Bronx Board Member: There are service dogs called "hearing dogs." They are specially trained to alert owners to sounds by pawing or bumping them then to go back to the source of a sound - doorbell, smoke alarm, microwave oven bell, baby crying. This way, they lead the owner to where the sound is so the owner can take care of whatever it is.

All dogs in NYC must be licensed. People with disabilities have to submit a letter from their doctor to get a special license for a service dog for which they get a certificate from the City. There are many programs that train service dogs, and people can also train these dogs themselves.

It's odd for a "hearing dog" to bark at every sound since that doesn't help the owner. Call the MOPD (Mayor's Office for People with Disabilities) at 212-788-2830 to get info on service dog training and if an owner is responsible for barking, etc. that affects neighbors in the building.

Thank you, BP for such a quick and helpful response! I will call that number and do my homework. And maybe the dog just needs additional training.

Hope the MOPD can help you. It just happens that I have a longtime friend who's blind and has a service dog; that's how I knew a little bit about them.

See previous post and responses. Similar issue was covered a while back.

FN

Improve your recording by getting a digital camera and recorder. There is no point in having surveillance equipment that does NOT do the job. This would solve two issues one, you will have evidence of the dog, Secondly you will have usable video for what ever need you will have in the future.
Otherwise just bear with the dog until either dog or owner dies.
Pg

That's a tough one. It's certainly true that you've learned that you need to upgrade your video system.

But I'm not sure you simply wait for the dog (or owner) to die.

Here's the important element: Puddles on steps are dangerous. The dog's owner (evidently) does not inform the super when there is a dangerous puddle, and he/she clearly does not clean up after the dog.

Ask your lawyer what can be done. There has to be something in the proprietary lease about shareholders upholding safety -- clearly this person isn't doing so.

Steve

I had a similar problem. I requested my staff to pay a little bit more attention to people walking their dogs. I was able to narrow it down,to times dogs went out/in, pretty basic (as we have a large property and many dogs).

As our camera/recording system is pretty modern I was able to record the events quiet clearly.(Dog peeing all over the floor and the shareholder pretending nothing was happening) I did inform the shareholder (of course he blatantly denied it). Then I informed him that I had it on tape. Case closed.

You could always have someone monitor this persons comings and goings to narrow it down (and be sure). There is no substitute for a good camera/recording device. Try to find out what it would cost to rent one out for a while if you feel it is too expensive.

Best of luck Sherlock

FN

AS Fat Nickie noted, I'm also confused by whether "anon" on this message board is 1, 2 or more people. Can the "anon"s please use your initials or make up a nickname - New Guy, Coop-er, Board Lady, whatever? That would make it easier to know who's writing and who's responding. Thanks.

You're absolutely right! People should sign their opinions or their curt answers by doing initials or, as BP suggests, adopt a pen name.

Finally, I think "anonymous to anonymous" plays on the issue that you are trying to bring: why would a person identify him/herself to an anonymous posting, but through an anonymous reply.

AdC

postings like this. I formally nominate this one as well as adc's reply. totally frivilous.

I'm all for it! As we can see from the anonymous post responding here, another down-side of anonymity is the protection it gives to impolite discourse. If you always post with the same name (whether it's a pseudonym or not), you're more likely to behave as though you were raised with manners.

While nothing is a better deterrent then razor wire, (with the exception of electrified fence) we have used instead, motion detectors with alarms to our lobby in conjunction with one or two additional cameras. Signs posted stating surveillance and motion detectors seem to work. There is the occasional false alarm from birds or just wind but other then that it does work at least for us.
Cost is reasonable.

Pgrech is right about the alarm. It's a good option, but make sure you have a clause in the contract that covers the alarm's malfunctions. We used one but if often failed to work and getting a money back for the times it was broken was not easy.

Thank you, Pgrech for your helpful response.

Two years ago we refurbished our indoor double level parking decks. Before groups of residents were dislocated, we worked with the township and obtained parking in the municipal lot (we paid for spaces) and we arranged for a local taxi service between the municipal lot and the building (24x7) via a telephone call.

