Local Law 11 is one big factor this upcoming year.

We are treating LL 11 as "capital".

I am not an accountant, but to my knowledge, LL 11 is not typically a capital expence as it is maitenance, if you couple the work with some desired improvement you may be able to work it in.


~AR

You're absolutely right! Local 11 is maintenance work and payment of taxes indicates on the work that this is maintenance.

I think the idea persists that if greater than $5K, it must be capital expense.

Great question.. Like to see more answers!

I am doing budgets for about 17 buil;dings right now and my average increase this year is 5-7%.. last year was much higher.

~AR

We are in the process of reviewing our current budget and planning for 2011. We continue to see a rise in utility, water/sewer and labor costs. We also have the potential based on today’s oil price for higher energy costs in the future, along with continuing need to meet regulatory requirements – water backflow preventers, elevator code changes, local law 11, and new green laws. Discussions about maintenance /assessments are underway.

Add in the following factors, we have seen a sharp rise in arrears since July with no return to normalization expected until at least Q1 2011, and it hinders our ability to raise the funds for operations or capital improvements.

We also have some major façade and terrace work that needs to be completed – a refinance of our underlying mortgage can not be completed until 2012 due to a lock out period, so we will be under stress and probably pay higher rates to obtain alternative funding.

One last factor we have in our building that impacts our decision making– lack of resident shareholders living in the building:
We have 57 apartments (29 sponsors) 28 purchasing shareholders
Out of the 28 purchasing shareholders. (5 have relatives living there and 4 are being sublet and 2 are empty as the families live here part time) we are down to 17 (29.9%) apartments that actually owned and occupied by purchasing shareholders.

This makes it much more difficult to educate shareholders about our financial needs and improvements to the building and raise maintenance and assessments.

So where does that leave us…. We will probably raise the maintenance a nominal amount and need an assessment, but very well may not be around to implement the proper budgeting and use of funds.

If anyone has any thoughts or comments, please let me know.

Thanks

Ask for Mindy Goldberg at NCB.

Can't say enough about Mindy-she is slow on returning calls but that's cause she's really good and in demand. Stay away from mortgage brokers whatever you do and beware prepayment penalties.

Good luck!

Student loans.
Tax Installments / Payment plans.

Sorry to respond so late. Thanks for the infp. which I forearded to the involved parties. So sad that the family wants nothing to do with the parent.

The code is below for your perusal... generally you hagve 3 feet bu law aroung the paremeter of an opening, rule of thumnb, but not current code is never below an opening as lind, fumes, etc will be taken in from the opening.

Uniform Mechanical Code
M1502.2 Duct termination. Exhaust ducts shall terminate on the outside of the building. Exhaust duct terminations shall be in accordance with the dryer manufacturer’s installation instructions. Exhaust ducts shall terminate not less than 3 feet (914 mm) in any direction from openings into buildings. .Exhaust duct terminations shall be equipped with a backdraft damper. Screens shall not be installed at the duct termination

One thing to consider If you're moving that dryer vent though. There are codes for that. You're allowed 25' of developed run of 4" vent. 90* elbows count as 5', 45* elbows count as 2-1/2'. Add up the footage of pipe and then add your elbows up. The reason for this code is that some dryers are not capable of "pushing" much farther, which can lead to fires if lint builds up. Gas dryers are venting combustion gases as well.

Best
~AR

Look to your prop lease under the paragraph about subletting. That should have the info you need with regards to how long a visitor can stay before it is considered a sublet and in need of board approval. If memory serves, and I might be wrong, is usually a month max.

As long as the shareholder lives in the unit during the roommate's stay, there is no need for board approval.
You can have a guest, family or roommate for as long as you wish.

As a courtesy, you might want to inform the super that a "new face" will be in the building for a while.

Perhaps hiring an expeditor who deals with this type of thing exclusively will make it easier for you and for the building. Send your violations received to your elevator company as well to see if they have done the work and can certify as such.

