA’s delinquency rate has risen since FYE 2009 and currently is approximately 1 per cent.
Responding to Monique Fridell’s question about clearing depreciated fixed assets from ECA’s fixed asset inventory prior to the renovation, Ms Geiger explained that many of the items on ECA’s fixed asset list may not even exist anymore, and that prior to the renovation ECA may want to match the current inventory to items on the fixed asset list in order to clarify this record prior to taking on more fixed assets tied to the renovation. She stated that this would take a small team approximately one week of work to trace every item on ECA’s fixed asset list. There was considerable discussion of parking space depreciation. Ms. Geiger observed that there is no advantage to maximizing depreciation expense for condominium associations.
There being no further questions, Woody Cunningham excused Ms. Geiger, who departed.
Motion: Al Muller moved to approve the audit report and Judi Barth seconded this Motion. Passed unanimously.
Charles Bressler asked Woody Cunningham whether the Nomination and Elections Committee members were precluded from running for the Board. Woody Cunningham responded that he had discussed this explicitly and each member of the Committee understands that he/she can not remain on the Committee if he/she intends to run for the Board.
Treasurer’s Report
Monique Fridell reported that we had received an Opinion of Counsel dated 12/18/09 from Lerch Early confirming that the Bylaws provide the Board with the ability to undertake borrowings, if necessary, to fund ECA’s capital expenditures. This opinion was sought as a result of the approved motion from the November 2009 Regular Meeting.
Monique Fridell called the Board Members attention to the proposed “Reserve Expenses and Investments Processing Procedures” dated December 7, 2009 which she had prepared in conjunction with the Community Manager and which had been sent previously to each Board member. Monique Fridell provided an explanation of the proposed procedures. Monique Fridell had previously provided a copy of the proposed procedures to each Board Member. Judi Barth asked about paragraph two’s requirement that invoices be held until the end of the month. Scott Murdoch said that there should be no undue delay and, when Judi Barth expressed concern about late fees and interest penalties, Mr. Murdoch said he would endeavor to avoid late fees. Monique Fridell proposed to change paragraph two by adding “closing on or about the 22nd of each month.” Al Muller said that the names of individuals should be removed from the procedures and Judi Barth said “secretary” should also be deleted. It was also observed that “and” should be inserted between the two required signatures.
Motion: With the specified changes, Al Muller moved that the procedures be approved and Alexandra Kielty seconded the motion. Approved unanimously.
Monique Fridell then summarized the due diligence/analysis provided to Board members in her memo dated 10/16/09 regarding line of credit options (see attached memo). Jeffrey Axelrad asked whether he was correct in stating that approval of a line of credit does not mean that the Board is committing to borrowing any sum. Monique Fridell responded that this is correct, there is no commitment or intention to borrow, the purpose of the line of credit is to backup liquidity as reserves are drawn down to pay for the renovation. Monique Fridell further explained that a fee must be paid for obtaining a committed line of credit. In response to a question from Judi Barth, Monique Fridell said that any Condominium funds serving as collateral for a line of credit will continue to be fully insured by the FDIC. Al Muller asked Monique Fridell which option she viewed most favorably. She replied that the Morgan Stanley product, while requiring higher levels of collateral, offered more competitive pricing and no transaction fees.
Motion: Because of its lower costs, Al Muller moved that we obtain the line of Credit from Morgan Stanley, Judi Barth seconded this motion. Approved unanimously.
Management Report
Scott Murdoch said horizontal pipe replacement is proceeding. The emergency generator bids are due by January 20.2010. Turning to the architectural services contract. Scott Murdoch obtained two bids, from Preston Partnership Group for a total of $27,500 and NSA for a total of $15,100, both of which have been provided to each Board member. Alexandra Kielty asked about looking at replacement of pipes in the exercise room. Woody Cunningham expressed concern about the potential additional expense.
Motion: Judi Barth moved that NSA’s bid be accepted; Alexandra Kielty seconded. Passed unanimously.
New Business
Woody Cunningham said that because of the good results of the lighting project in the garage he proposes to extend to the light replacement contract to offices and other common areas. Jeffrey Axelrad asked whether the existing contract was still in progress, as far as stairwells are concerned. Woody Cunningham said it was.
Motion: Al Muller moved that the proposed contract with Derick Lighting to this effect in the amount of $12,513 be approved. Charles Bressler seconded. Approved unanimously
Woody Cunningham says that Mike Horan will report in the future about the potential for purchasing a bulk order water detectors for owners to purchase for use in their units.
Alexandra Kielty spoke about fitness room improvements. Alexandra Kielty spoke of an initial space planning contract for the exercise area.
Motion: Alexandra Kielty moved that we approve the $2600 Ad-On Services contract with Hartman Design Group. Monique Fridell seconded the motion. Judi Barth commented, in response to a query, that the proposal would not interfere with renovation. The motion passed unanimously.
