The board of my coop decided a couple of years ago to purchase radiator labs cozy covers on radiators. It was presented as a way of allegedly meeting nyc law 97, enacted in 2019 to set energy efficiency and emissions. But the cozy covers donot have any effect on emissions because the emissions come from the building boiler. At first, it was not mandatory but within the last month, the board approved a resolution to make it required for all shareholders. In a recent letter,left on all of our doors, the board has the right to withhold the resales,sublets and register of anyone who doesn't get the covers by July 1,2022. My question is under what law does this board have the right to impose any of these "pumishments" if one doesn't install the covers? I have been a shareholder since 1982 and never faced these types of bullying tactics.
> Join the conversation Comments (1)
We did not used to have this but now, it seems, we do.
Basic UWS pre-war coop with no amenities. part-time doorman.
How normal is this?
the building has a debt-to-income ratio requirement of 19%; the combined monthly mortgage and maintenance costs should not exceed 19% of a buyer’s gross monthly income.
Good morning
Does anyone have experience with a roof top solar farm as a revenue source.
Thank you
Robert
Hi. My father was a Connecticut resident when he died. He had 2 Coops apartments in Manhattan, NYC. In his last will he left his children (My siblings and I) his shares in the two coops. We don't know where he saved his certificates of shares. We are dealing with the probate process in Connecticut.
What do we need to do to ask the Coops Boards to issue Certificate's duplicates ?
What will the Boards require?
Can the Boards refuse to issue the certificates duplicates or reject us as new shareholders?
Hi all,
Is it a common practice in coops for the management company of the coop to charge the coop a 1% brokerage fee of the loan amount for a building's mortgage or re-finance of an existing mortgage.?
Thanks
Gary
What does this clause mean: “In the event of an exchange or no-consideration transfer, the flip tax is not triggered?”
> Join the conversation Comments (1)
Does the meaning of resident in the context of a Coop board eligibility requirement include only shareholders that reside in the coop full time. Are shareholders with a primary residence elsewhere considered residents.
What can be done if the Board of Directors of a Mitchell Lama Coop violates the new Mitchell Lama Reform Law 6412 and inform shareholders of 782 units that until they have a directive from HPD they can swim around the law?
That will continue to use proxies to achieve a quorums not use names of Directors on the minutes when they vote on coop business . Thank you
The unit above me has a brown spot on their ceiling. They are new owners and have asked the manager to check the matter. He told them he would but has not made any arrangements for an inspection. I have lived in this building for 25 years and the roof has never been replaced. they have repeatedly asked for someone to check this out but are being ignored. What would the next step be?
> Join the conversation Comments (1)Anyone aware of the pros and cons of a coop board requiring shareholders to agree to a hold harmless agreement for simple contractor work - like carpet cleaning? Thanks.
> Join the conversation Comments (1)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.
From what you wrote, it sounds like your board is trying a reasonable approach to meeting the potentially draconian requirements of LL97. LL97 can have very serious financial consequences if the efficiency limits are not met. I read some of the Cozy Covers website, and their approach to improving energy consumption efficiency makes sense.
To answer your question about under what law does the board have the right to do what it is doing, I recommend you read about the "Business Judgment Rule". The BJR gives boards very wide latitude to impose rules and guidelines as long as the imposition is done in good faith and applies to all shareholders.
In your case, the board is attempting to meet the dictates of LL97 using a low-cost solution, and the BJR gives your board the right to use whatever measures are available to them to obtain full compliance. The alternative for your building may be a major heating system overhaul or replacement and believe me, you do not want to see the maintenance increase or assessment for that.
Please don't consider the measures your board may use to achieve full compliance as "punishments", but look at them as a form of "fiscal attitude adjustment."
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.