As a lay person (I am not an attorney) who recognizes this is a minefield waiting for someone to step in the wrong place, my first and only piece of advice is to ask your board's attorney.

Good luck.

I agree with Steven - speak to your attorney before doing anything.

We just had a staff member tested for corona. He was sent home because he had a fever. We think it's the flu because some family members recently had the flu and he only had a fever, but not the cough and shortness of breath associated with corona. But, we took no chances and sent him home and told him to see his doctor immediately.

We worried about privacy issues, but our attorney said we did have the right to ask him if he was tested specifically for corona. His test returns will come back within the week. We informed our shareholders of what happened.

I'm not sure if you have the right to identify the s/h who tested positive, but I think the Board must err on the side of caution and act ethically to inform all s/h that someone has tested positive.

If the s/h were not informed, imagine the anger that would ensue once word got out (and it WOULD eventually get out) that the Board withheld info that a s/h had tested positive for corona. That Board would be finished since their credibility would be gone. People are very scared right now. The Board needs to provide as much info as possible in order to allay everyone's fears and take control of the situation.

I'm sure there are guidelines of how to protect the other s/h (self-isolation) and to clean the building properly in these situations. The attorney can hopefully help with that, but don't be surprised if there are no specifics since this such a brand new situation for everyone.

Be honest and communicate often and provide updates. We're all figuring this out as we go along.

Good morning:

Gallet Dreyer & Berkey, LLP represents many cooperative and condominium boards throughout the City. Please see below for our recent guidance on COVID-19 related issues for coop and condo Boards and managing agents (collectively, the “Landlord” or “Landlords”).

The full HTML is available at the URL: https://www.gdblaw.com/QUESTIONS-and-ANSWERS-Coop-Condo-COVID

Q: What are the Landlord’s legal obligations to protect buildings against COVID-19?

A: In general, an owner of a multiple dwelling has a duty to maintain the premises in good repair and in a reasonably safe condition. This standard of care may well be applied to the corona virus. Landlords should follow the guidelines from the CDC and local authorities which are outlined in our prior memo to limit the risk of potential claims.

For further guidance please visit the CDC and NYC online guides listed below, for which links are available on our website: https://www.gdblaw.com/QUESTIONS-and-ANSWERS-Coop-Condo-COVID

- CDC – Home Cleaning and Disinfection
- NYC Department of Health Coronavirus Disease General Disinfection Guidance for Commercial or Residential Buildings, dated March 5, 2020
(the “NYC Guidance”)

Q: What about Annual Meetings? Are In-Person Meetings Required? May it be postponed and/or held by telecommunication or other electronic means?

A: Annual meetings may be delayed, despite any fixed date in the by-laws for a meeting. The Board may either amend the by-laws, or decide to notify shareholders that the meeting will be delayed due to current health-related conditions. If a meeting is not held within 13 months of the previous annual meeting, a shareholder may petition a court to order a meeting. Such proceeding would take many months before an order was obtained, given the current status of the court system, so it is an unlikely remedy to be followed.

The Business Corporation Law allows an annual meeting to be held by reasonable means, which may include audio webcast or other broadcast of the meeting and voting may be conducted electronically via internet voting.

Each building’s by-laws should be reviewed to determine the best method for postponing the annual meeting or holding it via electronic means.

Q: What about Board meetings?

A: Boards are not required to hold in-person meetings. The Business Corporation Law, Section 708(c), allows Board meetings to be held by conference telephone, provided that Board members may participate by means of a conference telephone or similar communications equipment allowing all persons participating in the meeting to hear each other at the same time.

Q: Should the Landlord close all gym facilities?

A: Recently, Governor Cuomo announced an Executive Order that requires all gyms to be closed until further notice. The Executive Order did not distinguish between public or private gyms, or gyms of a particular size, so the Order should be read as applying to all gyms of all sizes. The Executive Order reads, in relevant part: "Any gym, fitness centers or classes, and movie theaters shall also cease operation effective at 8 pm on March 16, 2020 until further notice."

Q: What should the Landlord do in the event there is a suspected infected individual in the building?