Committee Reports
Landscaping: Charles Bressler reported nothing has been done yet as far as seeking additional landscape design contractors. In response to Judi Barth’s question, Charles Bressler said he would seek at least one additional bid by the next Board meeting which will require additional funding for the proposal. Jeffrey Axelrad commented that the Board needs to consider all potential bids before selecting a landscape design firm. Charles Bressler agreed. Addition discussion ensued concerning landscaping maintenance.
There was discussion of snow removal. Woody Cunningham said that we do have a contract with the same contractor who does the work for the Village. Al Muller made the point that the snow removal contract should be added to the list of contracts provided to the Board. Monique Fridell asked why the contractor did not do driveway snow removal promptly over the weekend snowstorm. After discussion, it seemed apparent that the contractor did not notify the plow driver to plow our driveway. Scott Murdoch commented that the contractor had been contacted on Friday December 18th by Management in advance of the snowstorm.
Energy: Joan Rosenbach reported that the Committee met on December 16 and submitted recommendations to Woody Cunningham regarding three engineering firms that could provide energy efficiency consulting services to ECA and recommended that the Board write an RFP for them so that a detailed energy audit and could be put out for bids by January 2010. David Drazin will be heading the Energy Committee during Joan’s absence between January and April 2010. Joan emphasized the potential value of “Cash for Caulkers” proposed legislation which may provide incentives for all kinds of energy efficiency purchases. She suggested asking our attorney to keep us apprised of this legislation and for an opinion on whether it could apply to condominiums. Joan also reminded people that CFL’s make wonderful stocking stuffers. Jeffrey Axelrad asked about caulking windows and doors and suggested that management be tasked with performing a survey of how many apartments are affected by a draft problem so that the potential for caulking to ameliorate it be ascertained. Woody Cunningham said that management should perform this task.
Social Committee: Judi Barth reported that due to Peg Downey’s leadership 248 boxes and additional gifts were supplied to So Others May Eat (SOME) for needy persons. Judi Barth also reminded everyone about our December 22 Holiday Party, rescheduled due to the weekend snowstorm.
Renovation Committee: Judi Barth reported that the proposed designs are being tweaked. The County’s approvals will be sought during January and are expected to take about one month. We will then go out to bid to at least ten contractors, all of which have partnered with the Hartmann Design Group in the past. There will then be a bidders’ conference. Judi Barth hopes that a contractor will be selected and on board by March 1 but it will probably be April 1 for the work to commence and then it is expected to take six or seven months to complete the work. We will seek two types of bids: the project as a whole, and individual pieces such as party room, bathrooms, etc. This way we may be able to benefit from volume work. Judi Barth and the committee have seen some of the finishes. Judi Barth says that Hartmann plans to make the areas inviting and to have functional (not hardwall divided) areas within the west lobby. Judi Barth provided additional, general descriptive commentary in the course of her presentation. She hopes that photographs and samples will be available for review at the February 2010 Board meeting.
Monique Fridell asked whether the Board has approved the plans that are going to the County. Judi Barth said that the June 2009 Board meeting amounted to approval. Jeffrey Axelrad reviewed and read relevant portions of the June Regular Meeting and Executive minutes and commented that no Board approval was obtained. Monique Fridell raised the issue of whether the Board actually approved a design. Woody Cunningham suggested that approval is a “technicality.” Charles Bressler said approval is not a technicality and that he has reservations about portions of the proposed designed. A discussion of details of the design ensued. Alexandra Kielty then commented that we must have approved Hartmann going forward and Monique Fridell reiterated that approval was for the HDG contract but that it seems that no vote on the proposed design product was taken. Jeffrey Axelrad said that Judi Barth’s comments about the June minutes not being accurate were not well taken in light of the care and attention each member of the Board typically gives to the draft minutes, which was followed by Board approval of the final minutes. Judi Barth said discussion took place at the Executive Session. Jeffrey Axelrad said the Executive session minutes did not reflect that and he had consistently objected, along with Al Muller, to Executive Sessions where such public matters were discussed. Judi Barth said that the Board had ignored the law for years. Jeffrey Axelrad reiterated that the Board must follow the law and, in his view, Judi Barth’s statements were not well taken. Jeffrey Axelrad also commented that he had said that he previously had asked that the Board be given options that meet its prior commitment not to exceed $1.2 million. Monique Fridell then commented that approval must follow careful attention to each detail in the plan before a vote is taken. Al Muller said that he thought that there had been some opportunity to object in June 2009. There was considerable discussion between Charles Bressler and Judi Barth about the esthetics and appropriateness of a dry bar. Woody Cunningham discussed the order in which renovation may proceed.
Motion: Al Muller moved that the design plans Judi Barth has provided at tonight’s meeting, previously presented to the Board at the June 2009 Executive session, be approved; further, that we move forward in the contractual process including obtaining bids. Alexandra Kielty seconded the motion. Considerable discussion ensued with all Board members participating. The motion carried 6-1 with Charles Bressler voting against the motion.
Monique Fridell said that it is important to observe that any future changes to the existing design plan will cost us money. Judi Barth reiterated a point that Woody Cunningham had made earlier in the discussion that, while we can decide not to do all or a portion of the refurbishment for which we have plans, we own the plans and can use them in the future.
