Issues with strata council and property management

I am an owner at Copperstone and have lived here since 2009, almost as long as Copperstone has existed. I, Jeff Franchuk, served on Copperstone council from 2010-2014 and was proud to help build and support our Copperstone community. I am increasingly concerned about Copperstone, both its financial well-being, as well as the quality and care of the community here. I don’t believe the current council and management are doing a good job and need to be replaced. We need new people, with new ideas and a willingness to commit to the hard work of getting Copperstone to where it should be: financially secure, and a welcoming place for everyone to live.

We are putting forward a petition to remove council and end the contract with Quay Pacific (we had a previous petition, see below for more on that) and realize some will just see us as “complainers”. We are not complainers—we have serious concerns and are taking action to hopefully get them addressed.

After our first petition went public, the management company (on behalf of council) began a campaign accusing us of lying, spreading misinformation and even accusing us of defamation in a slide show at the March 25, 2024 AGM (Annual General Meeting). None of these claims are true.

What we can say is this:

The strata property manager (acting on behalf of council) will continue to accuse us of lying and spreading misinformation. It is the manager who has done this, repeatedly. He will do everything to convince you we are trying to hurt or destroy Copperstone. He will assure you everything is fine with our finances—without providing evidence to back that up. He will likely reject any call for an independent audit as unnecessary. He will—and has—bullied and harassed those who challenge him and his authority.

We can’t tell you who to believe, but we can show you examples of how he and his company have misled the residents of Copperstone on multiple occasions.

Jeff Franchuk,
Owner, SL156

Financial irregularities, questionable spending decisions and priorities

Water bill non-payment/Actual numbers

UPDATE, March 24, 2025: I have added the water and sewer numbers for the 2024-2025 budget year (running February 1, 2024 to January 31, 2025) and updated images/charts accordingly.

We have obtained water and sewer invoices for Copperstone through a Freedom of Information request with the city of New Westminster. We will gladly share them with any owner who wishes to view them.

You may also request these invoices through strata council (good luck there!), or through an FOI request yourself with the city.

Below is a small sample of the Copperstone water invoice covering April/May 2024.

The water bill went unpaid from July 2019 to April 2023 (46 months), due to an error by the City of New Westminster. The total unpaid amount was $185,657.33.

The “Actual” numbers for water and sewer in the 2020-2025 budgets do not match what was paid.

There is $413,732.11 in unaccounted money in water and sewer bills, 2020-2025.

We talked to the Finance Department of the City of New Westminster and received all invoices from the city covering what they billed Copperstone for water and sewer services, giving us exact numbers. We are happy to share these invoices with any owners—and Copperstone strata (council) is obligated to provide them upon request, as well.

At the March 25, 2024 AGM, council spent a good deal of time showing a presentation, trying to explain the unpaid water bills. Their answers were incomplete and omitted critical information.

Every item in the annual budget has an Actual column showing the real cost (or revenue).

We have confirmed from multiple sources that the Actual numbers are simply the collected invoices/payments for a specific service, or in the case of revenue (eg. strata fees) the total sum of collected money.

I asked the president of a property management company in the Lower Mainland to describe what the Actual column in budgets represents. This is what he said:

That should be what was actually spent against each of the line items in the past year.

This is the obvious, correct response.

Compare to when an owner asked the Copperstone strata property manager to explain where the “Actual” numbers come from. He replied to the owner as follows (bold, underline and quotation marks are from the reply):

Regarding your additional question: ‘Where did you get “ACTUAL NUMBERS” from? Actual numbers in annual budgets.”

The Strata Agent produces a draft operating budget based on historical accounting data, income & expenditure, and figures based on current contracts. Council will review each budget line and agree on the operating fund budget to be presented in the AGM Notice and then approved by the owners at the AGM. Most of the figures in budgets are “estimates” and not actual numbers that are exact.

This completely avoids addressing the question on where the numbers in the Actual column come from. Why? There are three columns in the budget, but only two of them deal with estimates:

Approved Budget: These are estimates provided to owners for the previous year’s budget and are meant to provide historical context.
Actual: The actual cost (not estimates) of services/utilities/expenses in the most recent fiscal year (the most recent one ran February 1, 2024 to January 31, 2025)
Proposed Budget: These are estimates provided to owners for the current budget, which is voted on at the AGM. The current budget (fiscal year) began on February 1, 2025.

