I just got back from a three-hour homeowner's association meeting. Well, technically, it was only an hour and a half. The first hour and a half was the pre-meeting with two visitors from the City of Redmond Public Works department to talk about a rate increase for stormwater services. The meeting went something like this:
Public Works: It turns out we've been billing you as single-family homes instead of a complex of homes under a homeowner's association all this time, so we're correcting it, and that's why your stormwater bill will be twice as much, billed collectively instead of individually.
Homeowner: But it's twice as much as before.
Public Works: Yes, it turns out to be about twice as much as before. [Explanation of how they calculated how much we owe.]
Homeowner: I don't want to pay twice as much as before.
Public Works: You were being billed less than you should have before. Now it will be correct.
Homeowner: But it was correct before.
Public Works: No, it was wrong before. The new amount is correct.
Homeowner: I don't want to pay twice as much as before.
Public Works: We realize this.
Homeowner: You should have given us more notice.
Public Works: Well, we tried, but you didn't get the mail.
Homeowner: We shouldn't have to pay since you didn't give us more notice... ever!
Public Works: Well, you still have to pay. It's a city ordinance.
Homeowner: But it's more than we were paying before.
Public Works: Yes, it's more.
Homeowner: If you're going to increase our rates, you should have given us more notice.
Public Works: We tried to.
Homeowner: Well, I don't want to pay more money.
Public Works: (sigh)
(...continued for 90 minutes...)
There was like five minutes of actual content in the meeting (none of which was news to the board), repeated ad nauseum for the elderly/confused/angry homeowners who either weren't paying attention, didn't understand, or couldn't hear. I do not want their job.
1 comment:
Sounds like it was fun. At what point did you want to start hitting yourself so you no longer had to listen to the circular argument.
Post a Comment