A: If the Landlord or a resident has a reason to believe that a resident has contracted COVID-19 or is exhibiting symptoms of the virus, we recommend that the Landlord take the following precautions:
- Keep the names of suspected infected individuals confidential from other residents until consent to release the information to them is obtained.
- Obtain written consent from the suspected individual to share their status with the other residents of the building.
- Direct the building staff when interaction with the suspected individual is required to follow the recommended protocols as described in the NYC Guide, i.e. request the suspected individual to exit the room, wear a protective face mask and properly sanitize after the visit.
- Advise all infected or quarantined persons that deliveries will be left outside the apartment door, that the delivery (or staff) person will ring the doorbell to advise of the delivery and will depart immediately without interacting with such person.

Q: What should the Landlord do in the event there is an infected individual in the building?

A: In addition to the above, regulations require that the Landlord notify the authorities of a confirmed case.

Landlords should alert all residents that there may be a confirmed case in the building, and remind them to follow the health guidelines. Landlords should explain the measures that are being taken to prevent its spread (e.g., the person is following all governmental protocols for quarantine). Personal privacy considerations must be taken into account, so Landlords should not name the infected individual or identify that person’s specific location, without obtaining that person’s written consent.

The notice to residents should specify that the unnamed resident is self-quarantining, or that he or she is under governmental order not to leave the apartment, and that safe procedures are in place for ministerial tasks such as disposing of trash or receiving mail.

If other building residents inquire who the infected resident is, to protect the resident’s right to privacy and to remove fear that such person might be publicly ridiculed or shamed, Landlords should not disclose the infected person’s name or apartment, without obtaining that person's written consent.

If a Landlord learns that the infected person is not following protocol, then appropriate authorities, like the New York State Department of Health and the CDC, should be contacted immediately.

10 NYCRR 2.12 creates an obligation to report a communicable disease to a city, country or district health officer when no physician is in attendance. When there is a physician in attendance the medical professional is required to report the disease by CDC and the Health Department.

Q: Who may be deemed “Essential Employees” for buildings to maintain resident services?

New York State’s guide for their employees, during their COVID-19 containment efforts, states that essential employees shall include “Maintenance, Safety & Security, Fire Safety, Capital Services, Emergency Management, Food Service Workers, Housekeeping staff, Cooks and Cleaning Staff.” We can argue that the same rules should apply for building employees.
The Center for Disease Control (the “CDC”) defines essential business functions, jobs, or roles as those which are required to maintain business operations. So again, building employees needed to maintain operations should be essential.

The NYS Dept. of Health advises that essential employees are those which the building deems essential for the performance of services in that individual building. Therefore, doormen, porters and supers may be “essential employees.”

Case law regarding the warranty of habitability also states that maintenance and janitorial persons perform essential functions for the building. Park W. Mgmt. Corp. v. Mitchell, 47 N.Y.2d 316, 329, 391 N.E.2d 1288, 1295 (1979).

For all of the above reasons, we believe that maintenance, security and cleanliness are considered essential functions to be coordinated for the health and safety of a building and its residents, and those performing these functions would be considered “essential employees.”

Q: What should a Landlord do if a member of the building staff tests positive for COVID-19?

A: We recommend that the Landlord should send home all staff members who worked closely with that infected individual for a 14-day period to ensure that the infection does not spread and ask that the infected staff member identify all individuals who worked in close proximity (three to six feet) with him or her in the previous 14 days, to ensure that all potentially infected staff are sent home. In the event this results in a building having an insufficient number of available staff, Landlords may be required to find temporary staff.

Landlords should also undertake a deep cleaning of the affected workspaces and common spaces. Lastly and importantly, the Landlord should advise all residents that a staff member has tested positive and the building is taking all necessary steps and precautions to minimize risk to its residents.

Q: What is the Board’s obligation to protect its staff?

A: The Board has an affirmative obligation to protect its staff as set forth by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration guidelines (“OSHA”) and provide a place of employment free from recognized hazards which may cause death and harm.

