We have had them for about 15 years with no issues. The company should pay for your engineer to review its plans.

MissP,

Thank you very much for your input. Just curious - did you ask your s/h their opinion about the towers before you installed them? Thanks.

No. But when we reported there were no questions of concerns from owners. Interestingly, a few people who have since bought without thinking about them have suddenly become very concerned! If they were that upset about it, you'd think they would ask before buying. Provide info -- the only place that there can be a danger is in front of the towers and they face out (and 180 feet up).

Thanks again Miss P!

We do not have towers on my building, but two points come to mind...

* Notify your co-op insurance company of the proposed installation. There may be something in your policy that affects or may be affected by the installation, and that may cause your premiums to go up. At the very minimum, your insurance company should review the contract before you sign to make sure you are adequately protected, and they review any insurance the tower company says they will carry.

* Have your co-op attorney review the contract for all the obvious stuff, and to make sure you are getting a fair financial deal.

You've probably already considered these, but I wanted to get them out there.

--- Steve

Steven,

Now I'm on the receiving end of your sound advice. Thank you very much!

Very glad to help, as I have learned from you as well.

I have them in 1 building and negotiating in 2 others right now...
The service is different from their usual model and the new setups are strictly for a new 5G cell service initiative they are launching.

Its a Board decision in most Coops, but if its the first provider on the roof, you may want to put it out to the building out of courtesy.

Thigs to consider are
~Will they build their own deck? How and where is this mounted? Does it affect a roof warranty or maintenance? Make sure they take responsibility to move it ASAP should you need.
~ Where is the electric coming from? Who's paying, Are they installing a meter? Where? Where will the feeder line run?
~It's 5G, so there is signal bleed... Have them provide and RF safety report showing that the signal bleed into the building, residential and public are well within FCC safety recommendations. - This will limit Board liability later.
~Do not permit the 5 automatic renewable terms they ask for... it's a long commitment and you will not be able to renegotiate for many years. Sign off for 5+5 or 10 with option at your discretion.
~everything is negotiable so read the contract and have your building Atty review it and ensure it fits what you are willing to accept with regard to installation, time, ongoing access, and compensation.

~AR

REAPLLC,

Thanks very much for this information!

If you purchased on or before January 5, 2020
from an eligible shareholder/unit owner, you should receive the tax abatement for the July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2021 New York City (NYC) tax year. Therefore, if you purchased on or after January 5, 2020, then you will
first be eligible for abatement credits during the July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022 fiscal year.

Regardless of any fine points of law or regulation, to me the ethical answer is, whoever pays the co-op assessment deserves the abatement. Most co-ops debit the assessment in the same month they credit the abatement, so it becomes a wash for whoever is the owner of record at the time of the transaction.

I'm still trying to figure out why the is even an issue.

If you don't know the correct answer pls it is confusing when you post.

Fair enough, DM. :-)

In almost every instance, the annual abatement is distributed to shareholders in the form of a credit against what is due for monthly maintenance. Unless there is wording to the contrary in the sales contract, whoever owns the stock certificate when the credit is issued receives the benefit of the abatement.

By itself, the benefit from the abatement follows stock ownership and does not stay vested with the seller after the stock transfer. If the issue was addressed in the contract of sale, both parties are bound by the terms of the contract.

Is there anything in your contract of sale or its riders that address the abatement? If not, the current owner of the co-op's stock is entitled to the reduction in maintenance provided by the abatement credit.

Here's what the NYC DOF has to say on the matter
https://www1.nyc.gov/site/finance/benefits/landlords-coop-condo.page#require

Thank you

You're welcome, DM. Best of luck and I hope you get some answers.

--- Steve

All of the above

While both hard and soft skills are important, I would put greater emphasis on soft skills like being passionate, continually developing himself, and has a great personality and communication skills, rather than knows everything about electricity, plumbing, heating systems, and construction.

Why? Because you can almost always hire qualified contractors to handle the tasks requiring hard skills. And if you find you're constantly in need of a plumber, electrician, carpenter, either your building is falling apart or you live in a very big building. In the extreme, you can hire a dedicated handyman.

Executive functioning and interpersonal skills are a 24x7x365 requirement. The super is your intermediary between your board and your shareholders. Without good communication flow and diplomatic demeanor, even the most talented technician will be ineffective.

My building is looking for a new super. This is what we've learned from all the candidates we've interviewed and given trial runs, and the feedback from our shareholders who've had interactions with the candidates.

