November 11, 2014

SPADINA CONDOMINIUM CORPORATION

730 Spadina Crescent East

SASKATOON, SK

S7K 4H7

ATTENTION: President and Board of Directors

RE: AUDIT

Dear Sirs:

A motion was made at the Annual General Meeting to seek consent by signature of those who did not want an Audit. It was not until October 24th, that the Board advised that sufficient consent had been received and that an Audit would not be conducted. Considering the obvious confusion among residents as to the net effect of this motion which did not result in a confirmed resolution as required at the AGM, a number of residents contacted management following the AGM and advised that their signature was provided inadvertently as a result of being MOST INAPPROPRIATELY encouraged by the Board, to reject an Audit and the obvious confusion as to whether they were voting for or against the Audit.

An AUTHENTIC list of resident signatures has been obtained which clarifies and confirms the position of unit owners. AS A RESULT, MORE THAN 20% OF UNIT OWNERS, as is required by the Act, DO IN FACT SUPPORT AN AUDIT and further, they have with their signature, requested as well, that all information to which the Auditor may request of the Corporation be provided to interested owners upon their request.

The vote for this motion at the AGM was not conducted in a proper manner. The commercial owner whose property management company does the monthly accounting along with the treasurer who supposedly reviews these monthly statements, should have abstained from the vote considering the most obvious conflict of interest. WHY THEIR MOST ADAMANT OPPOSITION TO AN AUDIT? It can’t be cost, as the average cost per resident for the Audit is miniscule. Correction of inappropriate allocations of commercial expenses being shared by residents, more than pays for the share of residents of an Audit!

With the Board ILLEGALLY approving RESERVE FUND expenditures of 1 to 2 MILLION DOLLARS WITHOUT THE REQUIRED PRESENTATION OF A FORMAL BUDGET AND FURTHER, ITS REQUIRED APPROVAL OF UNIT OWNERS, the reason for their rejection of the Audit is most apparent. All Board members, and in particular, the two Board members mentioned above, should have remained neutral on this matter, however they and their fellow Board members, all strongly objected to the need for an Audit at the AGM. A continuing (and unjust) lobby effort for obtaining further signatures rejecting an audit continued in the days and weeks following the AGM. Not all residents were contacted as is required by the Act and Regulations.

Therefore it is requested that the Board respect the wishes of 20% plus of unit owners, and ensure that an Audited financial report be completed and provided to all unit owners by December 31st, 2014.

Please provide your acknowledgement of and written response to this request within seven days.

Yours truly,

Dennis M. Tofin Suite #603 Telephone: (306)242-0409 Email: [email protected]

Cc: all residents

Since the installation of the new hot water heating system, every attempt has been made by the Board and management, to minimize the input temperature to the perimeter heating lines in an effort to condense and minimize gas consumption and heating costs. This practise is total unacceptable, and residents find this practise to be most deceitful and disrespectful of the comfort of residents. The Board promised a substantial reduction in energy costs following the installation of the new hot water heating system. This promise, proved to be totally misleading and of course resulted in substantial increases in energy costs, to the detriment of residents.

Residents have in turn been subject to excessive noise of the heat pump units, and most importantly, a substantial increase in energy costs.  This is very evident when temperatures drop to normal winter levels. This is certainly not a responsible way to operate our heating system.

The input temperature on the perimeter heating line must be increased to a level of 185 degrees (F) PLUS, when necessary. Supply of heat from the Enercons is only necessary with prolonged cold extremes in temperature. It has been suggested that the caretaker, under instruction from management and the Board, refuses to use a temperature setting above 175 (F) degrees, as they are afraid that a higher temperature will cause the perimeter lines to leak. The perimeter lines, zone valves and other fittings on these lines are generally rated at 250 (F) degrees and 150 PSI pressure rating, both well beyond what our system can possibly reach. Zone valves and expansion joints on these lines have not been properly inspected and maintained for a very long time and are only looked at after they have failed, begin to leak, all at the inconvenience of residents.

The ongoing excuse of fear of leakage on perimeter heating lines and valves is a result of neglected maintenance and is certainly, not an acceptable reason for insufficient heat levels being provided to residents.

Yes, it is time to turn up the heat!