A review of lease addenda, repair invoices and tenant-held copies finds a gap between the total in the public summary and the conditions recorded at the stone stair housing row at Old Clock Court. The difference does not prove that anyone misstated the file. It shows what the public count leaves out: an old addendum names a repair share without stating how long it lasts.
The lease addenda, repair invoices and tenant-held copies lists 37 repair duties with a current amount and review date; the previous window lists 41. Adrian Veil checked both against dated handoffs followed from dispatch to the last public stop. The source was checked against a second copy held by Sera Voss. No dated correction to either copy was present when the comparison closed.
The board says the addendum remains in force. Tenants ask for an amount and an end date before renewal. The office has not supplied a separate measure that would settle the disagreement, so the two explanations remain competing accounts.
This report supports a narrower finding: the count is repeatable, but it is not enough to decide how a resident can question a repair duty that predates the current lease copy.
The clerk closes this file and opens the next window with a new date. The board closed this docket after it retained the current schedule and published the records supporting it. The next window starts with a fresh record.
