Unfortunately, residents were provided with only a fraction of the 2020 Reserve Fund Study. Why?

Brunsden advised in May of 2020 in a telephone communication that the “reserve fund study is in the Board’s hands as we speak”. Yet the Board advised the AGM that “the study was not received until September 28^th”. Who is correct? The evidence suggests Brunsden was correct in the timing of their submission.. Why did the Board sit on the Study for some four months? What changes to the Study did the Board request” and if Brunsden did make any of the requested changes, specifically, what changes were made? Brunsden must respond to this question as well.

The Board advised that Brunsden made numerous errors in the Study and that they found it necessary to prepare their own cash flow projections. Why did the Board not simply advise Brunsden of the “errors” and request a correction of the Study? This would have prevented a great unnecessary confusion among residents

On page 22 of the Study, it states “All exterior windows from the ground floor to the top floor, are owned by and the responsibility of the condominium corporation/association”.On the same page, it states “The windows in both the commercial and rersidential units are the responsibility of the specific unit owner. Thus, no funding if identified for them”. Why did the Board not request a correction of this in the Study? THE FACTS ARE: The registered plan of the building clearly states that the Corporation is responsible for the exterior maintenance of all windows in the building (maintenance refers primarily  to cleaning). Replacement of front windows is the responsibility of the Corporation.

On page 24 of the Study, it states “The condition of the concrete deck surface under the center 4^th floor balcony could not be inspected and verified as it is covered by indoor/outdoor carpet which was not removed to enable the concrete to be observed”. Brunsden was provided in October, 2019 with detailed information and documents including photographs of the “structural repairs” required. The Study states correctly, “the condominium corporation is responsible for all structural repairs only”.

The Study further states: “The condition of the concrete deck surface under the center 4^th floor balcony could not be inspected and verified as it is covered by indoor/outdoor carpet which was not removed to enable the concrete to be observed”. The need for required “structural repairs” can easily be determined and observed by simply walking over the balcony surface. Further, the owner of this unit, was available and prepared to assist at the time of Brunsden’s visit to the property but management made no attempt to ensure that the owner was contacted.

The Study further states: “The condition of the center 4^th floor residential concrete deck surface could not be ascertained. Funding has been provided to repair the concrete deck surface in five years, if required.” So if the condition of the deck surface could not be “ascertained” then why does the Study state “Funding has been provided to repair the concrete deck surface in five years, if required”. No resident would ever accept this “intentional” refusal of Board address to this deck structure issue on their condo preventing the owner from conducting their own surface covering replacement as all other owners are entitled to. The owner of 402 has made many requests over many years to the Board to address this issue only to receive constant rejection. The Board is clearly liable for this negligence and very disrespectful conduct. Without immediate written confirmation of structural replacement to be completed by the spring of 2021 provided to the owner, a statement of claim against “responsible” parties is promised by the unit owner.

Why has the Board failed to provide a responsible reserve fund budget by simply not recognizing or responsibly preparing for numerous short term and imminent expenditures, including chiller replacement, air compressor replacement, window replacement, center deck structural repair, probable Enercon replacement, the urgently required return of the humidifier removed for false reasons (a proven and very valuable tool to assist in preventing Covid transmission within the building especially in the elevators). Why did the Board fail to ensure that these items were reflected in the 2020 Reserve Fund Study when they were fully aware that these expenditures were very much imminent in the immediate future? These overlooked expenditures, totalaling some $150,000 are not recognized in the 2020 AGM Reserve Fund Budget. This all clearly leads to depletion of our projected Reserve Fund balance easily falling to well below $100,000 in 2021.

Unfortunately, this very serious misleading information all leads to yet further resident confusion and the need for CASH CALLS substantially above and beyond the $3000 already being demanded of residents. It is important to note, that there is no reason to support or defend residents who continue with their very irresponsible silence and are simply prepared to accept and succumb to the consequences of whatever misleading information they receive from the Board.

November 26, 2020

The Board has been reminded repeatedly of ongoing bedbug infestations. Effected residents have went through a very hellish and costly experience simply due to negligence on the part of the Board and management. The disrespect upon impacted residents and failure to act is shameful. The Board must be held accountable for this negligence and act immediately with an inspection and appropriate treatment of the entire building. Costs incurred by the impacted residents should be reimbursed to these owners immediately. This is only one of many issues that should have been addressed at a general meeting and if not, certainly at the AGM. The bugs are clearly moving through common areas reaching adjacent units (started in 1003, then moved to 903, 803, 702, 602, then 601).