The following protocols are recommended by OSHA:
- Landlords should promote frequent and thorough hand washing, including by providing staff and visitors with a place to wash their hands. If soap and running water are not immediately available, provide alcohol-based hand rubs containing at least 60% alcohol.
- Landlords should explore whether they can establish policies and practices, such as [note – we are talking about doormen and porters] flexible work hours (e.g., staggered shifts), to increase the physical distance among staff and others because state and local health authorities recommend the use of social distancing strategies.
- Landlords should introduce options for conducting essential operations with a reduced workforce, including cross-training workers across different jobs in order to continue operations or deliver surge services.
- Require staff to stay home if they are exhibiting symptoms of COVID-19.
- Encourage respiratory etiquette, including covering coughs and sneezes.
- Encourage staff when entering individual homes to inquire with residents if they are exhibiting symptoms of COVID-19 and if they have traveled to high-risk areas. If the resident answers yes to either of these questions, and the visit may be postponed, it is encouraged that the staff postpone the visit. If that is impossible, the resident should remain in a different room during the visit with the door closed, if possible, wear a face mask, and the employees should immediately wash their hands for at least 20 seconds with soap and water or use an approved alcohol-based hand sanitizer.
- Implement a course of action for prompt identification and isolation of infected individuals.
- Ensure there are hand sanitizers, soap and sanitized towels readily available for all staff.
- Additionally, the Board may issue a questionnaire to staff which is compliant with ADA guidelines (link on website).

For further guidance please visit the OSHA online guide: OSHA Guidelines for Employers (link on website).

For further guidance please visit the following online guides:
CDC – Guidelines for Employers (link on website)
EEOC -Guidelines (link on website)

Q: Can staff members refuse to work with residents?

A: Staff members may refuse to take on an assignment which is considered to be an unsafe work assignment. However, if another staff member deems the situation safe, has taken the necessary steps to protect against COVID-19 and the Landlord provides the staff member with proper gloves and equipment, then that staff member may perform the assignment. In this situation, we would recommend erring on the side of caution and request that another staff member who is comfortable with the assignment perform the task.

Q: Is revealing the identity of a suspected or infected individual a violation of the ADA?

A: While Boards may have to engage in a balancing act of protecting its residents from infection and the privacy rights of suspected or infected individuals, the ADA might come into play. According to the Americans with Disability Act (the “ADA”), generally the flu and other conditions which are lasting less than six (6) months are not considered a disability. (42 U.S.C. § 12102(1)) However, complications arising from COVID-19 may lead to a disability covered under the ADA. We would recommend that because Boards must maintain their fiduciary duty to their shareholders as well as individuals’ right to privacy (as medical records are confidential information) to refrain from sharing the status of a suspected or infected individual to other residents and staff; however, the Board could and should share the information with New York State Department of Health and the CDC.

Q: Is revealing the identity of a suspected or infected staff member a violation of the ADA?

A: According to the ADA, generally the flu and other conditions which are lasting less than six (6) months are not considered a disability also applies to employees (29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(j)) and as mentioned in the above, complications arising from COVID-19 may lead to a disability covered under the ADA and employment law. Due to the unknown risks and complications related to COVID-19, we recommend the Building err on the side of caution and refrain from disclosing this confidential medical information to a limited group, including: Supervisors (to implement necessary work restrictions and accommodations), first-aid and safety personnel (if the disability requires emergency treatment), workers' compensation state offices and insurance carriers, government officials investigating ADA compliance. Employers should refrain from sharing this information with co-workers and residents.

Q: Is sharing the status of a suspected or infected individual a violation under HIPAA?

A: HIPAA is short for the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. It provides patients’ security provisions and data privacy, in order to keep patients’ medical information safe. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), HIPAA’s privacy act only applies to covered entities and business associates of covered entities. Landlords are not considered such.

We hope the above is helpful for you. Please feel free to contact us if you have questions concerning the above guidance (ajb@gdblaw.com).

1. If someone is unable, i.e. on a ventilator, to sign permission to disclose COVID to neighbors they may have had contact with in an apartment building isn't there a duty to warn on the part of a condo board or management company, so that those exposed neighbors can be on watch or quarantine? What happened to duty to warn known exposure?

Ringaleavio (reminds me of my yute in Canarsie!),

I mentioned earlier when I responded in this thread that "I think the Board must err on the side of caution and act ethically to inform all s/h that someone has tested positive. But, that's just my opinion and I'm not an attorney.

But, as Steven has said, you should check with the Board's attorney before taking any action because everyone's rights must be considered.

My yute was in Queens, but great game anywhere.

I'm not an attorney, but I would advise you to speak to your attorney before doing anything. I'm guessing that rent moratoriums probably don't apply to co-ops because we're corporations and technically not landlords (at least I don't think we are).

In past hardship situations, we've always tried to work with s/h as much as possible to help them through their rough financial patches.

Since you have a possible refinance, it would be wise to speak to the bank and get their thoughts on the matter. This is new for them, too.

But, only speak to the bank after you've spoken to your attorney.

