Four Sisters News

Welcome to the Four Sisters Coop’s Online Newsletter. Enjoy.

The online version will be updated on an irregular basis and will be more like a news blog with the ability to comment on the copy that is presented. Comments will be monitored before being published and have the usual restrictions against the use of rude language, racist, sexist homophobic anti gay, ageist, anti religious or other types of comments that go against our Co-op creed.

There will be similar restrictions for the people tasked with writing Committee reports with the usual protection for the privacy of members in the Co-op. I would ask that those writing the reports merely report on the committees activities and not scold or advance particular opinions, those type of articles can be covered in our op-ed pages.

Our output will be monitored by the Board because ultimately the Board has to take responsibility for what we as the Newsletter committee publish. Our task is to keep the membership informed with the ability to communicate both ways.

I would remind all members that we now have a computer in the Co-op office that can be used by members during working hours when the office is open during the week. That way you can keep up with the online version even if you don’t own a computer. We have recently upgraded one of the computers so that you can burn a CD or DVD.

Exciting times, we are the first Housing Co-op to have an on line Newsletter. We are breaking new ground here and the possibilities are wide open.

JWL Editor and Chair of the Newsletter Committee

By the Bobarian

The proposal from the Finance Committee to levy a user fee on members using the parking garage should be rejected  by the general membership as unwarranted and unnecessary.

The question essentially is this. Once user fees of any kind are introduced, when will they end? If members using the parking garage are asked to pay $20 a month today, what about tomorrow? $50, $75 or more? The parking fee proposal is precedent setting and that precedent should not be allowed to pass because more of the same is the likely consequence.

Why stop with parkade use? Why not attach user fees to all areas of co-op life that all members are asked to pay for but not all use? The parking fee advocates are opening a road that out of logical consistency leads not to a co-op of sharing but of play and pay. No thank you.

Pray tell what other housing co-ops have adopted user fees?

Name some examples. Why haven’t most if any? Such practices contradict the principles of what co-op life is all about, that’s why. Such practices breed divisions among members substituting self interested groups over community minded solidarity. All one needs to-do is to watch and observe what will happen here at Four Sisters if the parking fee issue evolves into a long campaign.

Parkade users are not villains nor are they fat cats of privilege. Why do they use the parkade? They do because it’s there. Why is it there? It’s there because it was a requirement demanded by the city when Four Sisters was built. There was no conspiracy. Owning a car is more of a lifestyle choice than an evidence of affluence. There is no class wallowing in conspicuous consumption living here.

Why did the Finance Committee broach the subject of user fees in the first place? Is there a financial crisis or an emergency looming? It is incumbent upon Finance to explain to the general membership why and how this whole user fee controversy began. Letting the genie out of the bottle is easier than putting it back in.

Imagine for a moment that the membership at Four Sisters underwent a total green conversion and there were no car owners here anymore. There would still be an empty parking garage and the co-op would still be paying for it. What then?

Couldn’t the co-op simply lease parking out to the public? This would require a new legal framework to do so necessitating a great deal of time, effort and probably money to achieve. And then?  The security situation here would face compounded problems with strangers having access to Four Sisters on a regular basis. Think about it. Increased administration stress, mounting insurance costs and the need for around the clock professional security are all factors in this scenario. Would Four Sisters any longer resemble what it is now or would it look more like a bad dream?

Four Sisters is a good and desirable place to live. Many members find it a privilege to live here and share the tradition passed on by the founding members. This is a proud tradition marked by cooperation, a strong community ethos, mutual respect and sharing. Why spoil it?

Aren’t user fees nothing less than the poisoned apples in our gardens?

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed in these articles are those of the authors and not the Newsletter committee or the Board. We take no sides in this controversy and only seek to present both sides of the issue for the information of Co-op members.

JWL Editor and Chairman of the Newsletter Committee

The Finance Committee has proposed that car owners in the co-op using the parking garage pay a modest fee of $20 per month. The Finance Committee’s recommendation has generated opposition based on the view that the levy would be an unjust user fee penalizing car owners. However, if the massive operating and mortgage costs of the underground parking lot are considered, there are a number of good reasons why parking fees are needed.

The underground garage constitutes 22.2% of the total square footage of Four Sister’s not including amenities. Think about that. That’s 38% of  the total area of the High Rise and Low Rise combined! The expense of the parking garage is a considerable proportion of our mortgage costs which all of us pay whether we own a car or not and for which we have paid from day one.

That is not all. Once we add in increasing annual city property taxes and the land lease costs to that of the mortgage costs, it becomes strikingly clear that the parking garage is a very expensive item placing significant burdens on those of our members who not only do not own cars but are also on low and fixed incomes.

There is still more. Once we add the insurance, the energy costs of lighting the parkade  area  and the costs of maintaining it to all the expenses cited  above, a  hidden dimension of our housing charges is revealed.

Originally there were 76 parking stalls in the garage. Two were removed for recycling space leaving 74.  Two are set aside for employee use, two for the use of visitors and one for the tractor cage. This leaves 69 parking stalls currently used by 69 members out of our community of just over 200.

According to the B.C. Assessment Authority, the underground parking area, is worth $2.85 million which is almost ¼ of the co-op’s value. Each parking stall has a market value of $180 per month. Because we do not have a parking fee, all members, with and without cars, contribute $98 per month to pay for the parkade through their housing charges. That’s over a $1000 per household per year.

Imagine for a moment that all members here at Four Sisters had cars and we had a parking policy of shared use in the parking area. Wouldn’t those periods of using alternative parking cost each member considerably more than the measly $20 per month proposed by Finance? You bet!

The parking garage is not a commons area unless you own a car. The children’s playground likewise is not a commons area unless you have kids. There are probably some other non-commons areas that do not readily come to mind. However on the scale of things money wise it would be like comparing an elephant to gnats! The parking area is a gigantic non-commons and non-revenue producing arena that is and has been subsidized by every member.

Bringing in a parking fee would ease the financial burden on those members least able to afford it. For instance, if parking area users paid the full or partial costs of the parkade, we could lower housing charges not only for the 83 co-op members without cars but for everyone. At the very least we could limit future rent increases.

Future repair bills to the underground parkade could be astronomical and lead to large housing charge increases for everyone. Our Replacement Reserve Working Group says that one day we may need to replace the ceiling membrane of the parking garage. According to the Finance Committee ,this “will create an expense so great that it cannot be covered by the replacement reserve and will require refinancing of the co-op and therefore a significant increase in housing charges.” Such a scenario would place an even greater burden on co-op members on low and fixed incomes. It is only fair that car owners contribute to the reserve replacement fund to help pay for future possible expenditures such as the ceiling membrane  which would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Motorized vehicles, such as cars and trucks, account for 40% of green house gas emissions in British Columbia which are responsible for global warming. This does not include direct particulate emissions released from the tail pipes of vehicles that cause lung cancer and chemical vapors that cause asthma. For these reasons, we also believe that co-op members with cars should pay the full financial and environmental costs of owning and driving a vehicle.

In conclusion, the absence of a parking fee at Four Sisters has been a significant oversight for too long.

Tim Pelzer

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed in the foregoing article are those of the authors and not the Newsletter Committee or the Board. We take no sides in this controversy and only seek to present both sides of the issue for the information of Co-op members.

JWL Editor and Chairman of the Newsletter Committee