The wax ring is shareholder's responsibility. Why? Because without a wax ring, a toilet (shareholder owned fixture) cannot be set into the lead bend. The wax ring acts like a gasket.

The lead bend - This is infrastructure. Connects the stack with the hole on the floor of the bathroom. The led bend is securted to the floor of the bathroom with the flange. When the lead bend fails, the co-op replaces it and changes the wax ring at no cost to the shareholder.. Please note that the toilet must be removed so that the new lead bend is fastened to the flange.


Flange - Co-op responsibility. This is the end of the infrastructure plumbing. I"t "grabs" the lead bend and secures it to the floor of the bathroom.


AdC

Unless you damaged the bathroom subflfoor for which you are responsible, you may repair the tiles with common original tiles to provide evenness when setting the toilet. Remember, tiles are the responsibility of the shareholder as it is not co-op responsibility. The co-op is responsible for subflooring. This is an area of great misunderstanding and sensitivity when a floor is chopped or damaged and expensive tiles or flooring are placed by shareholders. Shareholders need to have extra tiles for contingency situations such as the one you describe.

However, watchout for double tiles, i.e., a tile floor placed on top of the original tile in the bathroom. This is a shortcut that creates problems. In other words, the new tile may have elevated the floor under the toilet and created a separation between the toilet and flange that now requires a double wax ring. This problem sometimes creates water leaks.

Another shortcut that you may see is the second flooring was placed around the toilet, i.e., the tile person did not remove the toilet to place the second flooring, thus surrounded the toilet with the new tiles. If these surrounding tiles around the toilet were chopped to remove and reset the toilet, I would refuse doing anything. After all why take responsibility for shoddy work. In my view, a shareholder short changed the work with unprofessional work. Thus, they should pay the consequences of a poor election.

AdC

Thanks ADC. Are you saying that the Corp does not have to replace the floor tiles?, just provide a level surface for the new tiles to be adhered to? When we change shower bodies, we replace the tile-why the difference?

I said, "you may repair the tiles with common original tiles to provide evenness when setting the toilet". If the shareholder has stock of the expensive tiles and you are using a contractor or someone to repair the chopped floor, rather than using common tile, you use what the shareholder supplies. However, the co-op should not pay for fancy tiles. The shareholder should be able to claim the loss through their its personal insurance.

Regarding your shower body, the answer is the same. To replace a shower body, your plumber needs to break the wall behid the tiles and break at least 8 to 10 tiles. Once the shower body is changed, you need to repair the wall behind the tile and you only need to cover with common tile. If the shareholder used fancy tiles, he should claim the loss through personal property insurance or provide the person who will restore the wall behind theh tile with the fancy tile to complete the job.

Remember, if there is a water leak that is determined to be part of coop responsibility and the wall was covered with a very expensive wallpaper or special decorative paint, the co-op is only responsible to repair the damage in a professional manner and prime the wall, but is not required to replace the wallpaper or repaint the wall in the original decorative manner. The shareholder claims damages through personal insurance.

AdC

the tenants must come to the basement to pick up the items. from this particular delivery company. If they are not home then that is a differnt story. however, if the tenant is at home, they must come to the basement. Either that or the handtruck is eliminated in the basement and the boxes must go up by hand. usually they are not that heavy. many times the reason the fresh direct people like to go to the actual doors of the tenants is to get a tip.

Thanks, ST. That's a good suggestion. If the delivery people can carry the boxes w/o the handtruck, it's fine to use the lobby. Our concern is protecting the lobby not any sense of snobbishness about keeping delivery people out of sight.

When we updated our Proprietary Lease in 2006, an amendment successfully passed that requires a Board member to resign if s/he or an immediate family member is suing the Coop.

The board member must recuse himself/herself from any information, deliberations or decision-making relating to the subject.

Unfortunately, it takes some types of individuals not to even think that the spouse is placed in evidence in such a situation. Also, the BM whose spouse is suing may not be registering that she/he is placed in a highly vulnerable position in front of other residents by not stepping down. It's just hard to think about it!

AdC

We use Service Directions Inc
They are OK

http://www.servicedirections.com/index.php

Try Metered Appliance Company of Woodside,NY We had them for seven years and probably will renew with them. We got rid of Coinmach.

important: make sure whatever laundry company you chooses, renovates your laundry room (for free of course) - new floortiles, paintjob, table & chairs etc. also use side loading machines only and not top loaders - will save big $ water charges.