I am currently interviewing for a super for a particular site. I am seeking all the required skill sets, but above that, passion, conscientiousness and aptitude.
I can train you to repair a boiler, fix a simple electrical or plumbing repair, but I cannot train you to care, to be passionate about your job and building, and I cannot give you the aptitude to adapt.. so these are more important...
I use a few simple tricks to gauge this.. mostly for the in person interview portion... I leave a pencil or small piece of trash on the floor in the office and when greeting them, advise to go right on in and have a seat.. Ill be right with you.. then I step away for a moment and take notice.. did the see it? Did they pick it up? Did they leave it on the floor and step around it?
The conscientious ones will pick it up and either hold it, put it in the trash or on the table... then I continue the interview...

Unfortunately, this is a fairly common problem. It is generally impossible to find tiles that match perfectly because the style and color of the original tile probably doesn't exist anymore, especially if the original tile is 60 years old (if I interpreted your summary correctly).

My understanding is that the co-op has to restore your tile to its original condition (i.e. new tiles). That doesn't mean the same exact color and style.

If you want to re-tile your bathroom so that it matches perfectly, the co-op is not responsible for paying for it. You would have to pay for it out of your own pocket or better yet, file an insurance claim against the apartment upstairs that caused the problem.

Good luck.

This happened to me so this is what I did.

(1) Take pictures of all water damage
(2) Contact your insurance company (ASAP) they will send an inspector to your apartment.
My insurance carrier set me up in a hotel while the work was being done.
They took full charge hired a contractor and had me pick out the damage materials with the contractor.
In turn they sued the apartment above me. In your case they will sue your building insurance company and your neighbor.
Best of Luck

Adding to the advice Marty provided, something you might try is negotiating with the insurance company is their laying out the same amount they would pay to repair your floors towards resurfacing the entire floor. The rest of the cost would be out of your pocket. Different insurance companies have different rules, but this might reduce your overall cost if you decide to lay down a whole new floor.

Hi! If you want a legal opinion about a legal requirement, I suggest you contact an attorney.

AFAIK, no contributor in this forum is a lawyer. So as for knowledgeable replies, remember that any legal advice you receive here is worth what you paid for it. The same goes for any articles a response might link to unless written by an attorney.

Not trying to be flippant or sarcastic, just trying to levelset your reliance on any legal or quasi-legal advice anyone provides.

Good luck!
--- Steve

Hi Steven424,

I ask on this forum in general b/c I have no funds to consult a lawyer. I always ask for "knowledgeable replies," b/c when I first joined this group I read a lot of semi-literate rambling and bitching and moaning, and wasn't looking for that.

I researched my question as best I could before posting here; not having found what I was looking for, I turned to this community for additional insight anyone might have.

I'm fully aware that people here aren't lawyers. If you reread my question, you'll see that I wasn't asking for a legal opinion or legal advice, even though my question included the word "legal." I was asking if anyone had come across very recent articles on the rapidly evolving legalities related to this topic. My thoughts included: Maybe there's a board member, or a building manager, or a politico, with more up-to-date info than what I could find. Or maybe there's another shareholder who had researched this same thing.

If you couldn't answer, that's fine; then no answer was necessary.

What I wasn't looking for, however, was to be "reminded" of who & what is here & that you get what you pay for. Maybe this will sound defensive to you, but I found that a bit insulting. I don't need to have my expectations managed. But thanks.

You're welcome, and no offense taken. :-)

Steve, Thanks for saying what I have been thinking. :-)

Unless the building itself has a BL or HR (and the ability to write that rule) that requires adherence to the CDC recommended guidelines and/or executive orders concerning masks, it is not enforceable, by action, by and through management or the BOD.

~AR

I reviewed some Habitat articles as well as several NYT articles, including the Ask Real Estate column. Several attorneys chimed in with the general feeling that it would hard to enforce. They felt that you could try fining people, but their opinion is that the fines would likely not be upheld in court.

It's such a new topic that it's still a very gray area. There are really no definitive laws or decisions on the books, meaning that we can ask shareholders to wear masks, but we probably can't force them to do so.

My experience has been that the overwhelming majority of people in our co-op are wearing masks. Of course, very few things in life get 100% compliance, so this is no different.

Hi Marty, That's what i figured, but again, was hoping that perhaps (especially with new strains now appearing in NYC) something changed very recently... along the lines, for example, of how the governor allowed corporations in NYS to legally hold meetings via Zoom (and then continued to extend his original deadline).

You're lucky that you seem to live in a compliant building with caring, intelligent neighbors. Unfortunately, I seem to be surrounded by jackasses who will not, do not, wear masks in common areas (including in our very small elevator that has no ventilation).

Thanks.

