Hi LTD,

In my co-op we absolutely forbid shareholders from moving their A/C units.

All of our buildings’ through the window A/C units were professionally installed at the same time we installed new Skyline double glazed & argon filled casement style windows. We chose casement style windows as it is not possible to properly seal a double hung window that contains an A/C unit. But a casement window can have a portion of the frame sealed with the A/C unit. We also use an interior A/C unit cover to reduce drafts from the A/C itself when not in use. We only allow only one brand (Friedrich) in 2 or 3 three sizes.

The co-op purchased all of the units and incorporated the cost into the window replacement project (at a substantial discount too). As we already had the funds on hand, there was not cost to the shareholders. The A/C units remain the shareholder’s property.

Under the current policy, shareholders would have to contact management to have the window company come out and move the reseal the unit. We had a few requests to move the A/C unit after the initial install of the windows but none recently.

This policy took off the table a great waste of staff time.

Good luck with your policy and best regards!

Firstly, legally, if they have insurance, a resident may be able to install units themselves. It is easiest if they have a 'sleeve' unit.
Secondly, if a staff member does this on building time then it is a "service" of the building. There can be no monetary fee charged by staff and the building's insurance covers damages.
If staff does it on their own time then they become an 'independent contractor' and really should have their own insurance. It is otherwise unclear who's insurance covers what but the staff member could easily sue the unit owner for personal damages or injury.

Some people in the building have ac's that are like waterfalls along the brick exterior. In the front of the building on board members as has turned several feet of brick green. I don't know who installed it and have addressed the issue to know avail. You do need to be careful installing this equipment to make sure it is secure and not causing property damage

Hi Steve. Do you mind if I ask who installed and sealed the ACs into your Skyline windows - my Coop is having a tough time figuring out the best way to install ours - there is concern about rain water infiltration and the like. Also, do you know how much your Coop payed for the install per AC unit? Thanks

Sounds alot like my building. It's taking years and several sales to change the atmosphere. Story might vary a bit. Our old board was in power for over 30 years. It wasn't until a major tenant to tenant battle occurred and people realized board had been seeping for 30 yrs. and was quite dysfunctional. What the newer boards had to do was wrk from the inside out. We firmed up PL and house rules and communications. Then started on the buildings mechanics, facade, etc. it's taking lots of work and most people don't want to put in the time - it is all volunteer.
My advice to you is to gather as many signatures as you can and call for a special meeting to address your concerns and to voice your opinions about how things shoukd be handled.
While the majority rules they still need to hear from the minority and listen compassionately.
There is a lot of give and take in a coop but there is also a way to be respectful and thoughtful. But, that too fluctuates on any given day.
A coop is not summer camp. We don't always agree and many harbor ill feelings towards their neighbors. That's where strong backbone and house rules make life equal.

WOW for a small building you would think there would be harmony. You have to remember you voted the board in, you can also vote the board out. Also your don't have to like each other, but you do have to respect each other. Like Frank stated your can call a special meeting and discuss the issues your feel the board is doing wrong. Then meet with the board to DISCUSS the matter. Hopefully this will help the healing process.
Good Luck

Appreciate the encouragement but definitely an uphill climb. I think the new people won't be happy until all the old ones have moved out. Big culture shift with the escalation of property values and the focus has become more on that (protecting the share value)than fostering a harmonious community. What is frustrating is that there has never been a real attempt at healing the rift. There is still a lot of suspicion on both sides and no one wants to talk about it-preferring to push on, hoping the others will just "go away." I doubt if anyone on the new board will ever allow anyone from the old board to serve again.

Hi deb,

To answer your question about whether the building completely healed. The answer is no. The conflict which was 1.a dysfunctional board that did not represent the community and did not even uphold the PL and house-rules. 2.board comprised of all sponsors was in power for 33yrs and gave out misinformation. Clearly there was a conflict of interest. 3. Objectionable tenant , 4, neglected building.. The list could go on. But, the biggest problem was that every time each problem was raised those responsible made personal attacks on those questioning them. It still happens. It's like kindergarten around here.
I just can't see myself working with people like that. They also, don't read. And, always say "they don't understand". Very frustrating.

Non board members who were on our PL committee two years ago now state they didn't know what they signed and want to revisit a vote taken two yrs ago. This happens at every meeting.

I'm a superintendent on the east side looking for a Westside building

I have 16 years experience.

joserivera124@hotmail.com

I'm a superintendent on the east side looking for a Westside building

I have 16 years experience.

joserivera124@hotmail.com

Hi Frank- in your building did you ever get the two "sides" together? Or just wait for people to move out? We have had some turnover but still enough are around for bitterness to seep in. It really seems intractable as each group feels they are the injured party, and really, all efforts to try to get groups to talk are regarded with suspicion. Some on the current board are especially bitter that they have to consider the concerns of those they feel "did them wrong," and there is mistrust all around due to this never being addressed.