Besides completely agreeing with Marty, let's step back for a moment regarding rent moratoriums. Suppose every unit owner stopped paying monthly maintenance for any reason. Who'll be screwed? *You* will! :-) Besides being a form of tenant, you're also a part-owner of the business. If you suddenly cut off all your income, how will your bills get paid? How will your staff be paid? How will you pay your mortgage? And ghod forbid, how will you meet your Real Estate tax obligations???

I'm trying to be light-hearted here, but think about it. When a shareholder brings up a maintenance moratorium, what you're actually doing is taking careful aim at your foot and pulling the trigger. It will be a painful experience.

Regina,

Maybe I missed it in your description of events, but what reason has the Building Manager given to you as to why you can't have this desk delivered?

I've never heard of having to provide literature before a desk could be delivered.

The reason that the Building Mgr gives is important because they must act consistently in the way they treat all shareholders. If he's allowing some things to be delivered but not others, then he'd better have a very good reason why.

Did he tell you that it can't fit through the door?

Good luck.

Regina,

Thank you for your help during this crisis.
I
I was researching Americans with Disabilities Act and found this on Habitat that I hope will help.

https://www.habitatmag.com/Archive2/298-March-2013/Board-Talk-A-Conversation-About-the-ADA

I assuming you are referring to the questionnaire your new mortgage company is requesting you have filled out by the co-op corporation (by their managing agent).

$150 is actually inexpensive. For as long as I can remember, the cost of completing the questionnaire by our MA is $250. Depending on what questions are asked and how frequently your MA completes a questionnaire for your building, there is probably research someone in the MA's office has to perform.

There's almost no way around needing to have the questionnaire completed. It provides your new mortgage company with a snapshot of the health of your co-op.

If you think the legal and financial situation of your co-op is such that your application may not be approved, you're wagering $150 (and other refi costs) against how much you'll save if you are approved. All you need is a good handicapper... ;-)

Good luck!

Thank you, Steven. That is indeed my present situation. I hate to throw away $150, especially since it wouldn't be deductible next year. I don't know how to do the actual math to see how much I could end up saving, in order to discover if it would be worth it.

Not sure what you mean by a "good handicapper."

Thanks again!

A handicapper is a self-proclaimed expert in how much to wager on competitive events, like horse racing. They try to determine if a certain bet at any given odds is worth the money you could lose.

I assume you've done the math to see how many months it will take for the money you will save each month due to refinancing to cover all of the costs you will incur to close on a new mortgage. All you really need to do is find out what your repayment savings will be each month and divide that into the projected closing cost. Say your total closing costs are $2,000 and you'll save $50 each month in loan repayment. Your break-even point is 2000/50 or 40 months. You may find that the projected payback takes so long that it's not worth moving ahead with the refinance.

Just to add a note - Washers and dryers are a breeding ground for Mold and Lint. Keeping them in Proper order is essential!! Please note that Aces Laundry is the ONLY route laundry operator to provide De- mold and De-lint and SANITIZING services for ALL of our locations on a regularly scheduled basis!!
WE CARE ABOUT OUR TENANTS HEALTH AND WELL BEING !!!

Stan never heard of Aces, our co op lawyer has said we can not break our contract with Coinmat they are too rich to fight. I say get rig of our lawyer and get rid Coinmat.
Do you have a way of getting rid of them so you can do business with us?
Can you also post your contact # and e-mail. Thanks you in advance.

PC - I never heard of Aces but it looks like they're based in Hartsdale (https://www.aceslaundry.com/).

If your current company is Coinmach, then I agree that they suck and they are so big that you'll never beat them. Keep your lawyer. He can't do anything about them.

We had no choice but to wait until the end of our contract and then, like failing the door test in a Bronx Tale, we dumped them and we dumped them fast!

I too have never heard of Aces... But I did get rid of Coinmach in all my buildings and went with Hercules. I am satisfied with them.
In one instance, I placed their machines on the curb and called them to get them or lose them... Don't let their tactics push you into a corner.
~AR

Can’t help you out of your contract, but when you are ready we at Aces Laundry are also !
Like I said - Scheduled De-Mold and De- linting
we have office throughout the Boroughs, Westchester, Nassau and Suffolk Counties -
We are here to Help Keep Our Patrons and Tenants Healthy and HAPPY !!!

Look in the Occupancy Agreement if there's nothing in your by laws. I'm sure it's mentioned because it's such a common question.