Sorry, I don't know the jargon "BL" or "HR," but thank you. I was fairly certain it wasn't enforceable, but I was hoping to hear something very recent to the contrary. ; ((

I find it sad your managing agent feels it's not necessary to post a must wear masks and maintain safe distances. NYers still are wearing masks and so should your building. They know they can not enter a store or work place without a wearing a mask. The virus is very much alive.
Have you sent a letter to the board voicing your concerns that mask wearing is a must and 2 people in the elevated with mask should be worn?
I don't think anyone would want to die or get the virus.
If you live in NY call 311 and tell them what is going on in your building and you are afraid. They will advise you or report and fine your building. Best of Luck

I think the Board should have made a decision after all this time. Whether it's yes or no, they should have contacted you. Even if you have a somewhat detailed and complicated application, 4 months is enough time to decide.

I would not grant you an interview until a decision has been made about your finances. It sounds like this is what's happening to you.

I can imagine why they might have possible reservations. I would also keep in mind that the pandemic probably heightens their worries given the potential economic impact on all businesses that exists right now and may exist for years to come.

- I'll assume that your earnings are steady. Anyone with self earnings will cause concern for the co-op. Has your wife had a steady income during her years of self employment? If it has not been steady, they may be worried about her future earnings.

- Without knowing anything other than what you've told us, I think your 9 investment properties could be raising potential red flags. I assume you have financial obligations on most if not all 9 properties.

The co-op may be worried that with the economy being so unreliable these days, they may wonder what happens in the worst case scenario, where most or perhaps all of your investment properties lose their income and you still have your financial obligations. They are surely asking "How would that situation affect you, your wife, and all co-op shareholders in the worst case scenario?"

As the President of your own co-op, I'm sure you can understand the potential pitfalls of your application.

Having said that, 4 months is enough time. If they won't grant you an interview, then it's probably time to move on to another co-op.

Marty;

Thank you for your very detailed and insightful comments.

I can now see why we might not have been interviewed yet. Though why the management company/board doesn't ask for information to make a decision is beyond me.

My wife's earnings have actually been increasing and our ratios are still pretty good even if you eliminate the rental income from all the investment properties. I also plan to sell our present coop apartment once the purchase is completed.

From another perspective, it's a good sign that we really haven't been declined yet.

Thank you, again. Your comments were very helpful.

Regards,

Amer

We review and approve in a matter of a week or so at the longest. You have a really lame board that you are dealing with.
And your misery has just begun if you follow thru with this purchase.
I'd get out while the getting is good.

My opinion is that the kinds of rules and regulations you're considering would best be added to your House Rules and not either the PL or the BL.

The PL is the basic document for Co-op Corporation (Lessor)/Shareholder (Lessee) interactions and relationships.

The BL is the basic Co-op Corporation governance document.

Both require a supermajority of shareholders to modify, so you want to keep things as non-specific as possible. What goes into the PL and BL are usually enshrined forever.

Rules and regulations dealing with relatively short-term situations that may need to be modified or removed with little fuss or formal shareholder concurrence belong in the House Rules. Adding/changing/removing House Rules usually requires nothing more than a majority of the Board,

Anything having to do with a fluid situation like COVID is much more easily maintained in the HRs. Similar types of HR rules would be 80% carpeting, smoking, allowable uses of common areas, etc.

My opinion, which I hope is helpful,
--- Steve

I agree; it seems the question arose in the building concerning whether or not the Board had the right to make a HR concerning personal health related issues.... my answer was yes, because it impacts the building as a whole... Which is why i asked the question and in thinking about it further, the PL language should probably be limited to something that permits the Board to make a HR that impacts the building during and related to any public emergency, disaster or health/pandemic related period...
(not sure if I made sense?)

Hi REAPLLC -

It makes sense. I don't think there need to be any changes to the PL or BLs. I believe most PLs already have enabling language which gives the board pretty much carte blanc authority to make rules which affect the general wellbeing of the building and shareholders. In fact, I think most original Offering Plans contained both the PL and a template set of HRs for new boards to follow. Try doing a text search through your PL for "House Rules".

You might also ask the co-op's attorney for what you can and cannot put into the HRs concerning emergencies in general and the current pandemic specifically. That would be the safest route.

I am working with the building Atty who recommended we add language, which he is working on, but I wanted to see if and what others were doing.
I'd be happy to make that public when its done.

~AR

REAPLLC - Is your attorney adding language to the PL (I assume) which authorizes the board to create/modify House Rules, or is the language he's proposing specifically geared towards COVID?

It would be much appreciated if you posted what your attorney proposes. We all learn something new that way.

--- Steve

As a manager, I have successfully removed the union from several buildings (and added them to others)...
Is there a current super working in the union position, or is there a vacancy?
if there is a super in the position, is there an issue with him?
is the cause strictly financial?
other?
~AR

REAPLLC - What process or procedure did you go through or have to follow to remove the union? How did you handle the loss of benefits once the buildings were no longer part of the union? How long ago did the conversion take place and how has retention been since the buildings were no long union?

Thanks!

I would love to hear also how you got rid of a union in a co-op. My understanding is that union members would need to do that.