Unless your corporate bylaws prohibit criminals from serving on the board, they're permitted. Which makes me think that such a prohibition would be wise to add to my co-op's bylaws.

Let me get this straight: He or she has been CONVICTED ... and that isn't enough to make the voting shareholders consider the person unfit?

What kind of building is this? Does it have bars on all the windows, towers with armed guards, and a warden's office?

Seriously, what kind of job are you doing communicating this to the shareholders? Are the shareholders seriously OK with this?

What if the sponsor still owns over 60% of the shares? As is the case in our building, he casts his votes for whomever he wants... Maybe we need you on the case, Elliot Ness :)

Coincidentally this came up at our board meeting last night. It is continually a hot button issue for many buildings, and has an equal number of circumstance. It really depends on the what the infraction is and how often it has occured. Each instance must be recorded by the management company and followed up in writting to the offending resident. Without a paper trail there is NO chance of removing the person, and even when documented it is VERY difficult to get a judge to issue an eviction order. If the coop has the ability to issue monetary fines it should be done and pushed for collection. Even if they don't pay now you will collect it when they try to sell or sublease the apartment.
Be aware that unless you have shareholders willing to step up to the plate if it goes to court you are wasting your time, unless there are Police Reports. And, if it is one shareholder complaining about another you also are going to have a difficult time taking legal actions.

As you can see it is a complicated issue and is really a question to best answered by the coop's attorney.

what is the infraction?

Is it one specific one?

Is it a major one (offensive, damaging) or a minor one?

You should just give the a letter and a fine everytime they break it, if it is a major one.

It really depends on what it is.

I think it would depend on two things. First, do the coop's governing documents give the board of directors the power to impose such fines? Second, has the board (or the managing agent on behalf of the board) sent a notice to shareholders alerting them that as of X date fines will be imposed on late payment of nonmaintenance fees? In our coop, the governing documents give the Board the right to impose fines on late payment of nonmaintenance fees but it has chosen not to impose them. We've never had an instance when someone has paid their maintenance but refuses to pay our trivial monthly storage cage licensing fee. If your building's fees are more substantial, I could see out of fairness to the majority of shareholders who likely pay what's due on time that those who pay late get fined.

As long as your shareholder lives the unit, you are talking about visitors or roommates if more than 30 days. The revolving door nature is not explained much. What are you talking about? Twelve individuals in one year? You also need to consider the character of your PL, which probably states that a visitor can reside with a resident up to 30 days w/o giving notification to the Board. In other words, you are entitled to have as many friends visitng you for the period of 30 days w/o breaking your PL. For your info, the NYS Rental Guidelines states the same 30 days and notify landlord of an occupant if longer time is involved.

AdC

This shareholder has had a new 'roommate' once a year for the past 3 years, causing some concern amongst shareholders who have asked the board to intervene.

You can direct those concerned shareholders here: http://law.onecle.com/new-york/real-property/RPP0235-F_235-F.html

---and that should be the end of the story, unless and until the law in the state of New York changes.

Your website citation confirms the 30-day information rule. I would strongly suggest obtaining the name of the occupant and estabish a policy for conducting a meet-and-greet session with the new occupant. The purpose would be to go over the house rules even in the presence of the shareholder. With good interviewing skills and good observation of body language, you may find alot about the occupant including relationship and perhaps surprise information that may be critical in finding out why the shareholder changes roommate so often.

Key items of the website citation are:

5. The tenant shall inform the landlord of the name of any occupant
within thirty days following the commencement of occupancy by such
person or within thirty days following a request by the landlord.
6. No occupant nor occupant's dependent child shall, without express
written permission of the landlord, acquire any right to continued
occupancy in the event that the tenant vacates the premises or acquire
any other rights of tenancy; provided that nothing in this section shall
be construed to reduce or impair any right or remedy otherwise available
to any person residing in any housing accommodation on the effective
date of this section which accrued prior to such date.

I would strongly suggest obtaining the name of the occupant and conduct a meet-and-greet session with the second occupant. In the meeting you may find, with a good art on interviewing, the relationship of this person to the tenant (shareholder) and also know the type of character this person is all about.