In a letter to the same owner, Quay Pacific wrote:

Obsidian received Commercial Water and the Water Sewer Invoices from the City of New Westminster up until June 2019. The new Property Management, Quay Pacific, paid the Water & Sewer Invoices received.

We confirmed with the City of New Westminster that Quay Pacific paid at minimum one water bill on July 4, 2019 and likely the one before it (both had been sent to Obsidian originally). How did the strata property manager or anyone else at Quay Pacific not notice the monthly invoices never arrived after paying at least one themselves? Quay Pacific also manages other stratas. It iseems improbable that these stratas do not have separate water and sewer bills.

The treasurer was on council for the water bill payment of July 19, 2019 (by Quay Pacific), yet apparently did not question why the invoices suddenly stopped arriving?
At the March 25, 2024 AGM the $127,704.67 budget deficit was explained as:
- Repayment on the unpaid water bills. Quote from president’s letter in AGM 2024 notice: “However, in paying these outstanding fees [water bill repayments] Strata has incurred an Operating Fund deficit.”
- Unexpected roof repair costs. Quote from president’s letter in the AGM 2024 notice: “These funds had to be taken from the Operating Budget.”

If the water bill was not being paid, the money normally reserved for it should have been (per the Strata Property Act):

(a) transferred into the contingency reserve fund;
(b) carried forward as part of the operating fund, as a surplus;
(c) used to reduce the total contribution to the next fiscal year’s operating fund.

If enough of this “surplus” money was spent, what was it spent on? Why was there no investigation into why there was an unexpected surplus? Note also: The surpluses reported in the subsequent budgets do not match the unpaid water bill money. Roof repair costs should not be taken from the general operating budget but from the CRF—this is the exact thing the CRF exists for:

Under the Strata Property Act, every strata corporation and section, must have a contingency reserve fund (CRF). The CRF helps to pay for expenses that occur less than once a year, or that do not usually occur. Examples of CRF expenses include: replacing the roof, upgrading the elevator or repaving a road. The CRF can also be used to pay for the depreciation report and the electrical planning report.

Source: Purpose of the CRF

And yet this council chose to take the money from our operating budget, without explaining why, deliberately contributing to a deficit—while also increasing strata fees by 5%. The special resolution the president refers to being voted down in 2023 was requesting $30,000 for roof repairs—to be taken from the CRF! The council literally went against its own proposed special resolution from the year before, without explanation.

The president claimed “we have an extremely healthy reserve fund” while omitting that the vast majority of the money in the CRF is from a settlement earmarked for the parkade membrane replacement project, which will cost millions of dollars to complete. This paints an inaccurate picture of how much money is actually available in the CRF for other purposes. It also ignores the fact that the settlement of $3.2 million is well short of the original $5.3 million estimated repair cost.

Summary

The water bill non-payment has been a fiasco, with the strata property manager, treasure and others failing to do due diligence with hundreds of thousands of dollars of owners' money. The budgets appear to be full of numbers that aren't real, raising serious questions over what is happening with our money.

This should deeply concern every owner at Copperstone.

Parkade membrane replacement project

PARKING MEMBRANE REPLACEMENT PROJECT: At a council meeting, the strata property manager strongly defended splitting this project up into multiple pieces and stages, which will result in longer work, higher costs, as well as more difficulty in getting warranty coverage and resolving any potential disputes or future issues. Splitting it up will also likely result in uneven or inconsistent work quality. None of this works in Coppertone’s favor. Some members of council also prefer the multi-stage approach. This is a massive project that will cost millions of dollars and it’s critical it be done properly.

Summary:

This project is already facing a shortfall in funding, thanks to a settlement that fell more than $1.0 million short of the projected cost--which will only go up over time.

For those unaware, the membrane is a seal or engineered barrier between the courtyard parking lot and the underground parking that keeps water from getting through. The membrane at Copperstone is leaking and is in need of replacement. In 2022 Copperstone received a settlement of $3.5 million for the replacement (check the November 2022 SGM Notice for details), though the estimated cost of the project was around $5 million at the time.