Look for something that might begin with "If, upon the death of the Member..."

The verbiage regarding transferring shares is usually in the Proprietary Lease and not the Bylaws. In my PL there is this:

16 (b) If the Lessee shall die, consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed to an assign ment of the lease and shares to a financially responsible member of the Lessee's family (other than the Lessee's spouse as to whom no consent is required).

I think this covers the financially responsible sibling.

As for subletting, the Board usually reviews the proposed sublet tenant to make sure they are a good fit for the building. The answer to your question might turn on the nature of adult son's disability.

You have a number of potentially conflicting rules and regulations in play when dealing with disability, tenancy and residency, and I would suggest you contact the co-op's attorney for a definitive answer.

Steven makes a good point about checking with the co-op's attorney. I think that the co-op would be satisfied with a relative who can be relied upon to pay the monthly maintenance with no issues. I think the adult child is on safe ground morally and legally to stay in the apartment.

First off, it generally isn't good publicity for a co-op to kick out a disabled child of the shareholder.

Legally, I think it's okay. My Occupancy Agreement states that upon the death of the Member, the shares shall transfer to:

1) The spouse who resided with the s/h at the time of death, or

2) A natural or adoptive child of the Member who resided with the s/h at the time of death, and who has resided in the apartment as the child's primary residence from the later of:

1) The date of birth or adoption of the child

2) The date on which the deceased Member purchased their shares

Of course, this is what my Occupancy Agreement (OA) states, but I think that most OA's are probably written in a very similar manner. Sounds like the son should be able to stay.

Marty - Did you have to sign a separate Occupancy Agreement in addition to your Proprietary Lease? I didn't because our PL spells out occupancy requirements. If you had to sign a separate document I'm curious as to why.

My concerns about the Adult Disabled Child taking ownership of the apartment and/or living there by himself, turn on the nature of the disability. If it's a physical disability, then I can't see there being any problems.

But if the disability is emotional or psychological, and the now-deceased parent was caring for and participated in the treatment of the disability, the question becomes, can the child live by himself? Will they become a nuisance or a danger to other shareholders, the building, and possibly himself?

IMHO this is where the issues of succession and sub-tenancy become dicey. The board will need to weigh the rights of the child vs. the rights of the other shareholders. The co-op attorney is the best resource for guiding the decisions of the board.

I did not have to sign the Occupancy Agreement. It was a package deal with the By-laws.

I agree with you about weighing the rights of the child vs. the rights of the other shareholders. You know that this type of balancing act is a common dilemma facing many boards and can concern many different issues.

I would see a potentially very difficult road for an emotionally disabled adult who could pose a danger to himself and/or other shareholders.

Get the attorney involved.

I live in Queens so I don't have valet parking. Can't help you with that since I don't know anything about it.

I do find your overall parking situation interesting. You say you don't have enough spaces in your garage, but you actually do - for one car per unit. I think that's as fair as it gets. Are new buyers told at their interview that they are entitled to one car? I hope so. No surprises are needed.

What you actually don't have is enough parking for the # of units who want multiple parking spaces. I assume that people who want multiple spaces knew the situation when they moved in, so how can they complain now?

I hope you get some volunteers who grab the $50 maintenance decrease in return for giving up their spot, but I don't see that happening.

You describe your small town as having limited parking. So if I give up my car for the $50, where am I now going to park my car? That doesn't make sense to me.

Would having valet service somehow help these owners who surrender their spaces?

I can see how having a valet service could seem to add value to the units, but at what cost? The Board should be able to divulge exactly how much valet service costs. Perhaps you can also do your own research to see how much valet service would cost. Call up a few companies and get a quote. I'm sure that's all your Board did.

Good luck.

I was just looking for feedback from anyone in a building with Valet & their experience using it, which company, etc. Everyone is told at the interview & prior that each unit gets one space, but we are always looking for ways to offer better amenities. Our parking is underground, covered & heated. I personally think that it would be great if all 2+ bedroom units were able to have 2 spaces. During the day many spaces are empty. The shareholders asked that an ad hoc committee be formed to see if there was a way to allow day visitors to park in the garage if space was available, but this request was met with silence.

I'm guessing that allowing day visitors creates potential security problems for the Board. Since you have a garage, day visitors would need to gain access. How do you get into the garage? Remote control clicker? Key?

