We've had a doorman (3pm-midnight, M-F) for many years. A SH (since '03) says she thought a doorman was just to help 2 elderly SHs and since they're both now gone, we no longer need one. We said it would be a "reduction in services" and we can't take away a service we've always provided. Also, our super has an afternoon job and goes to night school, so he isn't here 2pm to 10pm. With no doorman we'd have no one on site for security, or for help if needed.
This SH is telling everyone we're wasting a lot of money on a doorman. That issue isn't the problem. The doorman we have is very helpful/conscientious, and everyone likes him. The problem is this SH. Many others are complaining loudly that she's calling, e-mailing, ringing bells and bothering them. They all told her to stop but she hasn't and they want the coop to do something about it.
The board spoke to her and sent her a letter saying we have complaints that she's creating a disturbance and asking her to stop. Since she came here in '03, she's been nice and seemingly "rational," but suddenly she's ballistic about the doorman. We thought maybe something happened between them, but she hasn't said anything about him personally. He's 54-55, very courteous, and we don't he got fresh or anything like that. She's been bothering everyone almost daily since early July. She called me 3x today. I finally said the issue was no longer up for discussion and I was hanging up, which I did.
Our SHs feel as we do about her and the doorman is not an issue with them. I think we should all just ignore her and hopefully she'll tire and stop this. We don't want to get our coop attorney involved but if she doesn't stop, he may have to send her a letter.
Anyone have any other suggestions on how to deal with her?
Our co-op is about 35 years old. They are 2 story brickfaced garden apts. On average for the last few years we have had to repair at least a dozen pinhole pipe leaks a year from copper pipes that run through the ceiling between the up and downstairs apts. Any information about why these leaks would occur and/or how to prevent them would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
Many of you have written wise things and have also given me good advice in the past; I'd like to get your feedback on this.
Miraculously, it looks as though our current VP is serious about getting rid of our managing agent/management company. (I've posted in the past about proxy tampering and other issues.) This is a great, great sign. It also gives me hope that the VP may be starting to think independently of the BP (who wants to retain the MA/management company).
The current managing agent was hired by the BP, who was the only one to interview her and presented it to the rest of the board as a fait accompli: "Here is our new managing agent." The way it always worked was this: the BP would meet with the MA on a monthly (sometimes bi-monthly) basis. Alone. During my stint on the board, I found this odd and asked if I could attend. Initially the BP told me I could, but that first meeting came and went and I wasn't notified that it was happening. So I asked that I be included in the next one (and the next one, and the next one...). The BP hemmed and hawed and said: "Well, the thing is, often we change the time at the last minute, so it's difficult to set up with an additional person..." To which I would respond: "Well, let me know anyway. Give me a heads-up. If I can make it, I will." And he would just never let me know that these meetings were happening.
Subsequently friends in other buildings raised their eyebrows at this and told me that it is not standard procedure for the MA to meet solely, alone, with the BP. In their buildings, the MA meets with the entire board (or a majority).
How does it work in your buildings?
Now that we're shopping for a new management company and MA, I'd kind of like it if we could start out on the right foot. I'd like the entire board to have a working relationship with the MA. It just seems healthier to me.
Interested in feedback on this idea:
"To join our coop, you must run for election to the board one year out of every five, or else pay a $500 fee in lieu of your year of service."
First a house rule and, depending on the results, perhaps later a bylaw (with the sum left open).
To all - here's the situation:
We need $250K for a bldg project (must do it within 1-2 yrs)
- We have 20% that amt in reserve (just did a big project)
- $250K would eat up our entire LOC (not a good idea)
- We could take out an add'l mortgage (not desirable)
- A 2-yr assessment would be a very steep hit on Shs
- We'd need a 30% mnt increase to raise $250K in 2 yrs
(could lower it by, say, 25% after we raised the $250K)
We're in good financial shape with no debt but the need for $250K was totally unanticipated, hit us out of the blue.
Other options to raise $250K? Appreciate any suggestions.
Re: SHAREHOLDER BILL OF RIGHTS -(pending in Senate Housing Committee) NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH Bill #119
Title of Bill: An act to amend the general business law and the real property law, in relation to enactment of a residential cooperative and condominium owner’s bill of rights.
A Must Read !!!
To review Senate Bill #2386 go to: http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/distsen.cgi
Assembly Bill #5673 (same) go to: http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=A05673
Purpose or General Idea of Bill:
Enacts a bill of rights for owners of residential cooperative or condominium units to provide fair and equitable treatment of all shareholders or unit owners; directs the attorney general to promulgate a handbook summary of the rights of shareholders and unit owners vis-a-vis cooperative corporations and condominium associations and the procedures and processes available to shareholders and unit owners to enforce such rights.
On February 5, 2007 Senator Vincent Leibell introduced bill #S2386 where it was referred to the Senate’s Housing, Construction and Community Development Committee.
This same bill #A05673 was also introduced by Brooklyn Assemblymember Vito Lopez, Chairman of the Housing Committee.
The bill passed the Assembly vote, passed through the Senate Housing Committee, but at the end of the session, fell apart. Senator John J. Bonacic (Republican), current chair of the Committee on Housing, Construction and Community Development, is opposed to the bill. Major real estate interests are against this bill, citing an impingement on the rights of the board of directors. They feel that shareholders and/or board members would be better served through education.
There is currently a move to create separate bills for coops and condos, since there are different needs for both.
For shareholders interested in the passing of the Shareholder Bill of Rights, contact Senator Leibell and Assemblymember Lopez.
What exactly does it mean when the coop is named as additional insured on a certificate of insurance for a contractor doing work on a shareholders apartment?
Our board has a situation where work being performed in an apartment caused damaged to another apartments walls and floors.
The shareholder of the damaged apartment feels that because the coop is named as additional insured it should cover the balance of the damages that their coop owners policy does not cover because it is an additional insured and then look to recover from the contractor.
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.