Comments from the Floor
A resident asked whether there was an architect on any of the committees working on refurbishment. After he was informed that Alan Lockman had been a member of the refurbishment committee before moving out of the Elizabeth earlier this year, he commented he wanted to see plans he could understand and a representative from Hartmann to be available to take questions. The resident was informed by Judi Barth and Woody Cunningham that his comments were consistent with the Board’s intent and that these presentations were planned for early 2010.
A resident commented that residents should be more involved in the refurbishment process and that the Board needs more quality communication with owners.
A resident asked the Front Desk personnel be requested to call her unit when visitors are on the way to apartments. Monique Fridell noted that this has been a recurring problem over several years. Woody Cunningham concurred and repeated that this is established Board Policy. Management was asked to ensure that this is done consistently in the future.
A resident asked about the management report not being made available this month. Woody Cunningham responded that this was a “one off” event due to the Site Manager’s absence on Friday and the report will be made available very soon. It was emphasized that copies of the Management report are ordinarily available at the Front Desk prior to the Board meeting. The resident then joined in the comments about the plans for refurbishment that two prior residents had made. Some discussion of the lack of availability of all of the technical drawings ensued.
A resident commented that she is a member of the refurbishment committee interfacing with Hartmann and explained some of the procedures.
A resident commented that it’s unfortunate to see the disrespect Board members show each other. She commented that the discussions about a dry bar were too extended. The resident further commented that the condition of the building at present is “deplorable.” The resident also commented that the landscaping needs work and that the Christmas decorations seemed timid. The resident further commented that the Board and its committees are entrusted with making decisions for The Elizabeth and residents sometimes do not appreciate that necessary fact.
A resident commented about extensive dust due to façade work on the 14th and 15th Tiers. She made the point that other buildings’ contractors place a protective shield to avoid dust entering units and our contractor did not. She requested that the contractor be requested to clean up the dirt and dust in affected units. Woody Cunningham asked the resident to discuss this problem with management.
Woody Cunningham adjourned the meeting at 10:22 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Jeffrey Axelrad, Board Secretary
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Elizabethans Talking About Window/Door Replacement
On Jan 7, 2010, I posted an essay to this blog about the energy crisis concerning leaking windows and balcony doors in The Elizabeth that is costing unit owners huge sums of money. When I notified the associated Elizabeth Condo news group, many people contributed their thoughts on this subject. Most of the conversation boils down to: WE NEED TO REPLACE WINDOWS AND DOORS NOW AND REALIZE THE GOVERNMENT TAX CREDIT BEFORE 2010 IS OVER.
Let me first address those folks concerned with the cost of replacing windows and balcony doors. Also some other issues of how to proceed.
#1 01/08/2010
We should seek simple, efficient solutions before spending millions on new windows. Jeffrey Axelrad
#2 01/08/2010
Please read the Bylaws for Elizabeth to see if the unit owners are responsible for the replacement of the windows and sliding door. As a rule these items are the unit owners cost not the Association.
Thanks, Heidi Theoharis
#3 01/08/2010
Is there a price to do this window replacement? I have been told you cannot reap the benefits of spending large amounts of money on projects like this. What is going to be the per unit assessment? Joanne Dorsey 1720
#4 01/08/2010
I think we all need to know where the money to do this is going to come from. Do we even know if the condo assn gets the tax credit or does each owner get a credit. These are all things that need to be addressed.
--Robin Schattman
#5 01/09/2010
I agree with Jeff.
John Graham 1414
Here are the messages supporting window/door replacement:
#1 01/07/2010
We need new windows . Diana Brosnan
#2 01/07/2010
Ditto
We need badly new windows. We need sliding doors that SLIDE.
Mariko Isomura
#3 01/08/2010
Simple solutions for "fixing" windows in the Elizabeth are not good options.
Why?
--1 Caulking does not help windows where the weather-proofing in the middle of the window has become so old and brittle that wind blow right through the middle of the window.
Think about the heat and cooling that is going out of windows, not to mention the dust and dirt coming through them. Personally I feel disgusted about getting cement dust on my furniture. That's what happened in my apartment when the driveway was deconstructed and fixed two years ago.
--2 Putting plastic over the entire window, makes the window useless when the weather suddenly changes in the winter to a warmer temperature or vice versa in the summer.
Also do we want to look like a slum? Take a look at the outside of our building now. It already doesn't look so good and new windows would sure help make us look like we belong in Chevy Chase.
Let's face it, our windows are over 35 years old. They needed replacing more than 10 years ago. Better window technology is now available and will save us thousands of dollars per year. Ask Maurice Trebach for what his research has
yielded.
This is the time to take advantage of tax credits and hungry contractors who need work. We should not delay another minute. Karren Alenier
#4 01/08/2010
Karren, Right On! You spelled it out beautifully.
Thanks. If not now... When?
JRSalcetti
#5 01/08/2010
Probably 100% of owners on the north side of The Elizabeth agree that we need new windows. I won't apologize for using the heat just about 24/7 for this entire cold spell, and my bedroom is STILL cold!
