I
think that the Malcontents missed the meeting a few years ago with the
paving company. They explained to us that if we did not go down to
bedrock on the roads that all the cracks that we already there would
eventually reappear. The Delegates voted not to spend the extra money to
have no cracks and went cheap. We have cracks. This is another
frivolous lawsuit by the same people who sued before. Who is going to
pay for their lawyer. I certainly don't want to. If you go to the
meeting on Tuesday let them know you are not interested in losing a
lawsuit.
from Grace
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteGood points here. And to Phyllis R on the other blog, the Bath and Borden hole issue should be addressed to people such as former UCO Presidents Weiss, Walsh, and Lowenstein and their attention (or lack thereof) to CV infrastructure issues.
ReplyDeleteI wasn't a delegate when this vote was made for I would have voted against the cheap way out. As the saying goes "you get what you paid for." You can't blame David for this one.
ReplyDeleteLet us not forget, too, that there was another contributing factor to the difficulties in getting M & M to fix some of the road problems. It was realized at some point that a number of the parking spaces—from before—were not nine feet wide, as they are supposed to be. Now I was not in on the initial dealings with M & M, so I don’t know if this came up then, if we even knew about such a regulation at this point, or if when the stripes were originally done there was such a width regulation.
ReplyDeleteWhat I do understand is that one or two persons took it upon themselves to lodge an official complaint against M & M, the authorities agreed the complaint was valid, and M & M—their work in the Village now done and their equipment almost entirely removed—slowly and intermittently began to restripe the parking division lines. Whether this was ever completed, I don’t know. It was not completed in front of where I live.
It would have been nice if the restriping errors could have been caught when M&M was here in full force. It would have been even better if it had been in the contract with M&M to make sure the spaces were nine feet wide. Was it perhaps? Was there a clause that said something like “in accordance with present regulations”? I don’t know.
I do know, however, how “interference,” no matter how seemingly justified, by others such as the two who complained to authorities about the parking space widths, can throw a monkey wrench into the works when an entity such as UCO is dealing with a big company such as M & M about a major repaving job. It is only natural for a company to expect to follow up with a “punch list” of mistakes to be rectified. When the punch list is suddenly increased threefold by “interlopers,” I can see the company, rightly or wrongly, saying “Whoa, whoa, whoa! We’re not redoing everything for these guys. Just do a token amount, drag it out, forget the rest, and let them sue us if they want to go to the trouble. We’ve got other jobs to do.” I am guessing that this is why some of the other work, such as redoing some of the worst flooding areas and fixing SOME of the worst cracks hasn’t been done. From the company standpoint, we got our fair share of “punch list” stuff done. At the same time there have been OTHER reasons, which Grace (and Dom Guarnagia and I previously) have cited, for the cracks and flooding problems.
There is blame to go around in my opinion, but there are also simply mistakes (which we all make) to go around. Sometimes it is best to just bite the bullet, absorb one’s losses and carry on. We do this all the time, on a smaller scale of course, in our individual daily lives. Because there is a cost to fighting everything—a cost in time, money, effort, one’s peace and comfort, and getting on with other important things.
Hi Lanny. Some good points here, but please do not make any excuses for the TERRIBLE actions of those folks suing us over the paving job that was approved. There are no excuses or explanations or apologies possible for the horrible actions, bad speech, defaming of those on the other blog. None. Nada.
ReplyDeleteHi all,
ReplyDeleteThere is a small group of malcontents that like to bring law suits.
Those who wish to sue, do so, with your money.
Do not dare to reach your hands into Residents pockets to support your unconstrained fantasy of financial nirvana.
Delegates, please resist the Malcontent efforts to drag UCO and the Village into any frivolous law suit.
Do not fall for the snake oil that insurance settlements are "free money".
Reject this nonsense out of hand!
The prior Administration dragged the Village into a law suit which cost the unit owners close to $700,000.00
Those same people are involved in the current legal fiasco, JUST SAY NO!!!
Dave Israel