Patio bylaw enforcement

The Strata Council has done little to enforce the bylaw that covers what may be kept on patios/decks. This has resulted in an increasing level of non-compliance over the last 10 years, an example of how council—some members of whom have been on council since 2016—neglects issues over the long term. Recently, they began having vague discussions over this at council meetings.

An inspection of the 244 building on July 2, 2024 resulted in our unit being hit with a bylaw violation letter, due to our patio. Despite obvious and widespread non-compliance with the patio bylaw across the property, no other units were served notice. We felt we had been targeted by the strata property manager.
The strata property manager contacted the New Westminster Fire Department to report a “fire hazard” at the back of the 244 building. No such hazard existed, either on our patio, or elsewhere behind the building.
On July 11, 2024, I saw two NWFD firefighters on the Allen Street side of the building, apparently lost. I brought them to our patio and we chatted with them, and allowed them to take photos of the patio. They noted that they would file a report and confirmed no fire hazards.

In the July 30, 2024 council meeting minutes, the strata property manager wrote (emphasis ours):

Council reviewed the owner’s response regarding unapproved enclosure of a patio and the installation of a window ac unit and noted that there was no approval for the alterations. The City of New Westminster’s Fire Officer’s email stated that the storage on this patio is excessive. Council requested that the Strata Manager issue Bylaw Violation Letters to the owner.

We requested a copy of the report from the City of New Westminster. The strata property manager misrepresented the report above. The report said there were a “large” number of items, not “excessive” and made no mention of an enclosure, as there is only a screen held in place by a magnet. This deliberate twisting of language is a common trait of the strata property manager, changing the wording to fit his agenda, regardless of the reality.

At the September 24, 2024 council meeting, council approved a notice to go out to all owners, written by the strata property manager. The strata property manager sent this notice out without showing it to council first.
The notice was sent on October 2, 2024, ordered compliance within 20 days, and warned of inspections to follow.
We had a hearing with council on October 28, 2024 (after the deadline for compliance passed) and without the presence of the strata property manager—per our request. We provided evidence showing that at least 90 units (including the president’s) were non-complaint. We suggested an owner’s committee to revise the bylaw and to cease enforcement (except in cases of safety/fire hazard) until an amended bylaw could be voted on. Council agreed.
We believe this entire situation only ended in an equitable solution that is fair and reasonable for all owners because we deliberately had the strata property manager excluded from the process. This can be seen perfectly in what the strata property manager wrote in the November 14, 2024 council meeting minutes summarizing the council response to our hearing, which both goes against the spirit and intent of what council had agreed to:

The Council sent a response to an owner following a Council Hearing on the enclosing of their patio without common property alteration approval. The owner gave a presentation highlighting several balconies and patios whereby the owners had stored items contrary to the strata bylaws.

The Council considered the safety of the building and the impact on building insurance coverage if the storage of personal items on balconies and patios continues. The Council has the duty to enforce the strata bylaws for the benefit of all owners.

The council agreed to produce and deliver a notice to owners and tenants to comply with the strata bylaws and list items that must not be on the balcony and that all balconies and patios must be open and not enclosed. Owners and tenants who failed to comply with the notice will result in an inspection by the council or contracted inspector.

The cost of an inspection would be charged back to the unit responsible for bylaw violation.

– James Jamieson, Strata Property Manager

The response above is completely different than what we got from council itself. This again demonstrates how the strata property manager pushes his own agenda, regardless of what council says or does. This is not how a functioning strata should operate. Both council and management are to blame for letting this situation persist for years.

Summary:

The long lack of enforcement, the clumsy attempts to suddenly enforce while clearly not understanding the scope of violations (including the president's own patio), along with the dysfunction on full display between council and the strata property manager show how poorly this council handles efforts to make Copperstone a smoothly-running community for all.

Work on putting together an owners' committee to revise the patio bylaw began so late it won't be able to submit anything before AGM 2026.