Hi,
We found we had $3K of boiler violations outstanding from 1995-2004 when we went to refi the building. This was during the tenure of a builiding manager we let go in 2005. Our current management company tells us there is nothing to do but pay the fines. I have heard otherwise. Any advice besides hiring an expeditor? We are a tiny builidng and no budget for that.
Thanks,

I use Jack Jaffa.. they are pretty good.. they also monitor all my building on an ongoing basis.
http://www.jackjaffa.com/

~AR

I does not happen in my building as the board suffers from selective memory

MRM

Thanks, but I'm not sure I understand your post. Unofficial meetings don't happen because your board suffers from selective memory??

Nothing wrong there.
As long as it doesn't involve important decisions.

I believe that, as long as it's not a quorum of the board, you're OK. (ie., if you have 5 members and three of you are chatting; if you have 7, and fewer than 4 are talking, etc.)

Our board did discuss this a few years back.

You can't vote on anything -- even trivial items -- unless a proper meeting notice has been sent to all board members. As for general conversation, however, prohibiting ad hoc discussions among board members seems counterproductive. Some of our most useful ideas have come from exactly such chance encounters: "I ran into Jonas yesterday and we were talking about the noise problem and thought of an interesting new approach."

RLM had a good thought about avoiding unofficial meetings that involve a quorum of board members. Even if there is no formal vote taken, the quorum may effectively reach a majority opinion without the input of the absent board members.

What does your Proprietary Lease say about elections to fill uncompleted terms? (I very nearly said 'sentences' - lol)

I believe ours states board members can elect officers, and can appoint someone to fill an uncompleted term until the next regular election. Are your terms staggered?

Can't say whether this is kosher or not without having seen your PL, sorry.

Have seen this happen with some frequency, sometimes blessed by counsel. Technically, the member resigns the about-to-expire seat & is then appointed to the seat with lots of miles remaining.

Even where all the players are well-intentioned & competent, this ALWAYS sends bad signals to owners, who naturally assume the transfer is improper & that something's being concealed.

In such cases, I recommend Boards: a] announce that they're NOT appointing a replacement--though they could--because the election is imminent; b] endorse the member they want to continue to serve, offering substantive reasons; c] ask for proxies.

Such an approach carries some risk for the Board, but tends to generate ample good will & sufficient proxies.

HabitatReporter here with advice from Jeff Reich of Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz, LLP. He says,

"If the situation is as Gloria presented it, it appears that the board has not acted properly. As an initial matter, the condominium’s by-laws should be referred to in order to determine the board’s authority to fill the vacant board seat. Additionally, the by-laws will dictate whether the individual selected to fill the vacancy is entitled to serve out the full term of the manager who resigned or only until the next scheduled unit owner meeting. Assuming that the condominium by-laws do empower the board members to fill the vacancy and provides that the individual selected shall complete the term of the manager who resigned, it would not be proper for the board to select an existing board member. The reason for this is that while one person can hold two distinct offices (such as vice president and secretary), no one person can simultaneously hold two seats on a board. Even if the board member resigned his existing seat just prior to being selected to fill out the term of the manager who stepped down, those board members who are up for re-election would have to answer to the unit owners for this undemocratic act at the upcoming board meeting and could face a hostile electorate and find themselves voted off the board."

Thanks for weighing in on this, Jeff...but your response is misleading. You open by saying "it appears the board has not acted properly" but then contradict yourself, acknowledging that a board member could legitimately resign a seat up for election, then be immediately appointed to a seat with a year [or more] remaining.

This is exactly the practice I referred to in my earlier post. You point out that board members employing these tactics risk offending voters & could be voted out of office themselves; I agree fully. However, the board action we envision here is NOT improper, & therefore not actionable...except via the ballot box.

I've seen such maneuvers take place hours before an annual meeting. The election is literally over before most owners grasp what's happening. (Indeed--the election is often over before the meeting begins, determined by proxy.) When the dust clears, few have the money & drive needed to pursue redress...particularly when the best possible outcome is often another undemocratic election.

I'm aware of just one pending solution to such problems: the Ombudsman Bill sponsored by Sen. Krueger & Assemblyman Farrell. If you can suggest any possible alternatives for Gloria, or for others in her situation, I'll certainly help spread the word.