By the way, a few years ago I tried to find a window company that would fix the problem in my unit. There is no company that does this any longer. It's either the entire building or nothing.
Let's get on with window replacement -- PLEASE!
Helen Soderberg
#6 01/08/2010
Where is the money going to come from for window replacement?
You might also want to ask these questions:
--Who pays for the heating and cooling utility bills in the Elizabeth? Isn’t that ultimately the owners of each unit in the Elizabeth or do you think the cost of heating and cooling is free in the Elizabeth?
--What is the Board of Directors doing to address the problem of window and door replacement in the near future?
--What is the Board of Directors doing to address the money that it will take to pay for window and door replacement?
--What would you do if you were a single family home owner and your windows and door were leaking your heating and cooling to the great outdoors? Would you ignore the problem and continue to pay the outrageous heating and cooling utility bills or would you seek a solution? Might your solution include replacing the old windows and doors?
--if you were a single family home owner and realized you needed to replaced old windows and doors, how would you finance that? Take out a loan? Dip into your savings? Borrow money from your family or friend?
I believe it is time for more unit owners to come to the monthly meetings and learn what the Board of Directors is doing to address everyone’s concerns about running this building. Fiscal responsibility is not only assigned to our Board of Directors but also to everyone who owns a unit here. Karren Alenier
#7 01/08/2010
There’s no question that the windows need replacing. This need has now been discussed for years. One could easily argue that it should rank above refurbishment in terms of priorities. Yet, alas, some refurbishment is also needed. Idealist that I am, I would like to think that doing one does not preclude doing the other—and without either being done halfway.
But what about cost? Cost will surely be an issue, at least in the near term. The cost issue cuts two ways, however: on the one hand, energy expenditures for the building should decline substantially over the long term, with initial savings accruing even in near term; on the other hand, the immediate costs of window replacement will also be substantial. And also to be considered, as Robin Schattman rightly points out, would be any tax savings that might result from window replacement.
There is an urgent need to take a serious look at how all of these costs and savings—including refurbishment—balance out. Options should flow out of some serious and solid thinking. And I don’t think we need to pay thousands of dollars for such thinking.
In a word, we may have cold hands (mine have been cold for days), but let’s not have cold feet. Let’s move forward.
May all soon experience warmer times, and to all a Happy New Year.
Cheers—Jim Jones
#8 01/08/2010
We can invite a large window company to come to the next meeting and do a small presentation on the cost of window replacement per unit. This will be a good base for the calculation and more specific for the type of windows which will be installed. Once the Board has this information they can then have the condominium Bylaw review to be sure that this is cost that the Association has to do plan on in 2011. Please let us know if you need any assistance with it.
Thanks,
Heidi Theoharis
#9 01/08/2010
Heidi, It sounds like a good idea to me. Diana Brosnan
#10 01/08/2010
Karren:
Thanks for the communication. As owner of 1601 I totally support this effort.
Brad Bickford
#11 01/08/2010
I totally agree with Jim Jones. The windows need to be replaced. The wind blows right through the middle of my sliding doors. A note of caution, however: the issue needs to be discussed transparently (no pun intended), and the financing costs examined and explained carefully and publicly.
I have to add that I have resided in Chevy Chase since 1971 and lived in The Elizabeth since 2005. I love it here. To me the place looks wonderful, it has a superb staff, and all the neighbors I have come to know are grand peoople.
Negativity should not be a part of our MO. Ilo-Mai Harding
#12 01/09/2010
I agree with Jim Jones. During the last two weeks of high winds, I've watched the blinds in my living room swaying back and forth, with some vanes even click-clacking together because the balcony doors allow so much air to flow inside the unit. The master bedroom blinds also move when the wind whistles through the gap between window casings. Both the living room and master bedroom face north, receiving the brunt of the cold air. Even weatherstripping, applied
in mid-December, does not help. I am reminded of Jeff Foster, our realtor from 13 years ago, who showed us this unit on a windy day in 1997 and noted the draft at the sliding balcony doors, remarking "It's like Grand Canyon in here."
Window replacement, not band-aid efforts, is long overdue.
Ellen Cohen #1507
#13 01/10/2010
I think it is prudent to consider what Jeffery is suggesting, that we try to find simple solution to the windows before spending millions. However, some of us have tried this approach. I personally am using the tenement slum method.
That is to use plastic and duct tape for my bedroom window. While that is about 80% effective (at least in the bedroom) my belief is that owners at a supposed luxury highrise should have their windows up-to-date. It is time to move forward.
Unfortunately, we are a little late for simple solution such as duct tape and calk. If you ask any honest third-party builder about the expected life of windows in a house or an apartment built in the 1970's they will tell you that a
windows life span is around 20 years. Hoping to extend the life of windows past that is just wishful thinking and it causes us to waste energy. I am sure that the ECA has spent (and wasted) thousands of dollars on energy for heating and
cooling because they are not willing to recognize that the windows have been at the end of their life for over 15 years.