Documents:

A PDF of the official council response to our October 28, 2024 hearing. See how it differs from the tone and specifics of what the strata manager says above.
A PDF of the New Westminster Fire Department report from their July 11, 2024 inspection of our patio.
An audio recording we made (with permission) of the hearing (13.8 MB M4A file)

Gate installation on Allen Street

In September 2024 a gate was installed at the bottom of the stairs on the south side of the 244 building, at the Allen Street entrance.

The gate—which constitutes a major change in access to the property, as it would be locked—was installed without any consultation or approval from owners.
In strata council minutes, it’s noted that an owner complained about foot traffic from the hospital construction moving through Copperstone property. This was temporary while the hospital lane was closed, and is not a compelling reason to install a gate. The foot traffic stopped many months ago when the lane re-opened to construction personnel.
Another reason was concerns over drug use in the stairway. The gate does nothing to address this as the alcove can still be occupied. The gate also acts as a hindrance to residents who now have to stop and unlock the gate to enter or exit the property. It presents a safety issue in the event of an emergency, creating a bottleneck or delay if people are urgently trying to exit the 244 building or enter/exit the property.
Consulting with the New Westminster police department, we discovered only one person ever called about alleged drug use. The police suggested multiple deterrents that would likely be more effective and cheaper than the gate:
- red lights
- high-frequency audio
- call-ins to police to attend when alleged drug users are observed (the police simply need a description of the person or people involved)
The cost was ambiguously described in council meeting minutes as $700 for the gate itself and/or possibly its installation. This does not include additional costs for the locksmith work or any other expenses associated. This is not a good use of our money and again, council went ahead with this with no consultation of owners.
Council is now asking for “up to $30,000” for security measures at AGM 2025, a ridiculous overreach based on fear mongering and little else. We do not need to turn Copperstone into a surveillance state. The $30,000 figure appears to have been pulled out of thin air, another example of council moving ahead on ill-conceived, poorly-planned projects–at our expense.

Summary:

UPDATE, March 12, 2025: Council is now asking for an absurd "up to $30,000" at AGM 2025 for locked gates, security cameras and more, for dubious reasons that would turn Copperstone into a fortress, a huge waste of our money.

Original Summary:

Council is making decisions about property access that should be approved by the majority of owners, not arbitrarily implemented based on a few random complaints that are no longer even relevant. 

The gate is currently not installed, with only the frame in place. In the meantime, we (Jeff and Stan) have regularly begun cleaning up trash and debris in and around the stairwell, put up signs advising no loitering and are generally keeping an active eye on the area--at no cost to owners and residents. We do this because we care about our home and community at Copperstone.

Poor snow removal and planning

SNOW REMOVAL: After incomplete and substandard snow removal by Burnaby Blacktop in January 2024:

Council did not have the contractor return to complete the snow removal properly. The strata property manager at the 2024 AGM claimed that they could not do the work because the roads were not passable. This unprompted explanation makes no sense, in part because no proper follow-up was EVER done. Also, the roads were cleared quickly, regardless.
Council opted to authorize spending more owners’ money ($1500) for a snowblower to be used by caretaking staff, despite having already paid $10,000 for a snow removal contract and not properly enforcing it. There is also nowhere on site to properly store a gas-powered snowblower.

On January 30, 2025, strata council approached the issue of the four speed bumps in the driveway being torn out by snow removal companies by completely missing the point of what they were trying to solve and had them removed:

Council’s perception of the issue: Stopping the accidental removal of the speed bumps by the snow removal company.
Council’s solution: Proactively remove the speed bumps and re-install them at a later date.

Actual issue: Insuring the speed bumps stay in place SO THEY CAN FUNCTION AS INTENDED.
Actual solution: There are many, but contacting the snow removal company, making them aware of the speed bumps and putting it into the contract would all help. The main part is to COMMUNICATE.

The speed bumps can’t work if they are not there, a problem the current council either doesn’t understand or doesn’t care about.

Summary:

UPDATE, March 26, 2025: The speed bumps were finally but back by White Diamond Construction on March 25, 2025, 53 days after they had been removed--and, conveniently, six days before the AGM.

Original Summary:

Council has long failed to address the accidental removal of speed bumps by snow removal companies and when they finally did, they approached it from the completely wrong direction, essentially trying to cure a headache with a hammer.

Snow removal is not being dealt with responsibly by council.