Goodness, we had a terrible time with Metered Appliances. Laundry card system frequently screwed up, and the company ignored calls from residents and management. We got out of our contract after only a year; we're now using MacGray and are happy with them so far.

The ONLY problem we had with Metered Appliance was with the money card. They solved the problem by putting in two money machines so that we had a spare at all times,at no cost to us. They responded to all service call within 24 hours. We found them good, and are in the process working out the details of a new contract.

One thing for sure we would NEVER use Coinmach.

We just renewed our contract with Hercules. They have been very attentive and helpful.

We use Fowler and are reasonably happy with them. That's not a glowing recommendation and is not intended to be, but there have been no disasters.

Your Coinmach contract is a problem and it sounds like you need to ask your lawyer about it. In particular, are you saying they won't even tell you when the contract expires?!

One key point: we insisted on a "Management Agreement" with Fowler rather than the standard contract, which gives us more leeway and gets rid of the objectionable clauses in most laundry contracts. The "Right of First Refusal" clause has been invalidated by the courts (Google the 2005 NYT article called "A Ruling on Contracts for Laundry Rooms"). Interestingly, the losing party in that case was Coinmach.

Automatic renewal is another headache you'll need to discuss with your lawyer. I *think* they have to send you written notice at renewal time, but I'm not sure.

NB - Contracts state that you must give your laundry co written notice within a certain time (e.g, 90 days) if you won't renew them. We gave Coinmach proper notice and went with Hercules this year, in fact we sent them 3 letters since Dec. They said they never got them, couldn't read the signed receipts we faxed them, wouldn't respond to calls from us or Hercules to remove their machines. The transition took much longer than it had to.

Our coop attorney finally called our rep and confirmed by email and letter to him that if they didn't remove their machines by (date), we'd uninstall and store them, and if they wanted them they had to come get them by (x date). That finally worked.

Check your legal position with your attorney and don't take any nonsense from Coinmach or let them waste your time. They'll give you a lot of excuses, if they reply at all. They did this to us, and I know other bldgs that had the same problem. Hercules renovated our laundry room, they'll been very attentive, and we're very pleased with them. Our prop mgr said some of his other bldgs use them and never had any complaints about them. Another laundry co I've heard of that's supposed to have a good reputation is Sepco.

1) if Coinmach cannot produce a contract then you are free and clear. anyhow you could threaten to sue them is they balk. get rid of them - they have a terrible reputation.

2) only 2 machines?? GET YOUR OWN ONES. seriously - get your own - research it - you can make good money for hte coop. and use the warrently onthe machines to have them fixed if they break. get very energy efficient ones and have a coinbox attached. you can do this!

Coinmach provides service, going above and beyond the call of duty, in my experience as a board director and co-op resident of many years.

Coinmach is #1 for a reason. They get the job done. There are some unfair comments here by folks who don't or won't sign their own names. When someone Anonymous says a negative about Coinmach that's meaningless. That could be a competitor for all we know.

In fact all these comments negating or praising one outfit or another without context are without meaning. What size building are you talking about? What is the paper trail of unresolved omplaints? Why dont you get new machines? It takes two to tango I've always found.

So back up your words, or back off.

Whoa! "Coinmach is #1 for a reason"? On what basis? Net revenue? Annual gross? Independent customer survey? This is such obvious company PR-speak, and it's clear to everyone here that you affiliated with the company.

"back up your words, or back off" is no way to speak to other people on this forum.

Messages like this have the opposite effect you're hoping for. People here take complaints with a grain of salt, and this thread has seen comments pro and con about numerous companies.

But I would never go with Coinmach now after such a transparent, defensive attempt at self-promotion.

Dear Sir or Madam,

This confident analysis of what is obvious, clear, pr speak, impact of bt postings, etc. is interesting.

Unfortunate your main conclusion is incorrect. I am not affiliated with Coinmach. Just a satisfied customer. Whether or not you - whoever you are - go with Coinmach, or a competitor, is your decision.

Let's try to be helpful to this forum's participants seeking fair and balanced information (I'm not affiliated with Fox News either) and stay with the issue(s) at hand.

After all, it all comes out in the wash. Have a pleasant day!

I notice you didn't answer my question: How do you "know" the company "is #1"?