We are homeowners and we need to shoulder that responsibility. While light bulbs, tape and calk have their place in reducing energy consumption, it is time to recognize that windows are a critical component for saving energy. We have been talking about this issue for over a year. The board needs to take a responsible lead on this. It is time to see less talk on this issue and more action.
Jim Rich #301
#14 01/10/2010
I agree that we need new windows and patio doors. The cost of hydrocarbon energy continues to increase and will not go down in the future. We will continue to pay escalating condominium fees to cover the heating costs.
The ongoing cold weather has provided us with the realities of the window/patio door problems. Windows that were installed when the building was constructed represent currently outmoded technology even if they had been maintained in a first class condition. I cannot imagine a real solution other than their replacement.
Linda and David Robinson, Apt 904
#15 01/10/2010
FYI--I have just sent the Board the following memo in support of replacing the windows and balcony door ASAP. Molly Frantz
To: Elizabeth Board of Directors
From: Molly M. Frantz, #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.
#16 01/10/2010
Thank you Molly. I too tender MY FULL SUPPORT.
Mariko Isomura Apartment 9
#17 01/10/2010
I agree totally with Molly on this issue. Window replacement has been on the board's radar for over a year. Lets hope the board moves in the next month and before the renovation to resolve the windows so we quit wasting the money we spend on energy as well as to help keep our property values strong. It is the responsible thing to do. Jim Rich #301
#18 01/10/2010
Right on, Molly. Cheers—Jim Jones, #307
#19 01/11/2010
Hello Ellen,
Yes, I remember that day as well. The windows have always been an issue. The 4620 faces the same challenges as we do. I have had to buy space heaters for all of my tenants that rent from me in the Arcade. Glad to hear you are still in the building. Jeff Foster
#20 01/11/2010
Molly,
A rational and eloquent appraisal. Here, here!
Jerry Feldman
#21 01/11/2010
Imagine what space heaters do to our electric bill!
Sharon Bobb
#22 01/11/2010
Jeff Foster is not the only one. I too had to resort to a space heater on a limited basis. Does it make sense? It does not, when we all are trying to combat onslaught of electric bills. On my side, however, I have to find an “effective” solution to my (our) fast deteriorating windows and patio doors. Neither do I have the tenacity nor the courage of the legendary Dutch boy who kept his fingers in the dike.
Mariko Isomura, Apartment 9
#23 01/12/2010
Mariko is right. The use of space heaters, which consume a lot of power, is another dimension of the problem. This, too, should figure in any calculations regarding window and sliding-door replacement. Also not so far mentioned, I think, is all of the glass in our ground-level sitting rooms. I assume that this also lets in a lot of air.
Jim Jones, #307
#24 01/12/2010
I am emailing you all to urge that you come to the Board meeting this coming Monday AND STAY FOR THE OWNER COMMENT PERIOD. I know that the meetings can be a "painful" experience, but the only time we get to make our concerns know is at the end of these meetings. Very few of us stay.
There are so many questions that should be raised and answered and facts that need to be known. For instance did you know that the credit for installing energy-efficient windows and doors is only for improvements PLACED INTO SERVICE in 2009 and 2010. The clock is really ticking on this one. I can't imagine what the owners will do if this Board's inaction "cost us" the credit. The credit rate is currently 30% of the cost of all qualifying improvements up to a maximum credit limit of $1,500. Who gets the credit (the condo or each of us) is still to be understood.
Molly Frantz
[NOTE: Jeffrey Axelrad pointed out in a follow up email that the January ECA Board Meeting will be Thursday January 21 because of the Martin Luther King Holiday this Monday.]
On Januray 11, 2010, Molly Frantz posted an open letter to the Elizabeth Board of Directors.
On January 10, 2010, Jim Rich posted “Windows & Doors: How we got here.”
Let me first address those folks concerned with the cost of replacing windows and balcony doors. Also some other issues of how to proceed.
#1 01/08/2010
We should seek simple, efficient solutions before spending millions on new windows. Jeffrey Axelrad
#2 01/08/2010
Please read the Bylaws for Elizabeth to see if the unit owners are responsible for the replacement of the windows and sliding door. As a rule these items are the unit owners cost not the Association.
Thanks, Heidi Theoharis
#3 01/08/2010
Is there a price to do this window replacement? I have been told you cannot reap the benefits of spending large amounts of money on projects like this. What is going to be the per unit assessment? Joanne Dorsey 1720
#4 01/08/2010
I think we all need to know where the money to do this is going to come from. Do we even know if the condo assn gets the tax credit or does each owner get a credit. These are all things that need to be addressed.
--Robin Schattman
#5 01/09/2010
I agree with Jeff.
John Graham 1414
Here are the messages supporting window/door replacement:
#1 01/07/2010
We need new windows . Diana Brosnan
#2 01/07/2010
Ditto
We need badly new windows. We need sliding doors that SLIDE.
Mariko Isomura
#3 01/08/2010
Simple solutions for "fixing" windows in the Elizabeth are not good options.
Why?
--1 Caulking does not help windows where the weather-proofing in the middle of the window has become so old and brittle that wind blow right through the middle of the window.