Parkade light replacement costs and implementation

LIGHT FIXTURES: Council proposes to replace all light fixtures in the parkade and other areas, switching to LED lighting to save on energy costs.

Light fixtures (which are different than light bulbs) should not (and do not) need to be replaced unless they are broken.
Replacing existing light bulbs with LED bulbs will cost far less than replacing entire fixtures unnecessarily, and still achieve the same energy savings.
This is another example of council voting on items for which they clearly do not have adequate knowledge. Rather than deferring and informing themselves, they vote out of ignorance.
At the September 2024 council meeting, the strata property manager asserted that an estimated increase of $10,000 on the project (to $45,000) was not a concern, despite owners only approving $35,000 at the 2024 AGM.
Some members of council are advocating for motion-controlled lights in the parkade that would mean areas of the parkade would remain dark. This is unnecessary and unsafe. It would result in minimal cost savings due to the efficiency of LED lights.

Summary:

UPDATE, March 10, 2025: The AGM 2025 Agenda is out and council is unbelievably asking for $20,000 more on this project, having done virtually nothing on it over the past year. A proposed part of the project to retrofit sensors to dim the lights would decrease safety, may not meet required building codes, and add significantly to the cost, with minimal savings.

Original Summary:

An example of council constantly deferring a major project--nearly a year after the money has been approved, nothing has been done except for talking to a few contractors. The additional costs of the project, in the form of the above-mentioned $20,000 special resolution for the March 2025 AGM, should be voted down by owners until a new, more responsible council can take a look at the project.

Monetary compensation for doing volunteer work

REMUNERATION (PAYMENT): Council awarded themselves $400 of owner’s money at the January 2024 council meeting, claiming they do “extra duties.”

The “extra duties” listed by council include: Meet with owners, inspect the buildings and deal with emergencies. These things are normal, expected work and part of being on council. Council is a volunteer position and introducing payments establishes a negative precedent and improper motivation. If any council member feels they are not up to the task, they are free to resign their seat on council without consequence. Being a council member is hard work and it is not for everyone.

Summary:

The strata council awarded themselves this extra payment 18 days after fire alarms were left ringing for almost four hours at all three buildings on January 4, 2024. The issue had to be resolved by council (as per the New Westminster Fire Department, who I talked to when they were on the scene. Nearly two hours after the alarms started, Quay Pacific was unable to reach any of the seven members of council, five of whom are still on council today.

This is a line item in the budget and we urge owners to have it struck at the next AGM. Financial incentives should not be part of being on council, no matter how well-intended.

Safety issues

CO2 sensors in the parkade were left untested for seven months past the required follow-up date in 2023.
Deficiencies in smoke detectors in all common areas of the 244 building were noted in July 2023. The strata property manager claimed all detectors would need to be replaced, at significant cost. Many months later, Mircom confirmed that only a software upgrade was needed (and was done).
The 244 building parkade had its gate left unlocked and open for over 24 hours “awaiting a receiving [sic]” in July 2023, presenting a security risk for both residents and vehicles in the parkade. The president was observed driving through the malfunctioning gate, despite people gathered around the gate trying to determine what had happened.

Ventilation housing damage. The ventilation shed in the courtyard was damaged for over eight months. In August 2023 (shortly after the damage), council was advised the mechanical dampers in the housing would not work as debris was blocking them. This posed a safety risk. The strata property manager said the debris would be removed with repairs, which did not happen until March 2024, seven months later. The strata property manager blamed the long delay on ICBC being difficult to work with, despite ICBC applying a 15% depreciation report fee on the work, due to long delays in getting it done (ICBC would not apply a DR if they were the ones responsible for the delay). More on this in the next section.
Roof maintenance (November 2023) work did not follow proper protocols, resulting in debris falling from roofs onto sidewalks below that had not been cordoned off, putting those on the property at risk.I had material (clumps of moss, twigs, etc.) fall on my head when returning home.