What is the basis of that claim? I offered three examples of possibilities.

Did you perhaps read it in newspaper? A trade magazine article? Or, perhaps, a press release? Since no one outside a publicist says "Such-and-such is #1 for a reason."

Ask yourself how you "know" this supposed fact. Making vague and unsupported claims of market position shows an agenda -- and THAT is what's not "helpful to this forum's participants."

We have had a difficult time with Hi-Rise Laundry Service. It takes numerous calls from the property manager, superintendent, and residents before they will send a service crew to repair a broken machine. Of course, other coops may have had an entirely different experience, but that's ours.

We have had good experience with them. Like all laundry companies, they have their good and bad points, but in general, our residents are satisfied.

Inspired by this thread, we've placed a great story by Elizabeth Jensen on our front page, all about how to negotiate a great laundry-room contract -- even if you're still in mid-cycle.

Check it out:
"Laundry-Room Contracts: How Not to Get Soaked"

on the front page through Wed., July 30, and permalinked at

http://www.habitatmag.com/publication_content/featured_articles_updated_three_times_weekly__1/laundry_room_contracts

Where is the article now?

http://www.habitatmag.com/publication_content/2006_november/web_exclusive_adaptations/laundry_room_contracts

We bought our own coin op washer dryers thru this company much better service there website is selaundryequipment.com if this helps you

would you consider an energy audit? the state subsidizes this and you will be guided through this process by professionals.

Thanks, st. Yes, we have conducted an energy audit for the building, so the Board has been implementing actions, e.g. switching to compact fluorescent bulbs, that help the building save energy. I was thinking more along the lines of what AdC described, namely how individual shareholders can change their habits to reduce energy consumption. for example, she mentioned how some shareholders routinely call both elevators to save a few seconds despite causing more electrical use and wear & tear.

DN, for the energy audit, did you go through NYSERDA? Did your managing agent submit the application/help with the application process?

I have been under the impression that an audit through NYSERDA is not completely subsidized. Would you mind telling me what the cost was for the audit?

Thanks.

Before my time, so don't know. However, the audit report was written by "Energy Management and Research Associates" (516) 481-1455. As mentioned, our Board is taking steps recommended in the audit to curtail energy use, but that's for things under the Board's control, e.g., the hallway lights. We need to better convince individuals to cut down on their water use. Too bad individual shareholders aren't directly metered for their own water & sewer charges.

What's that?...

No, I'm not being facetious, but there is a need to bring reality by harping $$$ signs.

Example: Shareholders are complaining of higher and higher maintenance as a result of the crude oil crisis. Therefore, boards should take this opportunity to speak about the followoing:

1. Use of elevators: If your building has two elevators or more, it's practice for residents to put both elevators to work at the same time when they are trying to call for one. By pressing both bottons, the elevators begin working and twice as much electrical use is being used.

2. Hot water: If your building uses the boiler to produce water, let individuals know that fuel oil is being wasted if they have a hot water leak in their faucets.

3. Speak about doing savings related to water in general - constantly running toilets, long showers, allowing running water are issues that demand education. Also, in buildings with booster pumps, the pumps will work longer hours as a result of higher demand due to water waste.

4. Suggest home audits and builidng audits to capture wasted electrical, heat, gas, etc. By also including home audits, perhaps people may learn to know that they can personally benefit from an audit.

Unfortunately, our country has been blessed by niceties (not to say LUXURIES) that were outside the European societies until 10-15 years ago. Thus, our current economic situation may be a blessing to bring some measure of reflection regarding our excesses.

Good luck!

AdC

How big and cohesive is your coop? We revised our governing documents in early 2006, and it was tough to get the necessary votes. Our attorney said, correctly, that there wouldn't be much controversy about the changes; our biggest enemy would be apathy. Even with multiple memos, newsletter mentions, "town hall" meetings, there were shareholders who didn't bother voting. They didn't vote No; they simply didn't vote at all. I'm glad we amended our governing documents, but getting out the vote was tough.

we only have 14 shareholders and I think the only ones who will not vote are the ones who do not benefit from the changes: the late maintnenance payer (1), the person who is going to move soon and doesn't want a flip tax, and the shareholder who has more shares in cumulative voting. Do you know if these votes have to be conducted in person or if we can have mail-in votes?