The Star credit and the others - Senior Citizen, Veterans, etc are not allowed unless the apartment is Owner Occupied - and next year even the Coop/Condo will be reduced by percentages and then be 0 if the apartment is not Owner Occupied - I would really like to try anything that could help shareholders be treated correctly because that is definitely not what is going on now - Definitely the Senate and Assembly bills would help, but they have been there for over 10 years and can't get passed - I have tried practically everything , the AG, the DA, our State Senator, Assemblyperson, letters to practically every agency and nothing has worked. I definitely believe in would be wonderful to get the media involved and tried many, many years ago, the problem again is how many people will be willing to participate and say that there is a problem in their coop, especially the upper Manhattan Owners; yes they have the same problems as we but they definitely do not want publicity unfortunately for their coops and they have the money to hire the lawyers and solve the problems- Stephanie

somethings up. Maybe they know about a lot more assessment that will be coming up and by the illegal powers of self dealing . try to get out soon.
Also there has been a push for sponsors to sell not rent, this is what they were supposed to do from the get go. However I would make a paper trail to the BOD concerning this, questioning this. and get everything in writing, so someday if you find a real lawyer, that works for shareholders, you may have a good case. Keep the papers/letters , do it certified or find a way that it can be proved given to BOD , 5 years from now,In my case and in other cases there is a BOD members or members that are in cahoots with the managing company/ sponsor and are making deals , that are illegal, deals that are not covered by the O and D insurance, since its fraudulent, and not performing item #1/ fiduciary responsibilities to shareholders by BOD
twitter @escapefrmyonker

What do you know about the sponsor and his management co? Is he looking to retire and move out of state/country? Maybe he won't make the profit he wants with the assessment in place. Why do you have a 4 year assessment? You need more information. Do you get copies of the annual financial statements? When is your next annual meeting? Have you spoken to any of the board members? Maybe there is a good, simple reason. No need to get legal unless you can't get any answers.

How small is small as in group? Sounds like you have a recipe and attitude for disaster. Legal quite likely but probably not cooperative living.

The board spent one year sending out information about the revised PL. a well written letter by the lawyer which was not "legalese" explained the major changes, the 5 major changes were again listed and a chart was made that highlighted our old method, our new method and the method used by most co-ops. We did spoon feed everyone and made calls. I guess you have to trust me when I say we have a small group of people that ran things (selfishly I might add) and were not looking after the other shareholders. They talked about batteries in our smoke detectors while pocketing monies from our commercial space and keeping maintenance artificially low. They held two hats, they were the sponsors of the building which had control of the storefront and their rent was based on maintenance, the lower our maintenance was the lower their rent was and the more profit they made. They kept this secret for nearly 25 yrs. whe it was discovered and the bundling was in big debt their board control was overruled. So, if you speak about vindictive it's not the new board. The old board is never happy, is always claiming board doesn't communicate. The new boards are working very hard, it took years the unravel the subterfuge, get the debt paid, build a true reserve, run a balanced budget, etc. the disgruntled ones find things everyday to complain about and to discredit the board.

It's wearing on those tht volunteer.

I don't believe coopertive living means everyone gets their way. And, sometimes the minority have to accept what their fellow nieghborhoods vote in.

This is a very small co-op. A Board comprised of nearly half the residents may easily have well above the amount of combined shares(presuming they vote as a block) which would keep the non-board shareholders in a permanent minority.
The writer states this "older group" never runs for the board. I find that surprising. The legal counsel given to the Board is unfortunate in that it treats a very small co-op the same as a large one, where it makes much more sense to have the board deal with these matters, but each unit not having as enormous an effect on another. The financials of new applicants were never open to non-board members in our co-op. but we did meet them before the vote to admit, after the Board brought it to that point of approval. But the final vote was one in which we actually had a face-to-face and the board had presented them to the rest of the co-op. That never seemed so onerous a task for anyone and we met our prospective neighbors before it was a fait accompli.
Does the Board have regular meetings where all Shareholders can air concerns? Is there an open policy of communication? Is there a common area where people see each other and can informally speak?
Without that things can get pretty ugly quickly, with bad feeling lasting a long time. It is essential that a board, especially one with this power, be one which is very forthright and proactive regarding communication and doing all it can to promote community in so small a building. If not, it is truly a recipe for disaster, as another wrote.

I think there may be a problem on how the changes of the PL may have been handled. In a small building as yours, if it is a CO-OP building, the best way to address the changes in the PL would be to verbally explain the changes at a meeting of the shareholders to make sure everyone understood them and bring it up for discussion then a vote. This way the older group would fully understand what the changes are and then you could have discuss the meet and greet idea at that time.

The older group is probably looking at your small building as a CO-OP and not a Condo. If your building is a CO-OP I can see why the members would want to have a say or have an input on who shares the space on the same floor or above or below them. In a Condo that is not the case. If it is a large CO-OP it would be very hard to have that type of input. As far as financials from a potential buyer that is always for the Board and management eyes only.

We have protocols. People must contact Board/management with renovation plans. Depending on the scope board might require shareholder to pay for the building's architect to review plans and to do an onsite visit (make sure work follows submitted plans). All fees involved are charged to shareholder.
For smaller projects or "maintenance" projects just letting the board/management know is sufficient. Our super might be used in that case to do site inspection.
If built ins have to be removed for building project I believe the shareholder is responsible. But, I would check with PL or building's lawyer.

Thanks, Frank, this is helpful esp noting if the work was submitted to the building architect or engineer. If the original work was approved with regard to allowing the built-ins, and not shown to an engineer or architect, then the shareholder might not be responsible for work if the building allowed the placement in this location. We also have a shareholder who wallpapered their unit and the paper is no longer available and his chase must be opened. If we have to hire some kind of professional to do this specific work, would the building or shareholder have to pay for this kind of specific person to handle working with wallpaper? so much to consider and this has never been dealt with before. Thoughts?

Who? Also the Super demands a fee.
But the coop demands he install it OR an insured third party.

You'd be crazy to rely on any answers you receive on here for a question that carries such a high risk of potential liability. The legal advice you receive here is worth what you pay for it.

Good point. But some people here may alrready hae done that and may
know the answer.