Corridor Temperatures

I propose that our Market Street at Town Center Condominium Unit Owners Association (a) heat our corridors only as necessary to keep the corridor temperature from falling below 66 degrees Fahrenheit, (b) cool our corridors only as necessary to keep the corridor temperature from rising above 79, and (c) neither heat nor cool our corridors when the corridor temperature is between 66 and 79.

This policy (c) to "neither heat nor cool our corridors when the corridor temperature is between 66 and 79" doesn't mean to keep to corridor thermostats set to the "Off" mode when the actual corridor temperature is in that 66 to 79 range. Rather, depending on the time of year, the corridor thermostats should be set in either the "Heat" mode or the "Cool" mode, but with the temperature setting on the thermostats at either 66 or 79 depending on whether the thermostats are in the "Heat" mode or the "Cool" mode, respectively. In other words, the heating should turn on if the actual corridor temperature drops below 66, and the cooling (air conditioning) should turn on if the actual corridor temperature rises above 79.

The larger the temperature range where our Association neither heats nor cools the corridors, the less our monthly Association assessments can be. Association expenditures for electricity have been rising rapidly, with the Association electricity expense for 2009 projected to be $143,000. For a unit with a typical par value of 0.32%, this amounts to about $457 annually toward the Association electric bill.

We have about a mile of corridors in our building. Corridors run the entire perimeter of our building on the first through the forth floors. The corridor on the Terrace (UL) level is only on the west and south sides of the building, about half the length of an upper-floor corridor. I am not including common elements near the main entrance lobby as part of the corridors. Appropriate temperature ranges for such common areas as the Community Room, the main entrance lobby, the Management Office, the Fitness Center and the Internet Center should perhaps be the subject of other posts, but are not addressed in this post.

Based on corridor thermostat settings I have observed, it appears to me that we sporadically cool our corridors if the corridor temperature rises above 74, and sporadically heat our corridors if the corridor temperature falls below 72. I think the temperature range where we don’t spend Association funds for heating or cooling should be larger than two degrees. Residents can maintain whatever temperature they want in their unit. Residents passing through our corridors going to or from the outdoors would normally be dressed for outdoor temperatures, and should thus be able to handle a corridor temperature closer to the outdoor temperature than is the temperature they maintain in their unit. Someone using the corridors, but not going to or from the outdoors, would normally be in the corridors only briefly, so should be able to tolerate a temperature somewhat different from the temperature in their unit. That is why I am suggesting a rather large 13-degree temperature range where we don’t spend Association funds to heat or cool our corridors.

While I feel strongly that there should be a rather large corridor temperature range where Association funds are spent for neither heating nor cooling, I believe there are good arguments on both sides regarding what should be the upper and lower temperatures of that range. I strongly encourage you to email me or/and post comments on this matter in my forum at the below links. (You will need to be registered and logged-in with that forum to post there.) I hope there will be dialog. I expect to bring this matter up during the unit owner comment period during our Board of Directors meetings, perhaps as soon as at the 18 Dec 08 Board meeting. After two or three months of unit owner dialog on this matter with other unit owners and our Board members (or maybe sooner), I believe our Board of Directors should specify the upper and lower temperatures for our corridors. My opening paragraph of this post might be suitable as a basis for a Board motion or resolution. Here are my email address and the link to my forum:

rasmussen305@gmail.com

http://mstcuoa.proboards59.com/

Board Dialogue with Unit Owners

In the past, there has been an item on Board meeting agendas that I believe hasn’t been worded in consonance with the requirements of our bylaws and the Condominium Act. That agenda item is the one that, in the past, has read “OPEN FORUM: Dialogue with Residents.” One way to correct the agenda item would be to replace the word "Residents" with the words "Unit Owners". The resulting correct agenda item would then be “OPEN FORUM: Dialogue with Unit Owners.”

While I believe it is indisputable that the wording of the agenda item must encourage the unit owners who don't live in our building to nevertheless participate in dialogue with our Board of Directors, the question of whether tenants should also be encouraged to participate in that dialogue is a legitimate issue for debate. I encourage all Market Street at Town Center Condominium unit owners (resident AND non-resident) to email me or/and post opinions on this question on my forum at the below links. (You will need to be registered and logged-in with that forum to post there.)

rasmussen305@gmail.com

http://mstcuoa.proboards.com/


I hope our new Board of Directors will word the agenda item in question appropriately.

Here are the details regarding what our bylaws and the Condominium Act require on this matter. You can view our Market Street at Town Center Condominium bylaws at the following link: http://www.marketstreetattowncenter.com/docs/BylawsV4.PDF Section 8 of Article III (on page 20) contains this sentence: “All meetings of the Board of Directors shall be held in accordance with Section 55-79.75 of the Virginia Condominium Act.” If you then look at paragraph D of that Section you will see that our Board of Directors is required to “provide a designated period of time during a meeting to allow unit owners an opportunity to comment on any matter relating to the unit owners' association.”

Please note that the statute says “unit owners”, NOT “residents”. Also note that our Board of Directors is elected by and is supposed to primarily serve the interests of unit owners, not residents. That unfortunate past wording of the agenda item suggests that resident tenants are more welcome to dialogue with the Board then are non-resident owners.

At the annual meeting 12 Nov 08, our outgoing Association President stated that 160 of our 333 residential units have non-resident owners. The past wording of that agenda item appears NOT to comply with our bylaws and the Condominium Act for those many non-resident owners.