In our particular case, the governing documents stated a special shareholders meeting is needed to amend the Proprietary Lease or the Bylaws (not the House Rules). However, a shareholder could hand in a proxy if s/he preferred. Our coop attorney said we had to be very meticulous about the amendment process as most amendments that get tossed out by the courts are invalidated not because of the content but because they were adopted in violation of proper procedures.

This is a very good question. We have an old building and some apartments heat up very quickly and require very little heat whereas some of the lower floors have their heat on high all witner...

Anyone have any info?

Most Steam heated buildings distribute the steam centrally. All areas are heated at the same time. In order for Heat Meters ( they do exist and are very expensive ) to work each Apartment or floor has to be on a seperate zone. This would require repiping the steam supply and return lines in the building, very costly and if not done properly it will be a nightmare with all kinds of problems such as banging, knocking and flooding the boiler.

On hot water heating systems it usually easier to zone off.

If one apartment is getting to much heat it can be corrected easly. On a steam one pipe system, by changing the radiator vent valve to a smaller size. The valve costs about $ 10.00 for a non adjustable valve and about $ 25.00 for a adjustable valve. This is somthing your supt can change. If this does not work than there is something wrong with the heating system and a professional should be called.

(1) Appropriateness of e-mail communications for sensitive information.
Unfortunately, a code of conduct and ethics is not a document that is easily found in co-op boards as a guiding document. In fact, I doubt if there is a board with access to one. Consequently, board members are left to their corporate experience and their moral values founded on their faith or ethics formation to guide their behaviors and to curb their tongues.

Since co-ops are essentially corporations similar to any publicly traded corporation, board members should conduct their business with the highest standards of integrity and business practice possible. E-mails are not private when writing on co-op matters to other board members, but they now belong to the corporation. In the event of a litigation, records and board communications among themselves and with the property manager and co-op counsel may be subpoenaed. Although the person being spoken of now may not be the subject of the litigation, all the e-mails are equally printed and reviewed. Derogatory language and expressions may be damaging to the co-op. Therefore, communications involving board members, property managers, co-op counsel or any other professional must be restricted to a formal business tone. Sensitive questions should be out of the e-mail communications unless a formal letter is being transmited.

Your co-op counsel may be a person to address or dictate how communications via e-mail should be conducted, what should be excluded, what to print and retain on file or burned onto a CD and what retention to assign and what to delete as soon as possible.

(2) Allegations: Obviously, if the comments seem improper, by all means speak up and bring the offending person to his/her senses. However, I would suggest doing your homework by first approaching individually other board members to find out where they stand with regard to these allegations and the manner in which the person expresses the allegations. Are the other board members equally uncomfortable as you are or are they somewhat uneasy? do they feel it's okay to speak freely without restrictions or do they feel it is necessary to stop this activity? Depending on the reception you get, you may have to do some persuasive work in order to bring them to see the issues. It would be tragic that in the process of bringing a higher standard other board members will end up taking aim at you for being too strict or hearing them they say, it's okay to express however you wish. Obviously, you want support from the rest of the board.

(3) Questioning Visitors: Who is anyone to question visitors of residents unless the visitors' public actions cause concern? While we may question eccentric fashions, extreme body piercing, extreme looks, etc, we cannot jump into conclusion as to the moral value of any individual. If a visitor behaves or uses objectionable language in public areas of the builidng in a reprehensible manner, then call the security guards, the police or write a letter to the shareholder if the gravity of the problem does not merit removal of the visitors from the building. If a shareholder does not like the action against their visitors while in the public areas, the house rules and proprietary lease probably say that shareholders are responsible for the actions of their guests. Do what you need to do, provide documentation to the co-op counsel and BE DONE!

Good luck!

AdC

Margaret - I agree with AdC's comments about this. My two cents --

If your Sh doesn't do anything offensive in public areas, doesn't create undue noise or disruption in her apt, and no one complained to mgmt or the board about her, you have no reason to fault her conduct. If she drinks in her apt - even if she was in the lobby or elevator and smelled of alcohol -that's not a coop issue, as long as she doesn't disturb anyone, create a scene or damage anything.

If she is disruptive, mgmt should send her a letter saying her conduct is objectionable per coop rules and advising her to be guided accordingly in the future.