Poor communication, council and strata property manager acting improperly, lacking knowledge

Single point of failure: All communication with owners is through a management company, creating a barrier between council and owners.
Long delays or no response: Messages sent to the property management company, Quay Pacific, can sometimes go weeks before a response is heard back. Occasionally there is no response at all.
Excluding people: We have verified that the strata property manager is excluding some owners and council members from certain communications without reason or explanation. They are not confidential messages where only select people would be permitted to receive them.
Threatening messages:The strata property manager has sent threatening letters to multiple owners, accusing them of things they have not done, without any evidence presented:
- The strata property manager sent letters accusing innocent owners of being the ones responsible for driving their vehicles into the ventilation shed. In one case, the man accused was already dead at the time of the incident. The strata property manager demanded a death certificate, and the widow complied. Despite this, he then sent the accusatory letter again, as if he had entirely forgotten the entire thing. He also sent us a letter as if we were the ones responsible (we had no vehicle at the time and still do not have one).
- The strata property manager accused another owner and made threats against his employment, including a ghoulish screenshot of a Google search he had done on the owner, complete with photos of him from his company’s website. Among other things, he was accused of being behind the petition, which he had no part in. The claims and threats were made without any basis in fact, with the strata property manager threatening legal action. The letter is included, with permission of the owner, in redacted form, under the Documents category in the sidebar.
Wrong people contacted: Replies from the strata property manager have been sent to the wrong recipients on multiple occasions, raising privacy concerns. This has happened to us twice, and we have confirmed the same with other owners.
Council meeting minutes are often late: The minutes for the August 2022 meeting were not made available until March 2023. The Strata Property Act require them to be made available within two weeks of the meeting. The strata property manager promised to post minutes in lobbies at the June 2023 meeting, but never followed through. Without explanation, minutes stopped being emailed entirely to owners in June 2024.
Council meeting minutes issues: The strata property manager writes the minutes, despite running the meetings and council having a dedicated secretary who could do this (as per the Strata Property Act). Jeff, having attended all meetings since February 2024, has noted how the posted minutes regularly deviate from the actual meeting themselves:
- Minutes often contain multiple discrepancies
- Minutes misrepresent multiple items and issues. Example: A report in the July 30 2024 minutes misrepresented a report from the New Westminster Fire Department regarding our patio, citing an “excessive” number of items and an “enclosure” when the report actually said the number of items was “large” and made no reference at all to an enclosure.
- Minutes omit important discussions
Council attendance at meetings is inconsistent and lacking: At our own hearing in October 2024, only four of seven council members attended. Attendance has improved marginally in 2024 after several members missed half of all meetings in 2023.
Vague treasurer’s reports: The treasurer’s reports on finances at council meetings often cites insufficient time to check everything, notes discrepancies, but tries to assure that everything is probably OK.
Irregularities: We have witnessed the following at council meetings this year:
- A vote was called by the strata property manager on an item. No council member said or did anything, remaining silent. After some time, the strata property manager declared the vote passed. Council remained silent.
- Another vote was held with only five council members present. Two of the five members voted YES. The strata property manager declared the motion passed.
Voting at AGMs.The voting process at the 2023 AGM was confused, chaotic and took far too long. Council (all of whom ran for re-election) counted the ballots themselves—a clear conflict of interest. Names of candidates were never put up for owners to see, and most candidates never spoke to owners on why they should be elected or re-elected.
We requested the ballots (and presentation) from the 2024 AGM less than two weeks afterward, but the ballots were destroyed almost immediately, preventing any challenges, recounts or outside verification of the results. Vote totals are never presented in AGM minutes—they are not private and should be shared with all owners.
Ignoring owners’ votes: After the EV Charging resolution failed to pass at the March 2023 AGM, council immediately resumed looking into it again at their first meeting in April 2023, wasting time that could have been spent on other matters, and showing disrespect for the owners who voted down the resolution.
Questionable ethics: At the February 2024 meeting, the president and another council member admitted they had missed the fire inspection. The president said he didn’t want to be fined. The member at large said he should not be taking part in the discussion and vote on whether to waive fines for all owners who missed inspection. Despite this, both members took part in the discussion and vote to waive the fines, a clear conflict of interest that no one objected to—even after it had been highlighted by the member at large!
Disrespecting owners and the purpose of council: In the Facebook group, the president posted the following on March 20, 2024 (five days before the AGM): “I get it. 5 years of it, won’t ever [sic] Leave council till that certain individual sells or decides to work with us but we both know that will never happen.” These unprofessional comments show a sense of entitlement, disrespect to the process of electing people to council and the reasons for being on council.

