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.