Our coop has storage lockers with a waiting list for all residents.
Recently, however. they may this new
House Rule. It seems "poor door" and discriminatory to me - thoughts?
"When a Resident leaves, the storage locker will be offered to the next shareholder on the waiting list. If there are no shareholders on the waiting list, the locker may be offered to the next non-shareholder Resident on the waiting list."
I have been reading comments by fellow coop owners and has me wondering "is investing in coops a wise decision?" If your board is ethical and operating by the book fine, but if it is uneducated and unethical you are screwed. Most shareholders don't know a thing about BCL laws that coops are to adhere to. Therefore they don't look at their purchase as a investment in a corporation thus a investor in their building/community. How can a handful of shareholders turn their cooperative around when legally it is expensive and time consuming. The cooperative has a lawyer to protect the board but what happens if they allow the board/property management to be unethical in decision making? Allow nepotism and some board members to act in their own interests? Essential services are not being rendered properly and no checks and balances by proper supervision. Property manager is a relative of the super in charge and resides on site. Union employees are fearful of speaking up for fear of losing their jobs. Doesn't union delegates come around to check on their members at all? Can the super their boss be the union delegate also when they didn't vote him in? Other lawyers advise you to just sell and get out once they ask the lawyer's name of the cooperative. Is there a old boys club when it comes to certain lawyers not going up against other lawyers? Or is it they know it would be too expensive to fight? I am not in NYC but in Westchester County where I get a strange look of pity. Please advise.> Join the conversation Comments (1)
Do board members have to attend a certain amount of monthly meetings each year? I don't see anything referencing a B.O.D. must attend every monthly meetings only that a majority of members must be present to conduct business.
If the rules and regs. on a particular matter are different than the bylaws, do the bylaws supersede the rules.
The co-op's By-Laws are clear about when the annual meeting must occur in the year. For many years the Annual Meeting did not adhere to the rules in the By-Laws. Currently a shareholder asked that the meeting be held in compliance with the By-Laws.
Management obtained input from an attorney (but has not presented an opinion letter) and says:
"... if the corp. was in fact holding meetings outside of the terms dictated, after 'x' years it becomes usual and customary to continue to hold the meetings on or about those times since that is what can be reasonably expected."
Does the past non-compliance supersede the By-Laws?
New York City Emergency Management will ensure that your residents are prepared for emergencies in NYC. The goal of the presentation is to teach New Yorkers the important steps they need to take to prepare, including important information they need to include in their written plans, developing a support network, and gathering supplies.
All attendees will receive the My Emergency Plan booklet to write their own individualized emergency plans. All presentations and materials are free and our guides are available in multiple languages and audio format.
Interested in a presentation email the Ready New York Program at email@example.com
This is happening in a NYC midtown Manhattan luxury 250 plus unit Co-op built in the late 50’s.
My niece has lived in my apartment without issue for over five years. I live in NY but not at this apartment. Under the original proprietary lease this was allowed. I recently received a letter saying my niece has to move out since I am not living there concurrently with her. This is due to a new house rule.
Is it legal for a board to make a house rule of this magnitude? I would think that a change to apartment occupancy would be more suited for a vote by the shareholders and not just a majority of the board. I think the intent was to combat Airbnb issues but I think the board overstepped their authority by making this change under house rules and not taking it to the shareholders for a vote.
Does anyone have any experience with a situation like this?
Can just a board make a house rule that has such a substantial impact to the shareholders?
My coop charges 15% of maitenance for any portion of the first year in which an apartment is sublet.
However, for shareholders who are renovating they have allowed sublets (of vacant shareholder apts) where this fee does not have to be paid. This seems unfair and inconsistent.
Is this allowable/ equitable/legal?
Is it fair to say that it is a conflict of interest if the by-laws state "The majority of the board must be members" where as the Rules and Regulations state "Only members can vote at annual meeting".
If a non-member can sit on the board, why isn't a person who lives in the co-op but not on the deed (inherited) entitled to vote?
Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Log in below or register here.
Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.
Habitat U: learn about how to manage a building, and what you should know as a co-op or condo board member.
Search, by word or phrase, all magazine articles from January 2002 to present. You may print or email your results. Print subscribers receive free access to the Habitat Article Archive.