Your website citation confirms the 30-day information rule. I would strongly suggest obtaining the name of the occupant and estabish a policy for conducting a meet-and-greet session with the new occupant. The purpose would be to go over the house rules even in the presence of the shareholder. With good interviewing skills and good observation of body language, you may find alot about the occupant including relationship and perhaps surprise information that may be critical in finding out why the shareholder changes roommate so often.

Key items of the website citation are:

5. The tenant shall inform the landlord of the name of any occupant
within thirty days following the commencement of occupancy by such
person or within thirty days following a request by the landlord.
6. No occupant nor occupant's dependent child shall, without express
written permission of the landlord, acquire any right to continued
occupancy in the event that the tenant vacates the premises or acquire
any other rights of tenancy; provided that nothing in this section shall
be construed to reduce or impair any right or remedy otherwise available
to any person residing in any housing accommodation on the effective
date of this section which accrued prior to such date.

AdC

the roomate law , fortunately, overrides any coop rule. period. A coop may only ask the name of the additonal occupant. they may NOT ask about the relationship or any other questions. THERE DOES NOT HAVE TO BE ANY 'MEET AND GREET'. This is a fantastic law as it is the only one wihch gives shareholders a little taste of normalacy as to what it is like to actually own your own home (can rent it whenever you want, have privacy, have roommates , have lovers move in etc). Bravo for the roommate law!!

"THERE DOES NOT HAVE TO BE ANY 'MEET AND GREET'."

That's right. Insisting on a "meet and greet" is, to my mind, an invasion of privacy and is not a legal requirement. So...why do it?

Again... your opinion (to my mind)is as good as a meet and greet, just a matter of opinion.

AdC

adc - the person who asked the question can do nothing but ask the name of the roommate. they can change them every week if they like. the roommate law is the roommate law. probably there are some buisy bodies in this person's building that have nothing better to do than spy on the neighbor. or they, themselves, may not like that particular resident who owns that apartment. however, the bottom line, is they can do NADA> (Thank god).

unless the roommates are running naked in the halls and selling crack from the apt. but it would have to also be really obvious.

No need to shout your opinion. In fact, I know what the roommate law is all about. Best thing is consult your counsel and discuss what is intended and implement the program that falls within the parameters of the law.

No additional replies will be posted again!!!

AdC

I said a skilled interviewer may be able to get more out of a meet and greet meeting than just a review of the HOuse Rules.

Obviously, in the case of the person who requested the information, he/she was not just talking about a normal roommate who comes into the unit, but someone who changes roommate every year and provides the impression of subrenting the unit.

Finally, since you are a co-op a meet and greet to go over rules may be in order. It's all up to the board and what they want to see established.

Regarding normalcy and ability to have roommates as you please, etc. is not an issue here. I'm giving some suggestions to someone who has a situation and wishes to explore what can be done.

AdC

We apply fees, as these are more defensible.

If there are persistent and recurring violations and thus warrant major action, our attorney notifies the offending resident that the Proprietary Lease will be suspended under the terms of the lease and, if a mortgage is outstanding, we will notify the mortgage holder.

The Board should be able to discuss this frankly and take a vote on the purchase of an expensive software for the benefit of one person. IN your case, the president should be providing FULL justification for the purchase. As treasurer you should be able to obtain the information and provide it to the president as well as other board members.
AdC

This is a very bad idea. Offer to send him hard copies.

And to protect yourself, there should be an investigation as to exackly WHAT this board member bought, courtesy of the SH, for himself in the past. And put eveything in writing. and in the Board Min...

Full disclosure must be made to all the SH...Otherwise if other bills are questioned, you could be drawn into something that you did not start.
All you need is one disgruntled S/H to start looking into the accounts. and the next thing you know you are being called on to defend your decision -- in court.
VP

Mac users can use Parallels software which allows them to run PC applications on their Macs. The cost is about $79 and the board member should pay that themselves becoz we live in a Windows world and I'll bet this isn't the first time they have encountered this issue.

In our co-op, a director, president or otherwise, is not reimbursed for anything, anytime, anywhere.