Think about the heat and cooling that is going out of windows, not to mention the dust and dirt coming through them. Personally I feel disgusted about getting cement dust on my furniture. That's what happened in my apartment when the driveway was deconstructed and fixed two years ago.
--2 Putting plastic over the entire window, makes the window useless when the weather suddenly changes in the winter to a warmer temperature or vice versa in the summer.
Also do we want to look like a slum? Take a look at the outside of our building now. It already doesn't look so good and new windows would sure help make us look like we belong in Chevy Chase.
Let's face it, our windows are over 35 years old. They needed replacing more than 10 years ago. Better window technology is now available and will save us thousands of dollars per year. Ask Maurice Trebach for what his research has
yielded.
This is the time to take advantage of tax credits and hungry contractors who need work. We should not delay another minute. Karren Alenier
#4 01/08/2010
Karren, Right On! You spelled it out beautifully.
Thanks. If not now... When?
JRSalcetti
#5 01/08/2010
Probably 100% of owners on the north side of The Elizabeth agree that we need new windows. I won't apologize for using the heat just about 24/7 for this entire cold spell, and my bedroom is STILL cold!
By the way, a few years ago I tried to find a window company that would fix the problem in my unit. There is no company that does this any longer. It's either the entire building or nothing.
Let's get on with window replacement -- PLEASE!
Helen Soderberg
#6 01/08/2010
Where is the money going to come from for window replacement?
You might also want to ask these questions:
--Who pays for the heating and cooling utility bills in the Elizabeth? Isn’t that ultimately the owners of each unit in the Elizabeth or do you think the cost of heating and cooling is free in the Elizabeth?
--What is the Board of Directors doing to address the problem of window and door replacement in the near future?
--What is the Board of Directors doing to address the money that it will take to pay for window and door replacement?
--What would you do if you were a single family home owner and your windows and door were leaking your heating and cooling to the great outdoors? Would you ignore the problem and continue to pay the outrageous heating and cooling utility bills or would you seek a solution? Might your solution include replacing the old windows and doors?
--if you were a single family home owner and realized you needed to replaced old windows and doors, how would you finance that? Take out a loan? Dip into your savings? Borrow money from your family or friend?
I believe it is time for more unit owners to come to the monthly meetings and learn what the Board of Directors is doing to address everyone’s concerns about running this building. Fiscal responsibility is not only assigned to our Board of Directors but also to everyone who owns a unit here. Karren Alenier
#7 01/08/2010
There’s no question that the windows need replacing. This need has now been discussed for years. One could easily argue that it should rank above refurbishment in terms of priorities. Yet, alas, some refurbishment is also needed. Idealist that I am, I would like to think that doing one does not preclude doing the other—and without either being done halfway.
But what about cost? Cost will surely be an issue, at least in the near term. The cost issue cuts two ways, however: on the one hand, energy expenditures for the building should decline substantially over the long term, with initial savings accruing even in near term; on the other hand, the immediate costs of window replacement will also be substantial. And also to be considered, as Robin Schattman rightly points out, would be any tax savings that might result from window replacement.
There is an urgent need to take a serious look at how all of these costs and savings—including refurbishment—balance out. Options should flow out of some serious and solid thinking. And I don’t think we need to pay thousands of dollars for such thinking.
In a word, we may have cold hands (mine have been cold for days), but let’s not have cold feet. Let’s move forward.
May all soon experience warmer times, and to all a Happy New Year.
Cheers—Jim Jones
#8 01/08/2010
We can invite a large window company to come to the next meeting and do a small presentation on the cost of window replacement per unit. This will be a good base for the calculation and more specific for the type of windows which will be installed. Once the Board has this information they can then have the condominium Bylaw review to be sure that this is cost that the Association has to do plan on in 2011. Please let us know if you need any assistance with it.
Thanks,
Heidi Theoharis
#9 01/08/2010
Heidi, It sounds like a good idea to me. Diana Brosnan
#10 01/08/2010
Karren:
Thanks for the communication. As owner of 1601 I totally support this effort.
Brad Bickford
#11 01/08/2010
I totally agree with Jim Jones. The windows need to be replaced. The wind blows right through the middle of my sliding doors. A note of caution, however: the issue needs to be discussed transparently (no pun intended), and the financing costs examined and explained carefully and publicly.
I have to add that I have resided in Chevy Chase since 1971 and lived in The Elizabeth since 2005. I love it here. To me the place looks wonderful, it has a superb staff, and all the neighbors I have come to know are grand peoople.
Negativity should not be a part of our MO. Ilo-Mai Harding
#12 01/09/2010
I agree with Jim Jones. During the last two weeks of high winds, I've watched the blinds in my living room swaying back and forth, with some vanes even click-clacking together because the balcony doors allow so much air to flow inside the unit. The master bedroom blinds also move when the wind whistles through the gap between window casings. Both the living room and master bedroom face north, receiving the brunt of the cold air. Even weatherstripping, applied
in mid-December, does not help. I am reminded of Jeff Foster, our realtor from 13 years ago, who showed us this unit on a windy day in 1997 and noted the draft at the sliding balcony doors, remarking "It's like Grand Canyon in here."
