Some of us have had a brief vacation from the watchdog…but one update so far. WVH and Peterson will be going to trial on June 7th. Peterson had once agreed to settle with WVH. According to the previous agreement, WVH would pay their own legal fees and most of Peterson’s a total estimated to be about $45,000. They had also wanted him to sign the standard Alteration agreement. Upon review of the agreement with counsel it was determined that the way the standard agreement is worded that if Peterson were to sign the agreement upon insistence by Management and the Board to settle the case he was being coerced into allegedly committing fraud on behalf of the board. Peterson refused to sign the agreement because he would not commit fraud and further submit that document to city as the Board was asking him to do. He and his counsel asked numerous times that if the Board wanted him to sign an agreement of any kind if they could please write up an agreement that specifically reflected the case. The Board refused and the case was once again brought up before a judge. The judge had asked the Board’s counsel why they were insisting on him signing a piece of paper that had very little to do with the case and counsel for the Board responded that it questioned the safety of the placement of the submeter even though no one from Management nor the board has ever taken it upon themselves to look at the sub-meter in question since its installation by the Coops electricians almost two years ago. To address the concerns of the Board, the judge suggested an inspection from the D.O.B (Dept of Buildings). Both parties agreed that D.O.B. would be allowed to inspect the meter..then something curious happend.
One the day the D.O.B. was to inspect the meter, they went to the main office on 700 Washington to meet Gail Davis. Oddly, even though Ms. Davis had allegedly questioned the legality of the sub-meter’s placement for almost two years, and the Board itself in a letter to the tenant Peterson claimed that the sub-meter was a “fire-hazard”, Ms. Davis did not instruct the D.O.B. to investigate Peterson’s sub-meter even though in doing so could have brought an end to this debate. Why? No one can answer that but Gail Davis. Why after almost two years would Gail not want resolve this issue (as ordered by the court agreement) one way or the other concerning the submeter?
Well this issue of either allegedly blocking or preventing D.O.B. from inspecting the meter and bringing and end to the issue was brought before the judge last week. The counsel for the board asked the judge for yet another appointment for inspection from D.O.B. . Needless to say the judge refused citing counsel had that opportunity and for their own reasons refused to act upon it. So the case will now go to trial on June 7th and the expense is surely to escalate due to Management/Board alleged mismanagement..Question is, was it worth it? ….Stay tuned.