The Board was reminded of their negligence on numerous occassions yet nothing has been done. They have clearly exposed themselves to liability issues given their refusal to act. Please review the attached letters to the Board. No response has been provided.

April 7th, 2020

SPADINA CONDOMINIUM CORPORATION 730 Spadina Crescent East
Suite 603
SASKATOON, SK
S7K 4H7

ATTENTON: Mr. John Beckman:
Re: Bed Bug Infestations
I understand that there has been six or more cases of bed bug infestations in the building over the past year including one most recently.
As this is obviously not an isolated occurrence, the building should conduct immediately a thorough investigation of ALL UNITS
and common areas of the building and provide a copy of the inspection certificate to all unit owners.
Regards.
Dennis M. Tofin
603-730 Spadina Crescent East
SASKATOON, SK
S&K 4H7

Please click on the following report

Invoice review 2014-2015.xlsx

The Board at this year’s AGM once again clearly demonstrated a total lack of respect for resident questions and requests for information and clarification. Once again after many years the Chairman chose to avoid and not provide an opportunity for residents to present many of their concerns and questions.

1. There were far too many issues that required attention but could not be addressed at the AGM. Many residents advised prior to the meeting that they found the information package they received to be somewht convoluted and obsure. Residents including myself have repeatedly requested a general meeting to be held preferably prior to the AGM in order to ensure that they are sufficiently informed and prepared to commit themselves to any funding proposed by the Board. Any such meeting has been adamantly rejected by the Board and as a result, far too much information has been intentionally concealed and many questions left unanswered.
2. Mr. Beckman chose to reject resident requests for placement of motions on the Agenda. These motions were intended to provide clarification and address confusion issues among residents with the AGM package information package provided to them. By the way, an explanation for the well beyond reason “AGM costs” billed by the commercial owner and management is requested. Clearly it is time to contract with an independent property manager in order to prevent such excessive management fees.
3. Mr. Beckman continues to state that reserve fund expenditures including the costly landscaping project did not require approval of unit owners. This is in contravention of our Bylaws which Mr. Beckman fails to understand.
4. In the 2019 AGM minutes, it was suggested to leave monthly fees as they are with operating surplus to be transferred to reserve fund.  The common expense fund like the reserve fund should maintain a reasonable fund balance to deal with potential unexpected expenses.
5. In the 2019 AGM minutes, when asked why the chiller and pool floor repairs were not included in the Reserve Fund budget, Mr. Barnes advised that “there wasn’t enough money so why would we budget for it”. When there is “not enough money” then there is some budgeting work to do. Further there was a resolution to leave fees remain the same, providing no responsible preparation for substantial reserve fund expenditures that the Corporation was facing.
6. The Board has repeatedly advised in the last several years that the chiller and air compressor are due for replacement. Yet no mention is made of the chiller, pool floor and air compressor in the 2020-2021 reserve fund budget. Further, repair to the center 4^th floor deck, the humidifier, a provision for window replacement, etc. is absent in the current year budget as well. It is totally irresponsible to not even mention these items in the current budget. With the present $220,439 reserve fund balance, an immediate need for these expenditure items may arise at any time. This would result in a reserve fund balance of well below $100,000 which places the Corporation’s finances in their worst position in the entire history of the building. A most unreasonable comment was made by the Board that “certain items had not yet failed and therefore did not appear in the reserve fund budget”. This is obviously not a very responsible position to be taken by any Board.The Alternative Funding Plan as proposed at the AGM can easily accommodate the above expenditures and begin a responsible rebuild of the Reserve Fund. No cash calls are necessary.
7. Yet what does the Board do but issue a cash call due to a clearly insufficient funding plan. I was personally attacked and accused of a “nefarious purpose” in my submission of an alternative plan. The Board was fully determined to make this accusation but refused to explain what was nefarious about the plan that required no cash calls while their plan did. I resent any such “nefarious” allegation. The Alternative Plan clearly was able to rebuild the reserved fund to a reasonable level where the Board’s plan did not. The average reserve fund balance over the past 20 years has been about $200,000 which is what the current balance is at June 30, 2020 but with the real danger of this balance falling below $100,000 should the chiller and compressor fail at any time as there is no budget for these items. The Alternative Plan can accommodate these items and further rebuilds the Reserve Fund to a reasonable level going forward.It is very troubling that other than balcony bracket repair (which is total unnecessary on most floors), there are NO projected reserve fund expenditures for the next couple of years. Never in the history of the building have we had such a most questionable forecast. The Board admits it really doesn’t care as it will simply resort to irresponsible cash calls whenever they wish which is always the result of incompetence or naive and uninformed planning -Toronto Condo News.
8. At the 2019 AGM a reserve fund expenditure in the amount of $15,000 was approved for the vestibule. Yet it appears that in order to obtain additional funds, this project was delayed and projected to now be $30,000 at the 2020 AGM. The Board and management obviously cannot be relied upon for their inaccuracies in budgeting and failure to act on approved expenditures.
9. At the 2020 AGM, the Board avoided many questions relating to insurance claims and payments for substantial damages during the past two years.  A detailed report including related invoice and other supporting documents should be made available to residents.