Window replacement, not band-aid efforts, is long overdue.
Ellen Cohen #1507
#13 01/10/2010
I think it is prudent to consider what Jeffery is suggesting, that we try to find simple solution to the windows before spending millions. However, some of us have tried this approach. I personally am using the tenement slum method.
That is to use plastic and duct tape for my bedroom window. While that is about 80% effective (at least in the bedroom) my belief is that owners at a supposed luxury highrise should have their windows up-to-date. It is time to move forward.
Unfortunately, we are a little late for simple solution such as duct tape and calk. If you ask any honest third-party builder about the expected life of windows in a house or an apartment built in the 1970's they will tell you that a
windows life span is around 20 years. Hoping to extend the life of windows past that is just wishful thinking and it causes us to waste energy. I am sure that the ECA has spent (and wasted) thousands of dollars on energy for heating and
cooling because they are not willing to recognize that the windows have been at the end of their life for over 15 years.
We are homeowners and we need to shoulder that responsibility. While light bulbs, tape and calk have their place in reducing energy consumption, it is time to recognize that windows are a critical component for saving energy. We have been talking about this issue for over a year. The board needs to take a responsible lead on this. It is time to see less talk on this issue and more action.
Jim Rich #301
#14 01/10/2010
I agree that we need new windows and patio doors. The cost of hydrocarbon energy continues to increase and will not go down in the future. We will continue to pay escalating condominium fees to cover the heating costs.
The ongoing cold weather has provided us with the realities of the window/patio door problems. Windows that were installed when the building was constructed represent currently outmoded technology even if they had been maintained in a first class condition. I cannot imagine a real solution other than their replacement.
Linda and David Robinson, Apt 904
#15 01/10/2010
FYI--I have just sent the Board the following memo in support of replacing the windows and balcony door ASAP. Molly Frantz
To: Elizabeth Board of Directors
From: Molly M. Frantz, #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.
#16 01/10/2010
Thank you Molly. I too tender MY FULL SUPPORT.
Mariko Isomura Apartment 9
#17 01/10/2010
I agree totally with Molly on this issue. Window replacement has been on the board's radar for over a year. Lets hope the board moves in the next month and before the renovation to resolve the windows so we quit wasting the money we spend on energy as well as to help keep our property values strong. It is the responsible thing to do. Jim Rich #301
#18 01/10/2010
Right on, Molly. Cheers—Jim Jones, #307
#19 01/11/2010
Hello Ellen,
Yes, I remember that day as well. The windows have always been an issue. The 4620 faces the same challenges as we do. I have had to buy space heaters for all of my tenants that rent from me in the Arcade. Glad to hear you are still in the building. Jeff Foster
#20 01/11/2010
Molly,
A rational and eloquent appraisal. Here, here!
Jerry Feldman
#21 01/11/2010
Imagine what space heaters do to our electric bill!
Sharon Bobb
#22 01/11/2010
Jeff Foster is not the only one. I too had to resort to a space heater on a limited basis. Does it make sense? It does not, when we all are trying to combat onslaught of electric bills. On my side, however, I have to find an “effective” solution to my (our) fast deteriorating windows and patio doors. Neither do I have the tenacity nor the courage of the legendary Dutch boy who kept his fingers in the dike.
Mariko Isomura, Apartment 9
#23 01/12/2010
Mariko is right. The use of space heaters, which consume a lot of power, is another dimension of the problem. This, too, should figure in any calculations regarding window and sliding-door replacement. Also not so far mentioned, I think, is all of the glass in our ground-level sitting rooms. I assume that this also lets in a lot of air.
Jim Jones, #307
#24 01/12/2010
I am emailing you all to urge that you come to the Board meeting this coming Monday AND STAY FOR THE OWNER COMMENT PERIOD. I know that the meetings can be a "painful" experience, but the only time we get to make our concerns know is at the end of these meetings. Very few of us stay.
There are so many questions that should be raised and answered and facts that need to be known. For instance did you know that the credit for installing energy-efficient windows and doors is only for improvements PLACED INTO SERVICE in 2009 and 2010. The clock is really ticking on this one. I can't imagine what the owners will do if this Board's inaction "cost us" the credit. The credit rate is currently 30% of the cost of all qualifying improvements up to a maximum credit limit of $1,500. Who gets the credit (the condo or each of us) is still to be understood.
Molly Frantz
[NOTE: Jeffrey Axelrad pointed out in a follow up email that the January ECA Board Meeting will be Thursday January 21 because of the Martin Luther King Holiday this Monday.]
On Januray 11, 2010, Molly Frantz posted an open letter to the Elizabeth Board of Directors.
On January 10, 2010, Jim Rich posted “Windows & Doors: How we got here.”
Monday, January 11, 2010
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.
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.
Sunday, January 10, 2010
Windows & Doors: How we got here
Here is some insight how we have arrived at this point about the windows and other cost-related issues at the ECA.
