Hello,
I have read what I could find in past messages about boards creating new policy and grandfathering. I am ambivalent about grandfathering and I wonder if there is any widely accepted best practice or law that could offer guidance as we (my fellow board officers and I) consider the pros and cons.
Buying into a co-op is a tremendous investment. It is the largest investment many of us will ever make. It is a huge life decision. I can understand why grandfathering would make sense and would be the fairest course of action in certain cases.
Say a TV producer buys into a co-op. He pays careful attention to what the sublet policy is, because his work requires him to be in New York for long periods of time, and then in California for long periods of time. He loves the building and wants it to be his permanent base, but also anticipates possibly needing to sublet for several years at a stretch. The prop lease stipulates that shareholders must occupy their apartments for two years, after which time they may sublet. There is no time limit placed on subletting. Our hypothetical TV producer happily lives in his apartment for several years, after which time he is offered work on a show in California. He accepts the offer and starts making plans to sublet. Around this time, the board decides to impose a sublet limit of three years, after which time shareholders must either move back into their apartments or sell. Because the TV producer has no guarantee that his work obligations in California will end in under three years (the program may last four years, five years), he feels forced into a position where he has to sell his apartment.
In this case, because the investment is so enormous, the fairest thing to do, it seems to me, is to grandfather. Otherwise, it is almost as if one party has broken a contract. Agree? Disagree? If you disagree, can you tell me why?
Or, say a man who loves cats and has always owned them and plans always to own them buys into a co-op. He carefully scrutinizes the prop lease, making sure that the buildings he looks at allow pets before making such a large investment/life decision. He buys into a pet-friendly building. After he purchases, the board decides to implement a no-pets policy. In this case, too, not to grandfather seems unfair and similar to breach of contract. I have heard of cases where a SH may be allowed to keep the current pet, but after that pet dies must abide by the new no-pet policy. This, too, seems unfair to me.
Basically, I have problems with policies that change the conditions of original purchase and that essentially force people into a position where they have to sell. I really believe that people prefer to have as much autonomy and flexibility as possible vis-à-vis a very considerable investment.
This is not to say that I prefer a lax environment with no limits. But I do think that boards sometimes cross the line between looking after the shareholders’s collective investment and infringing on personal autonomy, personal decision-making. Boards need to manage, indeed, but micromanaging can really backfire imho.
On the other hand, I am aware of what seems to be the golden rule of business law: treat all shareholders the same. I just don’t know if that is possible or ethical in the case of policy changes. Otherwise things could change whimsically from year to year and people would never really know where they stand, and might find it quite difficult to make major life decisions.
I have been on this board for a year and I am disturbed by what I have seen here. I was under the impression that when I came aboard it was to make a difference but after being here for a year I am applaud as to what goes on here. It has been one fight after the other for me with the president he make all decisions some times with us but for the most part behind us. I believe he has secret meetings and persuades the board member to agree with him. All these members but two are not able to be persuaded and slowly a few others are starting to see things more clear. The shareholders are also starting to see a difference the way that some things are being handled and they are not happy. I feel that the board of directors should be a term position and twenty five years is too long for someone to be an officer for the same co-op. I believe it interferes with their perception as to the real reason why they are their. Elections are coming soon and I'm hoping for a new change in leadership because it is long over due. What can you advise in this situation.
You cannot not.He enjoys the same benefits as the sponsor. Make sure he is a registered investor and if not report him as he has taxes to pay. He cannot benefit from the various abatements. He probably will not be able to sit on the board ever and most importantly he cannot live in his apartment. I read an article on sponsors and investors online. Keyword your query and your answer will be in "black and white"
we converted to a coop in 1986. Recently the sponsor sold an apartment to a "Investor" who now sublets it without paying the fee to the coop. This seems to be a terrible precedent and has not happened before. what should our board do to stop this?
Thank you for recommending Trident Recreation, our president of the board spoke to the owner but although he was soooooooo nice he was unable to help us because they only service outdoor pools. So here I am again asking if anyone knows of a pool managing company for a indoor a pool. Thank you
I'm a HABITAT writer doing an article how a co-op/condo board can create a policy and a price list for minor in-apartment work that building staff can do (fixing a cabinet door, installing an air conditioner, mounting a TV wall-bracket, that sort of thing), as an amenity/convenience that makes the staff some money and for which the co-op/condo takes a fee (or not).
If you have such a system and you'd like to help your board-member community with some practical advice, please contact me at flovece@habitatmag.com. With thanks, --Frank Lovece
Hello:
Has anyone utilized the services of a company called Greensmart? Our Board just had a presentation by a representative from this company and it appears to be a positive move should we decide to proceed.
If anyone has experience with this or a similar company, specifically in actual savings and shareholder acceptance of initial installation procedures, your feedback would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
Hi: It is my understanding there are pool companies that come in and do all the work to get a pool up and running. Does anyone know of a company that is reliable? Our condo's are in Brooklyn...
Thanks.
Hi All
Can anyone recommend a handyman for our condo's. We have 80 buildings 4 condo's to each building. /We are looking to outsource our handyman work and would like someone reliable and in the area. We are in Dyker,Boro Park, surrounding areas are Bay Ridge and Bensonhurst. Any recommendations?
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.
Your right a housing investment is major decision of time, money and effort. When one chooses to purchase shares in the cooperative, they agree and accept the proprietary lease, house laws, and by-laws that govern shareholders and the corporation. At the time of purchase, a shareholder accepts the theoretical and applicable differences between owning property in a house, condominium property and shares of a cooperative.
Under NY State Business Rules, Board of directors is granted wide ranging powers to govern the corporation – focusing on equitable treatment of shareholders. Policy and governing document updates are controversial.
This year we updated our sublet policy as well - to include a time limit and fee; it was a change that had not been made since the 90’s. We didn’t grandfather anyone; rather we allowed a phase out over two years until the new rules were implemented for those with current sublets, meaning they received 2 years + the time limit. I want to avoid hypotheticals, to stay focused.
We made the policy change consistent with our governing documents. Our bylaws Article I states – the primary purposes of the corporation is to provide residences for shareholders who shall be entitled solely by reason of their ownership of shares to proprietary leases … We wanted to meet this standard, while allowing some flexibility by allowing more time, but not grandfathering. We wanted to set a new policy that would be consistently followed, allow all shareholders the same opportunity and terms for subletting, and to minimize legal and financial issues for the corporation as a whole.
On Grandfathering – it’s a difficult proposition. Board’s change, managing agents change, requirements change. As a board member, a goal we strive for that treats shareholders equitably is consistency in polices. Think of all the policy’s in effect in a co-op, from the move in/move out, - Parking – laundry room – sublet and pets, etc… If these policies are updated and grandfathering occurs for each policy – managing the corporation (which the board was elected to do) becomes considerably more difficult and time consuming.
Those not happy about the decision, should reach out to the board/managing agent and see if they will meet with you to discuss your concerns (no guarantee), sometimes there are factors behind a policy change which are not communicated clearly if at all. (If you want specifics let me know)
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.