Held at Thistle Community Housing, 1845 Folsom Street

Attendance: Jonathan Machen, Carol Teboe, Alex Wilson, Deb Feustel, Gene Langlois, Loretta Milcarek, Jeff Yegian, Julie Morris

Agenda:
Slow signs
Space Rental for 35B
Parking issues
Speed bumps
Yard cleanup
Dumpster issue
Need for storage
Delinquency Report
Budget overview
Burning compost piles
Shed Request for resident

1. Alex Wilson began the meeting by thanking Julie for putting up the 'slow down- Children' signs.

2. Loretta discussed the possibilities of having someone move a home into space #35B. This issue was left unresolved for the time being.

3. Current parking problems: A new approach is needed, and is already being crafted in the new rules and regulations:

(Briefly - #4, Parking, under 'Motor Vehicles': Each home may have up to two vehicles parked in front. Cars should always be parked so that they do not block or extend into walkways, neighbors' home sites or roadways. Parking spaces in designated areas may be rented for a nominal fee per month by residents who own more than two cars on a first come/first serve basis until all spots are taken. Each resident shall instruct visitors where to park . The parking spaces in front of each home are to be used to park residents' motor vehicles, which are currently licensed, MHA stickered / tagged and operable. Resident shall not use the space in front of the home to park any over-sized vehicle, which might obstruct walkways, roadways or a neighbor's access. Resident shall not park any motor vehicle on lawns, patios, or other areas not designated for parking. Each lot will be issued two permanent stickers and one visitor hanging tag.

Briefly, the procedure for instituting rule changes was discussed. It was unclear whether there was needed a 30-or-60 day time frame for implementing these new procedures. Immediate action on this item: Get the policy stated and give it to Jeff, who can follow up for now.

4. Speed bumps: Two locations for speed bumps (2.5 inches high x 15 inches wide) were suggested on the north end of the park at a cost of under $275 for both bumps (better than a speed 'pit' which is not drainable and harder to remove). Other locations were suggested for the other streets that people speed on. Signs would need to be put up to alert people of the bumps, (probably at a higher cost than the bumps). It was agreed that we put a statement about proposed speed bump locations in the upcoming Mobilizer, stating that 'management recommends speed bumps for certain locations, unless you don't respond' and take action two weeks after the Mobilizer is issued. (This was never put in the Dec 2003 Mobilizer.)

5. Yard Cleanup: Hast reported that six spaces were really bad. Notices have been put under their doors with no response. Notice will be given that the Management Company can go after the person to clean their spaces with threats of fines and legal suits, if needed.

6. Dumpster Discussions. See the Mobilizer for Jonathan's article on this issue that follows.
During the December 8th management committee meeting, the issue of a certain 'problem dumpster area' was discussed. The dumpster area in question: the one at the north end of the park, near Valmont. A solution, offered by Hast Management Company and bantered about by the esteemed members of the management committee, was discussed. This article serves to highlight the issue, not to come to any conclusions.

Many people who rely on the dumpster near Valmont street - the main dumpster for this side of the park - also know that this busy dumpster area is the source of grievous complaints, mainly for residents living nearby. These problems apply to all the dumpsters, of course; this dumpster just happens to receive the most complaints.
Specifically, it was stated that the north Valmont dumpster area is a visual nuisance with many unwanted, discarded items left nearby, attracting animals and generating noise. Although the master plan for the park retains this particular dumpster, there is an alternative solution, one that, should we want to try an experiment, might be
worth trying. That solution is to offer individual trash pick-up service for the north side of Goose Creek. While not a cost-effective or practical solution for the entire park (it will cost more, and where would we put large items?), this alternative plan could be implemented, allowing those residents 'a new trash experience' as well as the option of using other dumpsters in the park, if needed.

Residents would be limited to one 32-gallon container for trash, and two other containers, one for recyclable bottles and one for paper. There are some catches, though, with individual pick-ups. You (a household) would be limited to a 32-gallon container for trash, unless you wanted to personally pay more. You would have to remember to put
the containers out on the street. You would not be able to leave both recyclable bins out at the same time. You would have to figure out where to put the containers on the street on pick-up day, and as we all know, street space is tight. Lastly, this sort of pick-up might
actually increase traffic and noise and pollution. (Pick-ups would be coordinated together, however).

What do you think? It's up to us to decide, not some distant absentee landlord. If you have a comment about this issue, please write an email to: mha_2635@hotmail.com.


7. Need for Storage: The need for the MHA to store files in a secure location was discussed, possibly using space in the washhouse rear room. Jonathan has a possible large horizontal file cabinet at Solstice that can be donated.

8. Delinquency report: one person is still outstanding. Action: Getting advice on proper procedures for terminology on the letters.

9. Budget discussions: due to conditions involving the sale of the Park we are $35,000 over budget. Loretta described the process for coming up with the budget: figuring the monthly costs for each item for the year 2003 and then making a good guess about what will be needed for 2004. Budget totals for 2003 and 2004 need to balance and there was a question about the utilities budget for 2004 was going down.

Some rough notes:
Both vacancy loss and 'administrative unit' are zeroed out by initially adding them into the budget as 'budgeted income' and 'scheduled income'
Grounds maintenance has gone up
Parking lot maintenance covers things like pothole repair
Gas costs are increasing
DNO insurance to be put into the future budget
Need a good working description of the parameters for a capital budget
'Park transfer' amounts are still uncertain
Nothing yet in advertising and promotion
Vacancy loss is a standard 3%
Snow removal used to be via a contractor/Enzo is able to do more now

10: Compost Piles: A resident’s compost pile caught fire some time ago and was put out safely by another resident. A properly maintained compost pile should not catch fire.

11: Shed Request for resident: this item was granted as the resident has proper diagrams for placement of structures on his lot. A larger shed, it was noted, will lessen the space available for more structures like a deck and so on.

submitted by Jonathan Machen

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••