At the 2024 AGM, the vice-president started yelling loudly at owners. The strata property manager later cited an unnamed owner in the AGM minutes noting how “professional” the meeting was.

Lack of knowledge: Cases where council displayed a lack of knowledge on what is happening in or around Copperstone:
- Construction cranes. At the February 2024 meeting the extension of a contract with Ellis Don concerning construction cranes moving over the 244 building was discussed, as Ellis Don indicated this contract would end in March. The strata property manager asked council if any cranes remained. The president said he “thought” there was still one. Two of the four cranes had been removed before the end of 2023, and the other two had been removed two weeks before the meeting took place, something that could be verified in less than five minutes.
- Graffiti removal. At the September 2024 meeting, none of the council members nor the strata property manager knew the status of graffiti removal from the fence between Copperstone and adjoining property (the issue had been previously discussed). The graffiti had been “removed” (painted over) on September 5th—18 days before the meeting. (We have photographs of the work being done.) The vice-president had asked about the graffiti in July, apparently not knowing it had been there for many years.

Neither of these are huge issues, but they underscore how little attention council members are paying to the property and buildings that are their–and our–home.

Inadequate or improper maintenance of property and buildings

A fire alarm went off on January 4, 2024, just after 6 a.m. Fire department attended, cited deficiency that council needed to address. They could not shut off all alarms due to this.
- At 7:48 a.m. I called the emergency line of Quay Pacific. The person who answered said they were unable to get in contact with any of the 7 council members. The person advised if we knew any council members personally, to message them. A council member finally arrived later in the morning to investigate. Council awarded itself $400 each at a council meeting 18 days later for doing “extra duties.” The fire department attempted to break into the panel containing fire safety plans in the 244 lobby, due to council absence.
Excessive moss growth on all buildings. In 2016, with a costly special levy for all owners, the exterior cladding/stonework was replaced on all three buildings. Today, this cladding is stained with moss and other growth, so thick it comes off in clumps in some spots. The moss treatment implemented by Quay Pacific is completely inadequate and will eventually lead to permanent damage of the cladding, necessitating expensive repairs.
Council has ordered healthy trees cut down, while allowing others to die due to neglect. The Heritage courtyard trees were noted as sick or dying by a certified master gardener, likely due to lack of water and poor soil structure around them. A city arborist later filed a report stating the heritage trees–which must be protected–were about 60% dead. The vice-president disputed the results, claiming the trees were just “hurting.”
Dead trees near the 244 building are equated to “dormant” trees by the strata property manager and not removed.
- The strata property manager advised us that council would inspect the trees (still very dead) the following winter or spring. This was Winter 2023/Spring 2024. This was never followed up on. The dead trees remain.
Water sprinkling/irrigation: In summer 2023 the irrigation system was turned on and sprinklers ran three days a week in violation of annual water restrictions, until city personnel ordered council to stop. This improper use was never explained or mentioned in any council meeting minutes. The improper usage continued through summer 2024, despite the City of New Westminster informing the strata property manager of this in 2023 (which we independently verified).
Multiple drainage points on the property are inadequate, often leading to flooded areas when it rains. The standing water seeps under the pavers/concrete to cause long-term damage.
The trench drain in the guest parking lot was “repaired” by the caretaker, who simply installed a large piece of wood in it. This prevents the drain from functioning correctly, resulting in water and sand accumulating at one end and causing damage.
The irrigation system throughout the property is incomplete, with some areas not connected and unable to deliver water to nearby plants and trees. Council appears to understand little of how these systems work, going so far as moving ahead with plans on cutting off an irrigation system in the fall of 2023 without understanding what would be affected.
The bushes in the garden area of the 244 building are inappropriate, as they grow over the entire width of the sidewalk every year, forcing pedestrians into the parking lot.
The lawn behind the 244 building is mostly moss and weeds and was never rehabilitated after stone cladding replacement work in 2016.