You said your BM questions her guests. Is it because they are disruptive or is your BM just asking them what the Sh does (or what they do) when they visit her? If the guests are a problem, that warrants a letter to the Sh too. But your BM has no business asking them what goes on in the privacy of the Sh's apt if they aren't causing any disturbance. If your BM makes accusations to the board about misconduct, she should present proof at a board meeting, not make unsupported claims to the board via email.

I would think that if this Sh's conduct is so disruptive, you, other board members or mgmt would get complaints from residents or you would be aware of it yourselves.

If your BM's accusations have no basis in fact and there is no proof of misconduct, your board president or coop attorney should tell your BM it's not a coop issue and to mind her own business. Maybe your BM is just a busybody who likes digging up dirt and in doing is wasting your board's valuable time. It's possible, just a guess on my part without knowing all the facts.

If the apartment is empty and sponsor plans to rent it, then call your coop counsel and have the counsel address this issue immediately.

The sponsor only has the rights specified in the conversion plan: read what are the sponsor's rights according to your plan and, if your rules prohibits washers, then ths sponsor must conform.

I don't think the installation of a washer falls under the renovation alteraation of units.

AdC

it was a decision that they be banned more recently.

Deina: If you have a leasing contract with a laundry room company, you should check your contract with them. These contracts usually state that during the contract term "other laundry services" cannot be used. It may also state that residents can't have washers & dryers in apartments during the contract term. If your contract doesn't say anything specific about machines in apartments, talk to your coop attorney. He might advise you that use of "other laundry services" is meant to include apartments.

some apt. have laundry machines grandfathered and there is nothing with basement laundry co. saying they cannot. also you could not enforce that one. this has to do with the question that the sponsor must or must not obey the laws. he can rent without approval, etc. but can he have a laundry machine installed if it is not allowed?

Our coop enacted a rule saying that machines aren't allowed in apts bec our contract with the laundry leasing co stipulated this. When our sponsor wanted to put machines in his apts, our attorney said he couldn't bec he doesn't need approval for apt buyers, etc. but he's bound by the house rules like all our Shs are. He didn't dispute it and we didn't have a problem on this.

Read your conversion plan... does it mention anything regarding washers?...what about your proprietary lease? If washers are not mentioned, your Board has to rule washers out from the allowed appliances via the house rules. Another appliance that may be ruled out is the waste disposer under the kitchen sink due to plumbing issues.

Now, if the sponsor allowed washers while the buildng was a rental prior to conversion and the sponsor has a rent-controlled renter whose original lease specified among the appliances in the apartment a washer, a disposer, A/C, dishwasher, etc then the sponsor is obligated to provide the working appliances specified per lease. Consequently, the new House Rule regarding a washer or a disposer may not apply to that specific rent-controlled apartment as long as the original renter and/or legal occupants are in posession of the apartment.

In your particular case, the sponsor no longer has a rent-controlled apartment because it is vacant and rent control will not apply to a vacant apartment. The House Rules now can be fully enforced on the sponsor because the new renter does not fall under rent control and because the new lease will be signed while the sponsor is no longer in control of the building as the owner. The sponsor must conform to the new House Rules of the co-op.

Best bet is to get in touch with the co-op counsel to "enlighten" or "refresh" the sponsor's memory as the co-op exercises its rights. For your information, the privileges that the sponsor will retain are the following:

(1) The sponsor will not pay sublet fee if any instituted.
(2) The sponsor will have the right to alter the configuration of the apartment as long as it complies with any alteration policy, i.e., provide certificates of insurance, obtain building permits to do the alterations and even combine apartments if two adjacent apartments are vacant.
(3) Rent or sell without any board approval.

I hope I have provided enough information for you to have a conversation with your co-op counsel.

AdC

Read your conversion plan... does it mention anything regarding wahsers?...what about your proprietary lease? If washers are not mentioned, your Board has to rule washers out from the allowed appliances via the house rules. Another appliance that may be ruled out is the waste disposer under the kitchen sink due to plumbing issues.

Now, if the sponsor allowed washers while the buildng was a rental prior to conversion and the sponsor has a rent-controlled renter whose original lease specified among the appliances in the apartment a washer, a disposer, A/C, dishwasher, etc then the sponsor is obligated to provide the working appliances specified per lease. Consequently, the new House Rule regarding a washer or a disposer may not apply to that specific rent-controlled apartment as long as the original renter holding the lease is living in the apartment.

