At an annual meeting I asked who was the lady on the Board who I had not seen before, and why we did not have an election to replace the director. The management company stated that we did not need an election for a new director. This is a 48 unit building in Queens with the sponsor holding 10 or 11 units. Was management correct in saying that we do not need an election?

Im sure this will impact each co-op differently, but wanted to share and solicit feedback.

The State Legislature ended its session on Thursday, June 21, 2012 without passing any legislation relating to the property tax abatement program for home owners in New York City cooperatives and condominiums.
Bottom Line - abatement credits on your RE Tax bill will be expired, and most likely your bill will increase.

At this moment, no one is quite sure what will happen next.
Will an additional legislative session be called to complete negotiations on this and other bills? Will the Department of Finance be forced to adjust our October or January bills to recapture unauthorized abatements? No one knows.

What are your thoughts?

we had out annual meeting a couple of nights ago , and the week before i asked everyone that i saw, the shareholders , if they received the annul financial report , and the answer was no, except for some who didn't know what it was, thinking they received it,but they received the notice of annual meeting. Yhis is not the first time this has happened, i still have the envelope and postmark the time i received it two days after the meeting. That was the year after the $ 27k zero drop error. on the budget, and not in our favor. I had posted around the building this factoid, incase people werent aware. i forget the exact wording on the proprietary lease, but i did lokk back and saw that if the accountant sifned off on feb7 ,we received it by march7. The proprietary rules say something like a reasonable time after the audit is completed. 30 days was probably the upward limit om getting the annual audit of financials to us. i will try and get through to the accountant/audit firm tomorrow to check when it was done, as this will be added onto the list for the DA.
I had also posted an article from the ny times ,co-op ans and questions, where i had wriiten in since the buyers were being told it was 90% owner occupied, and i could only see about 50%, and from day one, at conversion, i do not think it was 90%.
The Pres disputed that and it got heated, he had a lost where he had out hi-lighted the non owner occupied apartments, and after looking at it for a couple of minutes started rattling off many apartments where the shareholder did not reside , and never resided in. In fact there is one apartment that was sold at conversion on a non-eviction plan, that has remained unoccupied since 1983 or 85. IMO, it had a lot to do with making the magic number for the non eviction conversion. The owner has never come back or stepped foot in the building since. The president argued with me and said this was owner occupied, plus another , where the people live in florida and come back a coule times ayear , maybe 2 times i see them, That is another i argued about since it was owned and not illegally sublet,but was not occupied, I figure there is at least 50 years of sublet fee's that the co-op should have collected since the owners never lived in the apartment, their adult children did, and our proprietary lease par 14 says "AND" which we also argued about , now the president is even saying it says "OR" even though i have given copies and the case-law to him at an annual meeting 4 years ago, someday i will find a lawyer.with my pocketbook in mind, not his,till then pro se and DA for the criminal.. I also had a good question for the podcast ,but fogot it. maybe tomorrow i will remember

Does anyone know if this is currently true? Thanks

"... all building owners and managers with employees are required under New York State law to carry workers compensation coverage, which covers on-the-job injuries and occupational illnesses. Many boards may not be aware that participating in programs such as work safety groups—independent groups put together by insurance companies in pooled coverage—could result in a 30 percent or higher dividend and lower premiums on their workers compensation coverage. The savings is based on claims experience of the individual properties of safety group members. According to Kaminoff, at the end of the year, a board could receive a check worth 30 percent of what they paid into workers' compensation for them to deposit right back into their reserve account.

As an example, Carlson cites the FNYHC's program specifically for building owners and managers. By purchasing through the Federation's Safety Group, members were able to save approximately 60 percent on their workers compensation insurance premiums. Their coverage is through the Durnan Workers' Compensation Safety Group, which handles more than 5,000 New York properties.

Con Edison Firm Gas Customers are eligible for a 70% incentive (up to 20k) for the installation of a Building Energy Management System. Multifamily buildings w/ 5-75 units are eligible. 90% of buildings with 5-24 units will pay less than $3,000 for internet based wireless BEMS. Check with Con Edison and/or the Association for Energy Affordability to verify these claims.

The coop I live in where 3 years ago the board wrote a ltr about ac installations and posted on the bulletin board & sent in the mail to shareholders. To date, we still have residents with ac's installed with bricks, styrofoam, the yellow pages and after pointing this out to the managing agent they are still not properly installed. Who's at fault? the board, the management company, the super. It seems like such a liability not to have ac's installed correctly.

The city announced Wednesday that more than $100 million in financing will be available to property owners to help them convert from using heavy heating oils to cleaner fuels.

This is of particular interest due to the often insanely high construction costs associated with having Con Edison or National Grid upgrade your gas service. If either utility company offers to upgrade your service at no cost dont blink...sign up now and take advantage of the offer. Go to firm gas for whatever duration they require, yet do it.

However, a straight #6 to #2 conversion as long as the burner is able to handle the transition from #6 to #2 and your boiler is not a relic...the conversion cost is not very expensive relative to a conversion to firm gas. In fact, a majority of 6 to 2 conversions don't require financing.

It is recommended that you do convert to #2 and not #4. You know what you are getting with #2 and there will be consistency with every delivery. The contents of #4 are not always consistent...not a huge deal, yet something that could impact an older burner.

I am a member of my coop board. Recently the president, secretary, and treasurer decided to repaint, carpet, and decorate the board room? The secretary works for decorating store got the paint donated or at a discount. The treasurer added a chair rail and pictures, carpeting, conference table and chairs were purchased. The total cost was slightly more than $1000?

I was surprised when I received an email from the treasurer requesting a financial contribution to offset the cost. The new board room allows shareholders to rent the board room at an hourly rate.

The problem I have with contributing towards the upgrade is that shareholders are not being asked to contribute. In my opinion this is unethical. My thinking is there should be either a one-time fee to pay for the materials or the funds should come from the coop's financials.

The board is concerned they will be criticized for spending money frivolously. I don't agree - this is an investment that adds value to our property.

I am interested in getting feedback as to what is actually appropriate.

Anne-Marie Ditta
Mount Vernon, NY

recently our board increased our parking garage fee. This led to strong opposition and quite vocal complaints from people affected by this decision during our annual co op meeting.
A petition from the majority of garage occupants and some other occupants requesting reconsideration of this decision was subsequently presented to each board member. The minutes of the next board meeting state the petition was submitted. That's all.
In a newsletter following this thre was note to the effect that a petition was received but "no action was taken by the board."
Is this legal? Should it have been handled this way? Please let us know. Thank you

recently our board increased our parking garage fee. This led to strong opposition and quite vocal complaints from people affected by this decision during our annual co op meeting.
A petition from the majority of garage occupants and some other occupants requesting reconsideration of this decision was subsequently presented to each board member. The minutes of the next board meeting state the petition was submitted. That's all.
In a newsletter following this thre was note to the effect that a petition was received but "no action was taken by the board."
Is this legal? Should it have been handled this way? Please let us know. Thank you