This means each director pays for his or her own phone calls, mileage, lunches, dinners (yes, that’s right -- we never go out to dinner or lunch on the co-op), stationery, persona;l postage, personal computer software, personal PC stuff, personal printer ink or toner; regardless of co-op business.

About the only thing a director does not pay for is an incoming or an outgoing fax, even if is personal.

And, we never allow a contractor to take us to lunch.

And, if we use co-op office stationery for anything (take a pen or pad away from the office), we reimburse the management office.

Why does he need Windows? How is your operating account accessed? What is the software that only runs on Windows? Why can't he access through a web browser? I think that are Internet Explorer versions for Mac if that is the problem.

The S/H own the building. And YOU have every right to know how YOUR investment is being mananged.

Put your questions IN WRITING by EMIL and copy (some hard copies) everyone in the building.

Start the Email trail NOW...

Good luck... VP

There is no reason to disclose everything, and there are court cases that define the information that mist be disclosed..

That’s why you have a board of directors -- trust them or replace them.

If you want to meddle, join the board. Get elected fairly.

A co-op is not a social club – it is a corporation – major or private it is still a corporation.

Let the board act as a board and stop with the trivia.

As anyone who has been a member of a CoOp knows, its easy to say replace them... But not easy to do...

If the board is acting in good faith, and doing nothing wrong, except for sensitve or personal issues -- there should be no problem with full disclosure. Any Board member who tries to convienc you otherwise -- has an agenda!

Any govering body that needs to operate in secret -- should be suspected of everything. We learned the hard way. And are hanving to pay hard cold cash for the mis-manangement of a long-term board -- that we could not get rid of.. We finally discovered FORGED proxies and with a turn over of owners who really do care how the building and our finances are managed... we got rid of the ring-leader, and the rest followed.
VP

"If the board is acting in good faith, and doing nothing wrong, except for sensitve [sic] or personal issues -- there should be no problem with full disclosure. Any Board member who tries to convienc [sic] you otherwise -- has an agenda!" Judging what is "sensitive" or "personal" and should not be disclosed is the tough part for the Board. I think many boards want to be transparent but they have to make a judgment call not to release sensitive or personal information. In that sense,vp and JudyC are BOTH right. Discussion like this is why Board Talk is so helpful. Thank you Habitat!

If a board member does not have the sensitivity or sense to know the diffrence between personal/sensitive issues -- than he/she should not be on the Board. If you are acting in good faith, there is noting to hide.

Our building has learned the hard way that given the liberity, some B/M do have personal agendas, and need to be held accountable. We (the S/H and new board) have now spent over $7,000 in legal fees to correct certain building liberties a B/M took as head of the board, which his gofers approved.

Years ago, without any repercussions, detailed Min were sent out, and therefore we have a history of decisions made by the Board. But our previous Man/Co (just fired) tried to stop this pratice, therefore we now have almost two years of nothing being documented in the Min.

One such notation (and investigation) is a Board member FORGING a proxy to be reelected to the Board.

There are Boards in NYC who allow the SH to sit in on Board meetings, but meet in private to discuss personal/sensitive matters.

Unfortunately (as we see in all areas of goverment) B/M are human and have personal agendas and do personal favors. Any govering body that has to govern in secret -- is suspect.
VP

VP, as Vice President of your Board, can you talk about your building's newsletters, memos, etc. As a Board member, what do you recommend for the kind of written communication to shareholders: how long, how many pages, etc., so you inform without overloading busy people? Thanks!

"what do you recommend for the kind of written communication to shareholders: how long, how many pages..."

Frequent, and very short! On your website if you have one and in a public area of the building where it is apt to be seen, e.g., near your mailboxes or on a bulletin board reserved for that purpose.

When I served on the board previously, we were very communicative, and people appreciated it. Last year, the board communicated with the shareholders as little as possible---and people really noticed. Our current board (of which I'm a member again) believes in communication; I anticipate a very good and productive year.

When VP says that any governing body that tries to justify operating in secrecy is necessarily not on the level, I couldn't agree more. Communication and daylight...

We got into trouble when the B/Ms who published the Min left, the board hired a Mang company who wanted to stop ALL min -- and certain B/M had very good reasons to want to govern in secret. If there are no secrets -- there are no prblems.