In your particular case, the sponsor no longer has a rent-controlled apartment. The House Rules now can be fully enforced on the sponsor because the new renter does not fall under rent control and because the new lease will be signed while the sponsor is no longer in control of the building as the owner. The sponsor must conform to the new House Rules of the co-op.

Best bet is to get in touch with the co-op counsel to "enlighten" or "refresh" the sponsor's memory as the co-op exercises its rights. For your information, the privileges that the sponsor will retain are the following:

(1) The sponsor will not pay sublet fee if any instituted.
(2) The sponsor will have the right to alter the configuration of the apartment as long as it complies with any alteration policy, i.e., provide certificates of insurance, obtain building permits to do the alterations and even combine apartments if two adjacent apartments are vacant.
(3) Rent or sell without any board approval.

I hope I have provided enough information for you to have a conversation with your co-op counsel.

AdC

Legality: check your by-laws to see if board members MUST be shareholders. If not, it's legal.

As to ethical: as long as a board member fulfills his/her fiduciary responsibilities to the corporation, why not?

Even if the docs allow it [which seems unlikely], ex-shareholders [or soon to be ex-] inherently cannot think & act as shareholders, & should step down. If they have unique skills &/or knowledge which would be of value to the association, they can continue to contribute as volunteers, if they're willing...but they should not vote as owners.

check your bylaws and proprietary lease...chances are board members are required to be current shareholders.

As long as a person is still a "shareholder of record" - i.e., as long as a closing has not taken place at which his/her shares are transferred to someone else and for whom a new stock certificate is issued, that person can still be a board member if his/her term hasn't expired and s/he hasn't officially resigned from the board. You have to check your by-laws to see if a person who isn't a shareholder of record can be a board member.

Must a board member live in the building to serve on the board? We have a board member who lease out her unit and doesn't live here anymore.

Anonymous - check your by-laws. Ours which are the same that many co-ops have state that "it shall not be necessary that a director be a shareholder" - and also - "not less than a majority of directors to be elected...shall be residents of the building and unrelated to the sponsor and the holders of unsold shares." In our by-laws, this is in Article III, section 2.

Check your bylaws.

If they don't require a board member to live in the building, then let her/him serve. An investor is an investor, whether she lives there all the time, part-time or none of the time. That's because it's her money, not her presence, that makes her a shareholder.

She (or he) still has the same interest in seeing her investment increase in value no matter where she lives.

In fact, living somewhere else may be an advantage, because she can see other ways a residence is managed.

Finally, remember that New York State corporate law (which governs co-ops) prohibits treating any shareholder differently from the others. The courts consider it discrimination.

Nothing to do with discrimination ...
Your byLaws hold the answer...
However,as for sublets....
We have owners that live outside the building, and never intend to return. As oppose to being a positive force, they helped keep a board member (with his own agenda) on the Board who promised (and for many years succeeded) to help them keep thier lucurtive sub-lets --
A coop with high owner/occupation is considered a better investment by the bank and lenders... Also, renters (not all) do not have the same intrest in maintaing the building or keeping the peace with their neighbors. Good luck... VP

I said elsewhere ["They should not serve"] that board members should discontinue service once they sell, or determine that they will sell. I should have stipulated that living elsewhere--whether full-time or part-time--should NOT disqualify them from service. As Board Treasurer points out, the key factor is whether they maintain their investment in the property. As long as they have an equity stake, they're well-positioned to act in a fiduciary capacity.

Anonymous - Unless your by-laws say BMs must be Shs and all BMs must be residents, once your BMS close on their apt sales, they're no longer Shs and shouldn't be on the board.

Many by-laws say a "majority" of BMs must be residents. I agree with Board Treas that it's a person's money that makes him a Sh. But a coop isn't just a business corp. It's a home, a community where hopefully people get along, and a bldg that needs watchful eyes to ensure that residents treat it and each other with respect. If BMs don't live in the coop, they can't relate to that, and if they all they want is an investment, let them buy stocks, bonds, funds or CDs.

I also agree with Board Treas that Business Corp Law prohibits any Sh from being treated differently from the others. All SHs must be treated "fairly and equally". But if a BM must be a Sh, not letting someone be on the board who isn't a Sh is not discrimination.

We had the same problem,,, according to our bylaws, anyone could be on our board... A SH vote is usually needed to change the bylaw,,, so (if needed) put it on the SH meeting agenda,,, and vote to change the bylaw..