Once our Board makes clear that non-resident owners are just as welcome as resident owners to participate in the Open Forums, it could also continue to welcome tenants to participate in the Open Forums. But my personal view is that the wording I suggested at the beginning is most appropriate: “OPEN FORUM: Dialogue with Unit Owners”. I believe the proper channels for tenants to use are their landlord or our On-Site Manager.

Unfinished Business and Committees

There should never be a Board of Directors meeting agenda item entitled “Old Business.” Also, since the 20 Nov 08 meeting will be the first regular meeting of our new Board, there shouldn't be any Unfinished Business brought into this meeting (unless something was left unfinished at the organizational meeting of the new Board). However, members of the new Board may introduce matters left over from the previous Board as New Business. Committees don't carry over either. If committees are desired, they must be appointed by the new President and confirmed by the new Board of Directors.

Here is the detailed explanation of why the above statements are true. Our Market Street at Town Center Condominium bylaws can be viewed at this link: http://www.marketstreetattowncenter.com/docs/BylawsV4.PDF Section 13 of Article 3 (on page 21 of those bylaws) contains this sentence: “Robert's Rules of Order (latest edition) shall govern the conduct of the meetings of the Board of Directors when not in conflict with the Declaration, these Bylaws or the Condominium Act.” The following link identifies the right book: http://www.robertsrules.com/book.html The footnote on page 346 of that book reads as follows: “The expression ‘old business’ should be avoided, since it may incorrectly suggest the further consideration of matters that have finally been disposed of.” On page 471 of that book is the following information: “…all unfinished business existing when the outgoing portion of the board vacates membership falls to the ground…and if the board is one that…appoints standing committees, it chooses new...committees as soon as the new board members have taken up their duties….” The sentence at line 17 on page 229 of that book explains that the unfinished business of the old board can be introduced by the new board (as new business) “the same as if it had never before been brought up.” Section 4 of Article 4 of our bylaws (at page 22 at the bylaws link given above) explains that our Association President has “the power to appoint committees from among the Unit Owners, subject to the confirmation of the Board of Directors….”

Unit Owners Elect Two Directors

At the 12 Nov 08 annual meeting, unit owners of our Market Street at Town Center Condominium elected Dena Brannen and Christopher Burke to three-year terms on our Board of Directors. There were four excellent candidates to choose from, and I believe the unit owners chose wisely. This Board--Dena, Christopher, Jeffrey Taggart, Varsha Chandra, and the new GRACE representative--doesn’t include any of the persons who were on the Board before the 2007 annual meeting. I am hopeful and optimistic that this new Board will lead us in the direction we unit owners in general want to go with our Condominium.

Director Platform

I am running for one of the two or three open Director positions on our Market Street at Town Center Condominium Board of Directors. The election will be conducted at the Unit Owners annual meeting scheduled for 7pm Wednesday, November 12, 2008. If you agree with most of what I stand for, I ask for your vote, either in person at the meeting, or by proxy submitted before the meeting. This post and my other posts on this blog, Bob’s leasing blog, and Barry’s and my forums make clear what I stand for. If elected, I will:

1. Seek PROMPT maintenance and repair of our Common Elements.

2. Post information on this blog regarding possible upcoming Board actions, and encourage our Board to use its official channels to provide such information to Unit Owners.

3. Encourage Unit Owner dialog with other Unit Owners and our Directors, and seek to have our Board consider Unit Owner opinions. (One vehicle for such dialog is my forum at http://mstcuoa.proboards59.com/.)

4. Try to prevent our Board from imposing rules, regulations, restrictions, guidelines, and administrative burdens UNLESS there are (a) logical reasons AND (b) Unit Owner consensus.

5. Seek Board compliance with applicable laws and our condominium instruments.


If you wish to comment regarding this post or any unit owner association matter, I urge you to email me at rasmussen305@gmail.com or/and post on my forum at the link cited in item number 3 above.

Suggested Board Actions

Subject to preferences of our Unit Owners in general, I believe the following actions should be among those our Board of Directors considers over the next 12 months. I have explained some of them in previous posts on this blog, and will explain others in future posts.

Encourage ALL Unit Owners (resident AND non-resident) to attend Board meetings and monthly socials.

Circulate at least one Director meeting information packet (including ALL the documents the Directors have in front of them during the meeting, except reference documents and executive session documents) among the Unit Owners in attendance at Board meetings.

Set up procedures for Unit Owners to provide their comments at Board meetings in such a way that the usefulness of those comments in Board deliberations is maximized.

Define a “visitor” to our building as someone who (a) isn’t using a FOB for admittance AND (b) isn’t purposefully let in by a resident (by buzzing-in or physically opening the door).

Include icons (links) for the Condominium Act, our official Condominium website, and the Fairfax County real estate tax records website on the Windows XP desktop on the computers in the Internet Center.

Add our Declaration to our official Condominium website, and revise the categorization of document links on that website accordingly.

Discontinue collection of information regarding vehicles Unit Owners authorize to park in their assigned garage parking spaces.

Clarify and enforce the bylaw that generally allows no signs posted in or on our common elements without prior written approval of the Board.

Based on input from Unit Owners, establish if music is to be played in the lobby and other common areas, and, if so, what type(s), when, and how loudly.


For further information regarding links to websites related to the actions proposed above, please see my post of 28 April 2008 on this blog, at the following link.

http://mstc-uoa.blogspot.com/2008/04/useful-links-for-unit-owners.html



I would like to see Market Street at Town Center Condominium Unit Owner comments regarding Board actions such as those suggested in this post. I suggest you make such comments in an email to me at rasmussen305@gmail.com or/and in a post on my forum at http://mstcuoa.proboards59.com/