Substandard contract work

Snow removal is regularly inadequate, resulting in issues such as speed bumps being torn out. Council is not doing sufficient work with contractors ahead of time to prevent these incidents from happening, necessitating needless repairs. The president told us it’s inevitable, which is not an acceptable response.
Moss treatment. Moss is reportedly cleaned (without treating the stone cladding after) once per year, allowing new growth. Insufficient cleaning increases the chance of damage to the stone cladding of the buildings and will eventually lead to more unnecessary repairs. Verified by an independent contractor.
Parking curbs were improperly installed in the guest parking lot, meaning vehicles can park partway over sidewalks, partially blocking them. As they were being installed, the person doing the work (the vice-president of council) said to “complain to council” and continued to improperly install them.
Signs for not backing in to guest parking stalls: Council never followed up on this, despite it being repeatedly being brought up in meetings. Owners eventually got the signs on their own.
Nepotism: The strata property manager has offered his own brother’s company for contracted business with Copperstone. This is nepotism and creates a clear conflict of interest should the company do shoddy or inadequate work. Copperstone is not here to provide business for the strata manager’s family.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

1. What is your main goal?

To get a new council elected that will be proactive, dedicated, responsive and will meet the challenges of managing Copperstone on behalf of the owners, and to replace the current strata management company with a new one that will better care for our finances and property.

2. Wasn’t there already a petition?

Yes. We started a petition in February 2024, but many owners who signed have since moved away. We felt it was better to start a new petition, and to simplify the resolutions for the proposed SGM.

3. What happened to the other resolutions?

We felt it was better to focus strictly on removing the property management company and council. Other matters, while important, can be handled through other petitions and can be brought to a future AGM (Annual General Meeting).

4. Is everyone on council bad?

No. Being a council member is a demanding and challenging role. It takes a lot of time and dedication. But it is also 100% voluntary and council members are free to resign at any time without penalty if they choose to. Our current council has some good people on it, but the majority are willingly handing over all major decisions to an outside contractor, to the detriment of the owners of Copperstone, and have repeatedly displayed a lack of knowledge or understanding on many of the items they discuss and vote on. They capitulate to the property manager, who is not elected, and who has an entirely different set of incentives. We believe the best way forward is to remove the entire council and elect new members.

5. What happens if there is an SGM, but the resolutions fail?

We are always working on ways to improve Copperstone and the defeat of the resolutions will not stop us. This is our home and we will continue to work to make it a better place, not just for us, but for everyone who lives here.

6. What happens if council refuses to hold the SGM (Special General Meeting)?

The people who signed the petition may hold the SGM.

From the BC government website:

If the meeting is not held within four weeks, or eight weeks if the meeting is to consider a winding up (termination) resolution, the persons who have signed the demand for the meeting may call and hold the meeting (unless all the eligible voters, in writing, waive the need to hold the meeting and consent to the resolution).

See here: Calling a Special General Meeting

7. Are you trying to drive down property values and just make trouble? Isn’t this all just hurting Copperstone?

We could bring wider attention to the issues affecting Copperstone by going to local media, or by posting on social media. We have not done this. Instead, we go directly to you—the owners and residents of Copperstone. Our ultimate goal is to create a better home for everyone here. We aren’t profiting from this—it has cost us money and a lot of time and effort. We want to insure that Copperstone’s finances and management are handled properly, so that everyone benefits.

8. What happens if the vote to remove Quay Pacific is successful?

The successful vote will be brought to Copperstone council. The council (strata corporation) is required to give Quay Pacific two months’ notice stating that the contract with them will be terminated. Additionally:

When a strata management contract ends, the brokerage must return all strata corporation records in its possession or control to the strata corporation within four weeks of the contract termination. As well, under the BCFSA Rules, strata management companies must keep some strata records, or copies of strata records, for at least 7 years after their creation.

See here: Termination of strata management contracts

9. What happens if the vote to remove council is successful?

If the vote to remove council succeeds, all members of council will be removed, effective immediately. The SGM will then proceed to hold a council election, electing 3 to 7 council members. These members would serve until the next AGM, where they would have the option to run for re-election if desired. Any members removed in the successful vote for removal are not barred from running again.

If you have clarification of anything listed, or want to suggest additions or edits, please write to us at admin@copperstonecommunity.org.

Contents: