To: Owners of Strata Corporation NW628 Huntly Wynd

3

To: Owners of Strata Corporation NW628 Huntly Wynd

From: Members of Strata Council

Date: 16th October 2017

In response to the allegations in the petition and demand for Special General Meeting, we have prepared the following information.

Rationale for Owners' Request
Special General Meeting as delivered to all owners:
Under the leadership of Louise Corrall the following significant events have taken place: / Strata Council Statement:
The Strata Council of Strata Corporation NW628 stand united with our President, Louise Corrall, in refuting these spurious allegations. Every member of council has worked diligently and in good faith for the owners of Huntly Wynd, even in the face ofunprofessionalbehavior and personal attacks.This treatment of Council and its members is unacceptable and hinders the completion of Council duties on behalf of all owners of Huntly Wynd. Importantly, these divisive actions damage the feeling of community within Huntly Wynd and pit neighbour against neighbour.
All decisions made by Council in 2017 were unanimous votes; as such, allegations against President Louise Corrall are allegations against all of Council.
Petition Statement: / Strata Council Response
1.The Strata Council of Strata Corporation NW628 has violated Section 96(b) (ii) of the BC Strata Property Act by purchasing common assets in the form of a new universal Gym using funds drawn down from the Strata Corporation's contingency reserve fund without authorization from the owners; / 1. After months of repeated written and verbal requests by owners for new equipment, and a survey posted in the gym asking which equipment was used, desired, and wished, approval was motioned and passed at the AGM by vote and authorization to spend money from CRFto purchase new gym equipment. Appropriate equipment was purchased and has provided pleasure to an increasing number of owners.
2. The Strata Council of Strata Corporation NW628 was negligent in its duties to respond to an owner's request for fair and reasonable access to the Corporation's official web site resulting in the Corporation being named as the Respondent in BC Human Rights Case No. 15706; / 2. A finding of“negligence” has never been made against this Strata Council by anyjudicial body and one need not be negligent to benamed as a respondent in any legal action.
3. The Strata Council of Strata Corporation NW628 failed in its duty to provide sufficient Strata Council member oversight during the voter registration at the February 27 2017 Annual General Meeting which resulted in a discrepancy between the number of eligible voters who formed the quorum at the meeting and the number of votes that were cast in favor, opposed and abstaining in response to Resolution No. 3 / 3. This council appointed two scrutineers who verified all votes taken at the AGM. Strata Management company has responsibility for, and did provide, oversight to registration.
4. The Strata Council of Strata Corporation NW628 verbally committed when responding to an owner inquiry put forth at the February 27 2017 AGM to place on the March council meeting agenda that the Strata Council would investigate and confirm that the Corporation's total loss insurance coverage of $220.00/ square foot was adequate to cover the cost to rebuild one or more strata lot(s) in the event of a major or catastrophic loss yet no such confirmation (if it exists) has been shared with the Corporation's owners; / 4. Strata Council received confirmation from the insurer that our coverage is adequate to cover the cost to rebuild one or more strata lot(s) in the event of loss.
5. The Strata Council of Strata Corporation NW628 manipulated the 2017 Depreciation Report to reflect a heightened urgency to spend contingency reserve funds on renovating and redecorating a common property asset which the ownership subsequently rejected at an August 30 2017 Special General Meeting(Depreciation Report 13.0 Appendix B —Strata Feedback September 6, 2016) (Excerpt: The Strata requested the refurbishment of the amenities to be scheduled earlier in 201 7.Normac adjusted the plan accordingly.); / 5. Strata council recognized a need to follow the depreciation report guidance to maintain all common property. In addition to proposing owners take definitive action on ponds and streams, and act on fencing needs outlined, we recommended that, after previous proposals to bring the clubhouse and health club to current standards had been ignored, there not be another delay. StrataCouncilagrees that maintenance of all our common property is important - to each owner in each of the ways we enjoy it.
6. The Strata Council of Strata Corporation NW628 reneged on its verbal commitment to present three different design proposals and a fourth "none of the above" option when debating Resolution No. 3 at the AGM on February 27 2017 - a commitment that convinced some owners to support the Resolution; / 6. Following presentation of many design options to consider in July, some owners conveyed opinions in writing and at a meeting of owners regarding preferences and dislikes; as a consequence four of the design proposals were deleted from original presentation of ideas and plans when presented for voting at the SGM. As stated on notice of meeting, Strata Councilstated that the removal of those additional proposals reflected Council listening to those owners. The proposals retained were the most basic recommendations of upkeep and update seen as necessary to the integrity of property standards together with three choices to be made going forward, regarding style and colour. A core group of owners displayed opposition to even the most basic of required maintenance updates from the outset.
7. Members of the Strata Council of the Strata Corporation NW628 did not attend an owner initiated community feedback meeting held July 25, 2017 wherein forty-nine plus owners shared their views and opinions regarding proposed plans to use funds from the Strata Corporation's Contingency Reserve Fund in order to renovate and redecorate a common asset of the Corporation; / 7. Council President, Louise Corrall corresponded with the organizer of the communityfeedback meeting, Rob Sleath, to enquire whether Council attendance would be useful. Mr. Sleath recommended that Council not attend so owners could have their fulsome say to council. Council heeded this advice and did not attend.Minutes were received and shared.
8. The Strata Council of Strata Corporation NW628 has failed on several occasions to acquire a minimum number of three bids prior to awarding contracts to suppliers and/or service providers; / 8. There is no requirement for a particular number of bids but rather the requirement to due diligence and responsible behaviour. As stated in ageneralmeeting with owners, many providers were asked for written bids, but not all would bid for work in Huntly Wynd. Council at all times followed practice of due diligence.