Years ago, when we had Board min they were simple and recorded in broad scope WHAT was being discussed, results such as "tabled for further discussion" What and Who made the motions
"MrA made the motion to discontinue....:" “ The motion was approved four to thee with MrB abstaining.”, “ MrC made a motion to…, it was tabled for further discussion” … “A disturbance on the 5th floor was resolved.”,, “12A submitted a Bath renovation plan,(approved or) but needs more documentation”
Keep it straightforward, simple and unemotional. Touch on everything (within boundaries) that is discussed. Record votes, and motions. The Board min was never over two pages. The Min is a very important legal record of decisions, precedence being set and financial records. The S/H just wants to know that their issues are being addressed. How their money is being spent etc.
As long as B/M vote in good faith, do their Fiduciary duty – they cannot or should not be held libel for the results of their vote. In today’s litigious world, it is in a board members best interest to keep everything on record, and straightforward.
All renovations approval or work was noted. The previous b/M, who got rid of the Board min, now claims that a major renovation (building onto this terrace) was approved by the Board. But there are no discussions or notes in the Board Min, and we have conflicting recollections from the B/M who have all now moved out.
Brief notes on on-going mang of the building...
One of the complaints at our S/H meeting was about a very unpopular (among a few) decision by the Board. The S/H wanted to know WHICH B/M voted for this so that they would know how B/M stands on issues, run the building and how to vote. Bottom line, we have no idea where any of these people stand on important issues impacting our finances and quality of life.
We had a previous Super who did work for B/M, but even after he was caught taking kick-backs (passed the cost onto the S/H) and doing major renovations without permits -- the Board refused to fire him. The S/H finally took control. But, had the votes and motions (one B/M made a motion to fire him at every board meeting, been recorded, his supporters would not have wanted to go on record.
PERSONAL ISSUES. Owners in errors or personal complaints were not noted, unless there were legal implications. In 15 years of Min, no one was ever embarrassed or personally attached. Law suits (again our special B/M was sued by neighbor(s)) were recorded. In some instances names were left out, but situations were noted.
However what is noted that the above) B/M had various confrontations with staff, and the action taken. (Usually staff was blamed) However, when he forged the proxy, and the S/H got involved -- he was censured in the min, and not allowed to hold an office. (Unfortunately the sponsor held substantial proxies and kept him on the board)

Amen! More good, honest people would serve on Boards if everyone had this reasonable attitude.

In a perfect world, it would be wonderful if we had seven peopl, with no agenda to handle our investment. Unfortunatly, as we have witnessed in discussions at Habitat, and our buildings personal experience -- we dont live in a perfect world.

Its the BM who wants to run the building in secret, that you should first suspect.

As one BM put it, I am on the board to take care of my own intrest -- and after thousands of wasted SH dollars -- we have learned that he did take care of his own intrest. He managed to pack the Board(with Sponsor votes, and now we suspect more forgeries)like-minded owners who like him had personal agendas.

Poetic justice. Intresting, All the BM he put on the Board have for various reasons sold thier apartments. Each, found out the hard way, that you do have to have permits for renovations, and without permits -- you cannot sell. Three of the sales were held up for over a year.

Check your bylaws. Most co-op bylaws, based on the NYBCL, will state something to this effect: "any officer may be removed from office at any time, and a successor chosen, at the pleasure of the Board, upon affirmative vote, taken at any meeting, by a majority of the then total authorized number of directors."

It sounds like you're not on your board right now. The board may indeed have very legitimate reasons for wanting the president to step aside. They're bound to uphold the fiduciary, and if they believe that the president is not acting in the best interest of the shareholders, they can (and should) take action.

GK is correct -- but I'd like to add that if your co-op is like mine, the president (and all the other officers) are also board members. So even if the board votes to remove the president (or treasurer or secretary) from office, he/she is still on the board.

That may be enough to solve your problem.

But to remove someone from the board itself usually requires a majority vote of all shareholders.

That's right. Thanks for the clarification.

New today. See on the front page: "Ousting a Board Member: How to Remove Disruptive Troublemakers"

In lieu of self-promotion.