10. Residents received no financial statements for the months January to June, 2020. When I finally obtained a copy of these following repeated requests, the January, February, April and June statements revealed 12 credit entries to expense accounts totaling $42,951.21. UNFORTUNATELY, no other residents were provided with these monthly financial statements. Further, NO RESERVE FUND REPORTS are included in these very limited monthly reports, depriving residents of their right to monthly reserve fund activity throughout the year.This concealment of financial information from residents is very troubling and is certainly not compliant with responsible financial reporting. The excuse of correcting errors in prior month expenses deserves much more explanation. It is very unfortunate that the Board and management have avoided most relevant resident questions and were unable to provide detail on these credits and any detail and clarity as to the debit side of these entries. Another unusual excuse for June credits was stated by the Board as necessary to correct commercial fees which makes little sense and certainly requires a detailed explanation. Whoever is responsible for these inappropriate accounting entries should be relieved of their involvement in accounting activities of the Corporation.
11. The Board avoided the very obvious need to provide residents with sufficient time to voice their concerns and seek answers to their questions. An appropriate question and answer General Meeting has been requested for this purpose on many occasions only to be rejected with no explanation.  
12. The Board’s position that an $100,000 caretaker was necessary is very misleading. A review of caretaker costs in Canada is available. In Saskatchewan, $34,837 is the average caretaker salary. Obviously, little effort was put into seeking a caretaker at a reasonable cost. The previous caretaker was relieved of most of his duties several years ago and the Board simply allowed contractors to perform his duties, resulting in a substantial increase to our repair and maintenance costs. The Board was foolish enough to have a party for the caretaker upon his departure at a cost of well over $1,000. No responsible Board member would ever approve of this expenditure and more importantly the very poor performance of the caretaker.
13. More than $500,000 in projected reserve fund expenditures in the 2015 reserve fund study were reallocated to after 2025 in the 2020 reserve fund study. Residents seeking reasons for this were attacked for even daring to ask such questions.
14. I have personally expressed my opinion, asked relevant questions and contributed information at many AGM’s. I believe it is very important to permit residents to speak especially when far too many residents remain silent and contribute little if anything to the meeting. I would suggest that residents or their representatives who prefer not to hear relevant comments and questions at these meetings, and have made no attempt to inform themselves with a reasonable understanding of the facts, are unable to make any meaningful contribution to the meeting. With their lack of any reasonable understanding of the facts, they should remain silent until they have informed themselves of the facts and are able to make a qualified contribution to the meeting.
15. Brunsden advised me directly in May that the Reserve Fund Study was in the hands of the Board at that time, yet the Board advised that they did not receive the study until September 28^th.  The meeting was then advised that a draft was received in July. The truth of the matter is the Board had the study from May until September 28^th. Unfortunately new owners did not have the opportunity to review the study when they purchased their units in August and were wrongfully misled and deprived of essential information about their intended purchase. The Board responded to this by simply advising the meeting that these new owners had access to the 2015 Reserve Fund Study to inform themselves. Yet, the meeting was then advised that the 2015 study was no longer relevant. If no longer relevant, why were new owners wrongfully misled and left on their own to rely on a study that the Board deemed to be no longer relevant? This is very troubling with potential legal consequences for the Corporation.
16. A resident at the AGM opined that prospective purchasers of condos in our building are deterred by our unusually high condo fees, a low reserve fund, and the irresponsible policy of unknown cash calls and certainly NOT the state of the lobby or meeting room. To spend some $200,000 on these common areas is simply an attempt to put lipstick on a pig. A recent listing for a 1200 square foot unit in a luxury condominium property in Saskatoon shows monthly fees to be $450 or 1/3 of a similar sized unit in our building. This lipstick will do little to remedy this major financial situation in our building. The best remedy to this serious problem is to implement a responsible FUNDING PLAN that immediately addresses this issue. It was incorrectly stated that I referred to the importance of the “appearance” of the building. I made no mention of “appearance” and only referred to the serious public perception of our property due to high fees and the absence of a responsible predictable funding plan.
17. The issue of in unit common area inspections was avoided by the Board. Tom McClocklin Sr. falsely stated and misled residents by stating that “inspections have been on going and every unit has been checked”. Obviously, Mr. McClocklin has no clue what is going on in the building Mr. McClocklin has admitted in the past that he has no mechanical knowledge so he is not qualified to make any such comment. I have not had any inspection (other than the annual sprinkler inspections) in my unit for some ten years. Regular inspection includes those items outlined in the building manual. As a result, I have experienced major problems with zone valves, leaking windows and plumbing issues that have resulted in damage to my unit.
18. Regarding the lobby projected to be completed at June 30, 2021 ($75,000) there will be $84,706 available at that time leaving a resident only reserve fund balance of $9,706 after the expenditure. Obviously, no cash call is necessary at this time. With the meeting room estimated to be completed sometime in the fall at a cost of $93,390, and amount of $83,684 will be required at that time. Therefore no cash call is necessary until the project is completed about this time next year.
19. Amount presently outstanding and payable by the commercial owner to the Corporation is  $12,240.65 plus amounts to be determined upon a further resident review of invoices to be conducted as soon as possible. Please see attached schedule.