Alternatively, folks could elect to park on the street.

Either way, there was no diminution of monthly recurring parking fees.

I always found it best when taking over a building to make three lists. One Prioritized, one based on cost and the other by simplicity.
Then I begin to knock the simple ones while working on those that are Priority yet with in budget.
When faced with multiple issues, multitasking is important and delegation allows more to get done. Always keeping in mind that Resident Safety, Health and security are TOP issues.

Pgrech

The new board took over and is already discouraged???

Well, it's all a problem of breathing in-out technique and understanding that the computer was not invented by Adam and Eve or Second World War did not start nor won in one day. IN other words, there are many things to accomplish but a few that we can humanly and financially accomplish in one year.

The problem is vision, will or tenacity and making sure you stay on course. As PGretch stated, prioritize is the #1 lesson; divide an conquer is the second lesson. So, once you prioritize according to financial returns and safety to the co-op, you must understand what are the financial resources the required to do #1, #2, #3 priority, etc. Then proceed according to financial resources, safety concerns and shift priorities if necessary.

Once you do this, state your goals for the year as a board so you know what you are to accomplish (divide and conquer). Don't try to be overly ambitious. Being modest about your goals according to your maintenance and reserves makes the task easier. Every year as you complete or achieve the goals BLOW the trumpet loud and clear to shareholders; they will become awayre that you have done something positive and at least, you pad yourself in the back -- no one will do it for you!

Finally, don't dwell in the past. Look forward and don't try to find justification by digging the past. The past is only good to know payment history so that you don't pay double; to know what was done that may not need to be done again. The past only drags your progress. Turn over the page and think of what you need to accomplish. Otherwise, it becomes a justification for not doing anything positive.

AdC

Establish a long term objective (ten to twenty-five years) with a plan to meet the objectives.

1. For instance, one objective could be never to reenter the debt market.
2. Another objective is to eliminate all long term debt ten in twenty years.
3. Still another is to fund capital reserves and capital projects via assessments each year.
4. Eliminate any outstanding receivables greater than thirty days to less than 1% of monthly income.
5. Ensure that all contracts are put out to bid and assessed by competent outside consultants.
6. Reduce dependency on single suppliers


The plan can be:
1. Obtain an engineering assessment of the infrastructure within four months as required by AICPA rules.
2. Obtain a line of credit to be used only for “capital improvements” until the assessment income is available, to then be repaid each year without fail.
3. Increase monthly maintenance each year between 3% to 5.5%.
4. Establish a program to require capital assessment each year equivalent to one time or one and one-half times the gross monthly maintenance; to be collected over a six to nine month period such that funds are isolated from maintenance for IRS purposes.
5. Establish committees with friends of the “board” and with one or two board members on the committee for key areas: capital projects, maintenance of hallways and lobby; maintenance of heating and cooling plant; etc.
6. Establish a rigorous program with attorney to require payment of receivables.
7. Employ “industry experts” to assist in creating and evaluating “bid packages” as part of standard program for all major contracts bid.
8. Require that all purchases be made from multiple suppliers (round-robin) so that dependency is eliminated and maybe, not nice to say, collusion.

Use a few simple rules such as above to be the guiding light. Too many and it will be difficult.

Yes, it can be done. See my posting a few questions down.
http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?disc=94379;article=8107;title=Habitat%27s%20Board%20Talk

Jeff - PGrech's advice on dealing with issues is sound - make 3 lists by priority-cost-simplicity.

If, as you say, your issues are so overwhelming, this may help: Sort them first by "subject" - financial, building, staff, owner problems, rules/policies, legal, etc. Each board member could work on a few subjects and sort them by priority-cost-simplicity (the 3 lists), then the full board can tackle all issues on each list. Delegating does get things done more effectively and quickly, assuming people given certain tasks don't slack off.

When you have many issues and each one keeps unearthing even more problems, you have to say "Wait a minute. We have to get organized before we can accomplish anything."