You would have non shareholders in a area where other owners' possessions (car, maybe other items in the garage belonging to owners) are located. That's an insurance/theft/personal injury liability situation to be considered.

Does the garage lead to any access into the units or is the garage a stand alone structure? Do you have cameras in the garage in case something went wrong?

You might need to review your insurance policy and check with your attorney if there are any liability concerns for your building due to day visitors parking there.

I understand how it would be nice if the 44 2BR apartments each had 2 spaces each. But, how will you do that? By taking 44 spaces away from other units who already have them?

We had a similar situation last year. Our attorney said that as long as they are not in arrears with their parking fees and they are not subletting their space (not allowed to do that here), the parking spaces belong to the unit and the Board cannot take the spaces away.

It's a pain in the neck issue for the Board, but they should at least give you the courtesy of finding out the valet costs and answering your questions.

We are just lookin for creative ways improve the garage amenity.
We all have a fob to enter the garage, but you can buzz the front desk if you need to.

Thank you for the comment regarding day parking and liability. Good point!

All we are allowed to keep in front of our car is a shopping cart.

No other storage allowed. Occasionally someone steals a shopping cart, unfortunately.

I'm sure we could never give all 2 bedrooms a second space, but there are spots where we could double up cars and who knows, maybe a valet system could determine how many total cars could be parked in the garage. A premium could be charged for the 2nd car. We already have people saying they would pay more for a 2nd spot. Each unit is guaranteed a spot, so there is no taking any spots from anyone unless you somehow were able to acquire a 2nd or 3rd spot when there were some available.


And that is why I'm here, to connect with those that use valet to gather info. If our Board wants to inquire, they will or won't. The Board does not appreciate people getting info on their own.

You need a fob to get in to the elevator banks.

Good info and thanks for further explaining the situation. Let's say it's possible for valet parking to somehow put extra spaces in the garage.

How do you determine who gets first choice for these extra spots? Is it based on seniority as an owner or seniority from how long you've had a parking space?

I'd recommend reviewing your game plan with your attorney just to make sure you're on solid legal footing.

The Board will need to fine tune these details and have the answers ready for the shareholders, some of which will surely complain no matter what you decide.

As far as the Board not appreciating people getting info on their own - what does the Board expect people to do if the Board won't get the info for them?

Do you want the info or do you want the Board not to be mad at you? Your choice.

Good luck.

I commend the board raising the garage rentals it has been long time coming. All garage renters expected the garage spots to be subsidized by shareholders. I don't understand why these people rather pay the high maintenance increase than their garage rental cost. Please do not let them bully you into feeling guilty they do this every time it goes up. I've seen a couple of them have a fit over a $20 raise. Also you have a handful of shareholders who use their spots as a car storage and not an active parking spot. These cars never move. I suggest you do what we tried to do raise the rental fees until it reaches the street value. Keep in mind you have 149 shareholders to only 35 parking spots. By your 4-3 count your board has 3 people that rent garage spots. What happened to your 2 other board members? Maybe before the new elections you can put it writing that it be mandatory to raise the rental fee every time maintenance is raised until it reaches street value. Since there was a budget shortfall makes sense to maximize any possible source of income for the benefit of ALL shareholders. Keep up the good work.

we went thru this same situation a few years back. our garage was running more than $150 below market in the neighborhood. i suggested bringing it up by $50 and received a crazy amount of pushback. My point was that the garage has a waiting list and it's therefore a privilege (NOT an amenity) and it should serve as a source of income for the building. a higher maintenance will impact sale prices so the garage increase is the smart way to go. i finally got this thru the board when i had the treasurer do the math for the board members with parking spots and showed them the difference between the incremental garage cost and the incremental maintenance increase (about $2). good luck.

My building doesn't have enough spaces. 150 units and no guest parking in NJ in a small town with limited parking. We have 160 parking spaces. Our 3 bedroom PH apartments or 5 units, each get 2 spaces & everyone else gets one space. We have 44 two bedroom units and the rest are mostly one bedrooms leaving 11 studios. We recently decreased our maintenance by $50 to increase the parking fee to $100 to see if anyone would give up their spot. Waiting to hear the status of this. We've suggested valeting the garage to the Board, which would bring an additional cost, but they feel it would be too expensive. We feel it would add value to the building. They gave no numbers to back up the valet cost, but it would allow all day guests to park in the garage when many are out at work.