Obviously Spadina Towers has made a very big mistake. Who suggested the $80,000 number along with a free residence and parking estimated to be another $20,000? Why do residents simply accept this irresponsible conduct of the Board where it is residents who pay the bulk of such careless and unnecessary cost increases? PRIMARY SASKATOON PROPERTY MANAGERS, Board members of comparable properties, realtors, insurance agents and many others find our building one to be avoided because of clearly biased management and financial practices, including our extreme condo fees relative to comparative market fees. It is clearly time to contract with AN INDEPENDENT PROPERTY MANAGER where there is no commercial owner bias.

Building Caretaker salary in Canada Find out what is the average Building Caretaker salaryBuilding caretaker: SalaryBased on 45 salariesYearMonthWeekHour$32,936/ YearThe average Building Caretaker salary in Canada is $32,936 per year or $16.89 per hour. Entry level positions start at $25,013 per year while most experienced workers make up to $45,827 per year.Median$32,936Low$25,013High$45,827Building caretaker salaries per regionAlberta$36,582Saskatchewan$34,837Ontario$33,530British Columbia$33,300ManitobaN/AShow moreRelated SalariesCaretaker$38,812Building Caretaker$32,936People also ask…How much would I earn after taxes?Active jobs with salaries

building caretaker

Immaculate Heart of Mary School | Corner Brook, NL, CASalary : $25,350 Work SettingSchool or educational institution establishmentSecurity and SafetyCriminal record checkJanitors, Caretakers and Building Superintendents Specific SkillsWork with minimal…

building caretaker

0894880 BC,LTD. | Abbotsford, BC, CASalary : $39,000 Caretakers and Building Superintendents Specific SkillsWash windows, interior walls and ceilingsMove heavy furniture, equipment and suppliesWork with minimal supervisionClean and disinfect…

building caretaker

458349 BC, LTD. | Abbotsford, BC, CASalary : $39,000 Caretakers and Building Superintendents Specific SkillsWash windows, interior walls and ceilingsMove heavy furniture, equipment and suppliesWork with minimal supervisionClean and disinfect…

Building Caretaker – Vancouver

Cleantech Service Group | Vancouver, BC, CASalary : $40,000 JOB DESCRIPTIONWe are currently looking for a BuildingCaretaker for our site in Vancouver. This will be a full time position, Monday to Friday. This position would be an excellent opportunity…

apartment building caretaker

Westwood Employment Link | Winnipeg, MB, CASalary : $30,960 Caretakers and Building Superintendents Specific SkillsWash windows, interior walls and ceilingsWork with minimal supervisionClean and disinfect bathrooms and fixturesWater and tend to plants…