If the board is overwhelmed, which can happen to a new board, perhaps getting a consultant of sorts may help to give you an detached opinion and help guide you. Having both new management, and a new super, with a new board is tough going at first. Not sure if new managing agent is detached enough for that.

It is an option the board may concider.
Pgrech

Read the "Bible" of the co-op, i.e., your by-laws to determine who attends, who gets elected and, if still the "bible" is in doubt, ask your co-op counsel. Also, how does your proxy read to know what powers it confers. Perhaps it is an issue of speaking with your counsel and have him/her review/prepare your proxy. I cannot see how in the WORLD co-op boards as so fullish not to have your counsel revew the proxy so that you get "NO SURPRISES."

AdC

need a striaght informative answer. thank you - we do know people can come bearing signed proxies - the questions is - can they be rent regulated tenants - can they be anyone?

It is my understanding that ANYONE may attend an Annual Meeting if they hold a signed proxy, and may vote that proxy however they wish.

Ask your co-op attorney to get a straight answer.

Big Al: Unless coop governing documents say otherwise, a person doesn't have to be a shareholder to be appointed as a proxy. But he must attend the annual meeting if any issue including board elections will be voted on, otherwise those shares cannot be included in any tally. The exception is if a proxy form lets a shareholder cast a vote for specific board candidates - or states issues to be voted on and lets a shareholder check off a "yes" or "no" vote for them. As far as I know, anyone who's a proxy can ask questions at an annual meeting. Check this with your attorney. My board's always felt that rental/sublet tenants or anyone else in the bldg who isn't a shareholder shouldn't be allowed to be a proxy because they shouldn't be privy to all the coop's business. A debate.

I will come back later on the topic, but just one thing that caught my eye...

"if I want to be an enlightened shareholder...and possibly serve on the board in the future."

Even if you need a flashlight to become enlightened, there should be no excuses for not taking the interest and serving on the board. There are many areas that a board oversees and needs to take decisions that require plain common sense. Similarly, not all board members have to be lawyers, accountants or engineers so that talents may be shared. What a board member needs is above all common sense, fairness, desire to participate, learn and work for the good of the community, honesty and an open mind as well as willing to leave the nonsense out.

So, don't let you or others deter what you think will be to your benefit as well as others. If you started to inquire about the figures and what they mean, you are in the right path. Attend the annual meeting and ask the accountant if pressent to provide more information on those items that catches your fancy on the report. Remember, there are no stupid questions, but stupid answers.
AdC

What to do when asking accountant for explanation of a particular item on the financials & you are given an answer or non answer & brushed off.

I assume you're asking the co-op's accountant and that you're not on the board. (If you're on the board and he/she won't answer, get a different accountant.)

The accountant may feel that he/she doesn't have to answer a shareholder's specific question because he/she cannot bill for that time.

I would ask the board treasurer, and if the treasurer doesn't know the answer off the top of his/her head, ask for an answer by the end of the week (or something like that).

If you still have no response, ask the treasurer again. If you haven't heard back, ask the board pres. If you still have no answer ... you have a recalcitrant board. Ask the question at the annual meeting, and, better yet, get a few other shareholders to repeat the question after you if you get a brush-off.

I'm curious to see what others suggest.

Steve

You may ask the independent board accountant any question regarding the audited annual report. After all, the accountant certified, based on management records, the accuracy of the report as far as how it was prepared.

The accountant may not know day to day information because the independent accountant is acting in a capacity of independent auditor, i.e., it takes the figures from the management's accountant and spot checks expenses and receipts to ensure that consistent accounting practices have been observed. A co-op may engage the auditor to do more frequent audting on records, i.e., quarterly, semi-annually, etc. to ensure that management practices are followed consistently and also ensure better knowledge o the records. IN the process, the independent accountant may be more careful with the way capital reserves have been spent.

If you were to ask questions to the accountant, you may first ask a friend who knows about accounting to review it for you and provide you with some insight. The person may provide you with some relevant questions that you should ask at the meeting.

