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).
Thoughts?
--Curious
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.
Problem:
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.
Solution:
For shareholders interested in the passing of the Shareholder Bill of Rights, contact Senator Leibell and Assemblymember Lopez.
yes, it is legal to restrict renting until after a resident has lived in the unit for two years, as long as this is in the coop bylaws.
My Board continue to retrict the rental of apartments to 2 yrs, after which one either have to sell or occupy the unitIs this legal?
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.
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.
Problem:
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.
Solution:
For shareholders interested in the passing of the Shareholder Bill of Rights, contact Senator Leibell and Assemblymember Lopez.
we are 22 years into a 30 mortgage on a coop. we are also considering transfering it into a trust -
1) shall we pay it off and transfere it at the same time? there must be some advangtages to doing both at once.
2) are there really andy tax advantages to not paying off the mortgage? - the apt has increased in value 8 times over what we paid for it - maybe the interest is now so low it makes sense to just pay it off?
all input welcome - thanks.
Rifting off the string below...
What ever happened to last year's effort to get a coop/shareholder bill of rights? Any chance of reviving this effort?
What do people think is most crucial to include? I can think of:
--The right to privacy in one's home
--The right to review financial records of the corporation in which one owns shares
--The right to oust owners found guilty of malfeasance.
--Better laws needed
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.
GK: I remember your posts about problems with your BP, your VP's hesitancy to oppose him, etc. Glad to hear your VP is, hopefully, taking a stronger stance.
All BMs should have a working relationship with the MA, in my opinion. I think your BP and other BMs are forgetting an important point: A board is a "team." No BM should act or make decisions independently of the others. A BM can take on a task (e.g., researching a subject or writing a draft of a letter to Shs for "Board of Directors" signature). But he'd report back to the full board on such things.
That said, BMs have to interact with the MA to some degree. If, as happened to you, the BP is controlling and the only one working with the MA, the others are not in the loop and probably getting no info or skewed info from the BP on what is going on, how money is spent, etc. In my coop, we try to have all BMs attend meetings with the MA. If one can't make it, we make sure meeting minutes are typed asap and given to him with any paperwork (proposals, resident lists, etc.) the MA distributed at the meeting.
We have a lot of interplay by e-mail too. BMs copy the full board and the MA on their posts, and the MA copies all of them on his. It seems your BP and MA are a tight twosome, but handling e-mail this way ensures that no BM is left out of anything. You said you're shopping for a new mgmt firm and want to start off on the right foot with them. A first step in that direction should be having ALL BMs interview mgmt firms, deciding which firm you go with, and meeting the person who will be your MA.
In my coop, all BMs call the MA if they want, and meetings and e-mail keep everyone involved. There are times when the BP is the contact person with the MA, to keep things less complicated and/or time-consuming. THe BP and MA can often settle minor issues or clear up details that the full board doesn't have to get involved in. But on important matters the BP informs the others what the MA told him or what was discussed. Of course, it helps if you have a BP who isn't a control freak and who can be counted on to do this.
If your VP is waking up to the need to not let the BP keep playing "Power Man," maybe your board's next major task in the months ahead, along with hiring a new mgmt firm, should be getting the BP voted out of. If you want to fresh, clean start and get off on the right foot, it sounds like it's time to give your BP the boot!
Thank you for rating!
You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!
Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!
Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.