In recent weeks, I spoke to our management about their experience with issues such as window replacement and in that conversation it became clear to me that the past boards and past in-house management were not paying attention to the long-term planning that is necessary to maintain a luxury high-rise building such as the Elizabeth Condo.
What I found out was that for a period of about ten years the ECA did not either increase the condo fees at all or if they did so it was only by a small margin. While spending less money on condo fees is always popular, at least in the short term, this strategy unfortunately has put the Elizabeth condo owners in a financially awkward position. That is, the building is ageing, we need new windows and we don’t have any cash on hand to help pay for them. What do we do now? Do nothing and waste thousands of dollars on energy? Give all the owners duct tape and plastic for windows? Scream and yell at each other? I hope none of these things happen.
While I am sure some will take exception to what I have stated, let me cite a simple example of what could HAVE BEEN a less painful financial long-term plan for the ECA in relation to the window issue.
Let’s say that over the course of a ten-year period that the condo fees did go up on average by $50 per month per unit. According to my simple and conservative calculation, we would have approximately two million dollars in the bank. Then consider a guesstimate for the cost of window replacement is approximately $5000 per unit. (Remember this is a guess). If that were the case, the two million dollars (from ten years of condo fees) would cover those costs.
There are two points I want to make:
We have an ageing building that needs windows and they are going to cost each of us in the short term. I consider this to be part of a long-term investment to keep energy costs under control while maintaining the value of our investment.
The second is a point about financial management. For those who are convinced that self-management is the only viable solution, consider these two critical facts that were overlooked in the self-management era. L&M saved the ECA over $70,000+ before they began managing the Elizabeth.
Then consider the windows issues. The self-management model did not provide us with experienced people who had financial management expertise. They lacked long-term planning skills and did not have the business savvy to influence the ECA board of directors. A painful example of this is our need for updating the windows and the lack of funds to support that need. Because of this, the current Elizabeth owners are now scrambling to figure out how to update and pay for windows. However unfortunate this situation is, it underlines how the past self-management approach has hurt the ECA.
Using a professional management company offers an array of expertise, skills and business acumen for managing the Elizabeth. Of course it is not perfect, but it better than what we had.
Let’s learn from the past, get the windows updated and move forward.
Jim Rich
#301
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Our Energy Crisis & What We Can Do
We are very concerned about a crisis situation in The Elizabeth and see that the Elizabeth Condominium Association might be missing a financial opportunity to solve this situation.
What are we referring to?
Our leaking windows and balcony doors. For over 10 years, the windows & doors have been failing.
How many of you are cold in your apartments and want this problem fixed?
How many of you believe that window and door replacement would save significantly on our utility bills and that every day we let slip by costs us huge sums of money?
How many of you are concerned about the value of our property declining? Anyone know what apartments are selling for now?
AND what about the energy tax credits that have been extended into 2010?
Did you know that these tax credits also extend to heating and cooling units? In case you haven't noticed, the McQuay units in our apartments are also at the end of their lives. Have you thought about what happens if a McQuay unit breaks and how you will pay to replace it? Wouldn't it be better if we got a group discount to replace our heating and cooling units?
Please let me know if you care about any of the issues that I have addressed. If enough Unit owners demand that our Board of Directors make energy efficiency a priority, we might be able to leverage those energy tax credits and solve our energy problems in the near future. While CFL light bulbs are a step in the right direction, significant cost savings are in energy efficient windows & doors and up-to-date heating & cooling units.
We need a clear answer now on what tax credits we are eligible for as condo owners and then we need to move into action before winter is over and before we lose any more money and time.
Make your voice heard right away. Tell the Board what you want. Come to the Board meeting on January 18 or write them a letter now.
Thanks for taking the time to read this.
Karren Alenier & Jim Rich #301
What are we referring to?
Our leaking windows and balcony doors. For over 10 years, the windows & doors have been failing.
How many of you are cold in your apartments and want this problem fixed?
How many of you believe that window and door replacement would save significantly on our utility bills and that every day we let slip by costs us huge sums of money?
How many of you are concerned about the value of our property declining? Anyone know what apartments are selling for now?
AND what about the energy tax credits that have been extended into 2010?
Did you know that these tax credits also extend to heating and cooling units? In case you haven't noticed, the McQuay units in our apartments are also at the end of their lives. Have you thought about what happens if a McQuay unit breaks and how you will pay to replace it? Wouldn't it be better if we got a group discount to replace our heating and cooling units?
Please let me know if you care about any of the issues that I have addressed. If enough Unit owners demand that our Board of Directors make energy efficiency a priority, we might be able to leverage those energy tax credits and solve our energy problems in the near future. While CFL light bulbs are a step in the right direction, significant cost savings are in energy efficient windows & doors and up-to-date heating & cooling units.
We need a clear answer now on what tax credits we are eligible for as condo owners and then we need to move into action before winter is over and before we lose any more money and time.
Make your voice heard right away. Tell the Board what you want. Come to the Board meeting on January 18 or write them a letter now.
Thanks for taking the time to read this.
Karren Alenier & Jim Rich #301