AdC

Tell them that was not an adequate answer and ask again. And keep asking until you get a more satisfactory answer. Do not allow anyone to brush you off. Especially when it comes to your money

Put questions in writing to which were not answered & after sending numerous letters & a mandate from the board, was eventually answered with same answer given previously & no supporting documentation which would have actually answered the questions. It was also documented to accountant approximatly $70,000 missing according to the managment report for checks paid which were actually not & for money placed into a "phantom" account which has disappeared as shown in the management report. $$ have been missing for over a year & to date no response or comment from accountant. Board is apathetic with the exception of a few who are in an uproar over missing $$. I am banging my head against a wall!

As AdC says, one thing board members need is common sense. The same goes for shareholders who look at a financial statement to determine a coop's financial health.

Bill Gates once said, "A key to understanding how well the dollars and cents are spent is understanding the decisions and sense behind their outlay." Allan, compare figures for 2006 v. 2005. If a liability category was much higher in 2006, question it. Why were apt repairs $85K v. $25K? Question whatever jumps out at you. Check "Administrative Miscellaneous". It includes items like phones, messengers, printing/postage. Money may be spent unnecessarily on such items, or extraneous costs may be buried in there.

Check "Account Payables." Some unpaid bills carry into a new year, but if they were $180K v. $55K, ask why. It could be due to tax/insurance/fuel hikes. Or unexpected costs in a specific year for, say, legal fees. It could signal that funds aren't being managed well or the coop isn't taking in enough money to cover its regular expenses.

There's a lot to consider in determining a coop's financial health, but common sense should alert you to what seems right or not, whether you're a board member or not. Another quote from Bill Gates: "I'm not as concerned with the facts and figures as I am about the facts behind the figures."

Both BP and AdC are absolutely correct in both their points.

Let me add a couple of things to look at on your financial statement.

Under "Assets," check to see how high the "Cash & Cash Equivalents" is. That's the money in the bank -- savings. It's the money that pays the everyday bills, and it's the money held back for a pipe break, facade work, or boiler breakdown. That is, major expenses. The bigger the amount, the less likely shareholders will have to face an assessment.

(So how big is big enough? Our accountant says a rule of thumb -- and it's just that, not a rule -- is to have reserves equal to three months' maintenance. If you don't have that figure, and if you want to know how to find it based on your financial statement, respond to this post and I'll walk you through it.)

Second, under "Liabilities and Shareholders' Equity," look at the Income category. This will show how much money comes from sources other than the maintenance fee. There are probably several categories.

You may see an assessment or a surcharge, for example. Those are typically added to maintenance fees, which you will pay (unless those charges have ended; ask your lawyer or a neighbor).

Of all the other income categories: Add them together. Are they together more than 25% of the maintenance income (called "carrying charges")? If so, that's a good sign that the building makes money in ways other than charging shareholders. Typical categories are rental income from retail space and the fee from having cell phone attenae on the roof.

Then, below all the expenses, look at "Excess after depreciation and amortization." You want that number to be positive, because it's the co-op's profit (in very general terms). That's money that goes in the bank to save for a rainy day -- for emergencies, capital improvements, or a remodeled lobby.

Finally, read the supporting notes. Accountants say that these are the most important parts of the financial statement. The notes will tell you what's going on financially, what the big purchases were, the size of the mortgage, whether the co-op has other loans or a line of credit, how many apartments are still owned by the sponsor (if any), and any significant event that happened in the new year by the date of the accountant's letter (the cover letter).

For example, an accountant told me that in one of his client buildings, he had to include mention of a fire that happened in, say, January 2005, even though the financial statement was only for 2004 and 2003. That's because repairs to a fire would have a financial impact on the building.

Good luck!

I've just come across another source of good questions for the novice to ask about financials. It's in the April 8 Times real estate section, a whole article about questions to ask before buying (one section section is about the financials).

It has to do with comparing certain categories year to year (if your statement shows two years: the current and last year's numbers).