9. The Strata Council of Strata Corporation NW628 has demonstrated poor judgment in the awarding of a contract to replace fencing panels and has settled for inferior workmanship on the part of the fencing contractor contrary to Section 11.3 (b) of the Strata Corporation's Bylaws (b) that the standard of work and materials be not less than that of the existing structures; / 9. This personal opinion and indictment of work diligently done under authority of the strata act provisions is unworthy of discussion.
10. The Strata Council of Strata Corporation NW628 failed in its duty to provide sufficient Strata Council member oversight during the voter registration at the August 30 2017 Special General Meeting (SGM); / 10. This matter will be addressed by theWynford management group.
11.Louise Corrall, Strata Council President's conduct at the August 30th 2017 Special General Meeting (SGM) clearly demonstrated that she did not understand the process as was clearly described in the SGM agenda that the Strata Council had assembled; and
(NOTE.. This was evidenced by the President's insistence to proceed to a vote regarding the purchase of televisions. In the Special General Meeting agenda it stated: If the Ownership approves 3/4 Vote Resolution #1, Majority Vote Resolution #1 and 3/4 Vote Resolution #2 shall also be considered.) / 11. A procedural mistake was made, unwittingly, following a clerical error. It was raised, explained and resolved at SGM.
12. Many owners of Strata Corporation NW628 are concerned and dissatisfied by the Strata Council's unwillingness to call a community meeting for the purpose of addressing inquiries and have it receive community feedback regarding the oversight and administration of the Corporation's day-to-day operations; / 12. There have beenseveralmeetings of owners over the last two years including two community conversation Q and A meetings, a meeting that included presentation and Q and A with engineering firm who produced the Depreciation Report and presentation by an owner representing need for updates to common property, a meeting for presentation of design options and product samples with opportunity for dialogue and input, plus SGM that could have allowed discussion had owners been open to it. Attwo of these meetings, the unprofessional behaviour of several of the owners who signed this petition was off-putting to convening more. At one owners meeting two owners booed the introduction of council members. It appears impossible to hold sensible gatherings under circumstances like this and unless the conduct of owners changes, future Councils will be subjected to the same behaviour and as such, potential candidates may not be forthcoming for future Council vacancies.
13. The Strata Council of Strata Corporation NW628 has refused to provide owners with completed Request For Proposal documents by referring to the Corporation's business documents as being "private information and not available to owners; / 13. As stated, this council has not prepared RFPs due to the relatively small contracts involved, but rather followed the recommendation to seek bids for work need in order to make best choice on behalf of ownership. On this we, like other strata under the Strata Act, rely on professional management services. This council has availed itself of professional guidance in seeking of bids and done due diligence, on occasion seeking bids from a large number of service providers until successful in obtaining bids from interested providers, in reviewing more than three bids, as well as following up on references and viewing work done in other locations.This council followed professional management counsel to not post contracts publicly on the website for reasons of discretion and privacy, but rather informed owners they can request a personal copy of documents from Wynford.
14. Louise Corrall, Strata Council President made private arrangements in the summer of 2017 for an owner to use the Guest Suite for a period of time greater than allowed for and which prevented another owner from using the guest suite contrary to the instructions in the Guest Suite Reservation Form; and (NOTE: Maximum advance booking is for a seven (7) night stay. If a guest wants to stay on after seven nights, the owner may rebook up to one week at a time if the suite is available. A new booking takes precedence over someone rebooking week by week. However, if no other booking has been made, an additional booking may be made not earlier than seven (7) days before its commencement. Appropriate payment must be made in advance of any rebooking extensions.) / 14. Requests for three separate groupings of datescovering a period of 7 days staywithin a ten-day period were made. There were no conflicting requests.Louise Corrallproposed that to save cost of three separate cleanings the entire period form one booking. All was booked and paid many weeks prior to the dates requested, as required. Subsequently and very close to the dates, another owner requested the last day of the booking.As was discussed with the second owner requesting the last day of the booked stay,had the requests gone forward as originally requested as three separate bookings, under the letter of our rules the owner would still have been unable to book the date requested.
15. The Strata Council of Strata Corporation NW628 violated the Corporation's Bylaw 11 (2) (c) by permitting an owner to install a security camera(s) to the exterior of their strata lot without seeking approval from the requisite number of owners at an AGM / SGM nor was such approval minuted in any Strata Council meeting minutes. Bylaw 11 (2) (c) require owners to seek the Corporation's approval to alter 'common property, such as the exterior of a unit; / 15. No suchrequest was forwarded to Council by any owner for consideration, nor did Council grant authorization for this installation. Unfortunately, several owners go ahead and do things without seeking approvalin violation of Strata Rules. Any structural alteration, or change to common property, must be approved from Council as stated. The onus is on each owner to follow the Strata Rules and Bylaws and not for Council to tour and monitor eachproperty to ensure every owner is in compliance.
16. The Strata Council of Strata Corporation NW628violated the Corporation's Bylaw 11 (2) (c) by permitting the removal and replacement of window coverings, a common property asset in the Clubhouse facility without seeking approval from the requisite number of owners at an AGM / SGM; / 16. Sheer curtain panelswere removed for cleaning; when down it was obvious how much light they had shaded from the room. Following complaint by a small group of owners they were rehung. Interestingly, the sheer curtains referred to have subsequently been removed and changed by someone unknown to Council, and withoutauthorization of Council or the ownership. These newly hung curtains have a different texture and sheen. Other objects have also been changed, or dropped off in the clubhouse and guest suite without vote,which is another indication of someowners acting outside the Strata Rules.