If you can't find it on-line, a library can for you.

Re: the proposed bill requiring coops to give buyers the reasons why they're rejected in writing, it was discussed yesterday on The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC-FM Radio. Bill sponsor, Councilman Hiram Monserrate, was on the show. It was about 20 minutes long, with callers arguing the bill's pros and cons. To download the audio, go to www.wnyc.org then go to The Brian Lehrer Show Archives link. The show is "Rejection Made Clear" on April 26.

There was also an article on this in the NYTimes on April 21 called "Pushing Coops To Explain Why You Can't Buy." You can download it from the archives at www.nytimes.com.

This is a hot topic. Most surveys indicate that a great majority of shareholders in NYC favor the bill but an even greater number think it won't be passed.

Hi, BP,

I heard the segment on WNYC. What surprised me most was when Brian asked Councilman Monserrate (this is a paraphrase based on my memory), Were the real estate agents pushing hard for this bill?

And the Monseratte said: "Yes."

No wonder real estate agents would be given grounds to sue if the bill passes! I have never heard this point made in any discussion of the bill. If co-op owners knew that their buildings could be sued by buyers' agents -- many of whom have staff attorneys in their real estate offices -- those owners may feel differently about the bill.

After all, everyone *should* be opposed to discrimination, and in *favor* of corporate transparency.

But this bill aims to reduce the independence and rights of boards, and expands the category of protected classes to include their real estate agents.

Hi Steve,

I never heard of RE agents getting the right to sue a coop in any discussion of the bill either. We had an open house last night. The two agents handling it were in the lobby. One of them heard the WNYC show and were discussing it.

I asked if they're for the bill and agents' right to sue. One of them said, "I'm out to make a commission. I'm sick of boards rejecting people and making me work harder. If I can sue and get money for the time I spend on rejects, I'm all for it." An owner (never on the board) walked by, heard this and said, "Maybe you should focus more on finding qualified people who'll make good owners and neighbors and less on making money as fast and easy as you can. If boards should be accountable for good ethics and practices, so should you." Can't say I disagree with that.

I should clarify my point about suing.

The bill does not give injured parties the right to sue. It gives them the right to make a complaint to a city attorney, who can then file charges.

But the bill does, in fact, include real estate agents. Under Chapter 11, Section 8-1102, Paragraph C, " 'Proper party' means a person whose application has been rejected or a real estate broker who would have been entitled to a commission ..."

Later, in Section 8-1105, the bill allows "each proper party" to receive from a co-op found guilty fines ranging from $1000 to $25,000.

So no, real estate agents couldn't sue. But they would reap the benefits of a guilty verdict -- and would have reason to encourage a city attorney to file charges.

I am all for freedom of responsible speech and for the right to know. I am also for the right to protect the coop and condo and all shareholders. Why limit the lawsuit just to the person/s denied and his broker? Why not add the contractor and moving company as well as anyone else whom would have made money if the deal went through?
I think the key word is responsible. If the bill does pass, there has to be some legal protection from lawsuits for the coop/condo and all involved. Other wise it wont be responsible.
Just my 2 cents worth.
Pgrech

I agree, Pgrech.

Why not add the buyers' lawyers and the guy who sells moving boxes and packing tape?

The reason was revealed by Councilman Monserrate yesterday (he's the sponsor of the bill) on Brian Lehrer's show on WNYC.

As I remember it (this is a paraphrase; check a previous post here to find a link to a podcast of the show), Brain asked if the real estate community had been pushing for this bill all along. Monserrate said Yes.

* * * * *

I should point out an error I made in my original post. Under the bill, no one gets the right to sue, but rejected buyers and their real estate agents can complain to the city, which could then file charges; if a co-op is found guilty, both the buyer AND the real estate agent would be awarded damages of $1000 to $25,000.

Any lawsuit would come as a result of the bill's requirement that boards put in writing the reason for the denial and swear to its accuracy. The rejected buyer could then hire a lawyer to sue with the letter as evidence.