Tell us what’s on your mind? 
- This topic has 2,108 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 3 days, 21 hours ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Did I miss a Board meeting that was held a few months ago to explain the When/What/Why of this VERY HIGH Special Assessment? Unless I don’t understand the May 1st letter-those of us with more than one apartment that auto pay maintenance with Click Pay are being slammed with an unexpected several thousands dollars payment in a few weeks!
With a few decades of shareholder experience in Park City and in Willoughby Walk (Bklyn) I’ve observed that sometimes a tax abatement significantly reduced my maintenance amount one month out of the year. Other times the coop “kept” the abatement to offset assessment costs and in those times it was transparent to the shareholder. At no time do I recall paying thousands in special assessments. Will our 2023 tax write-offs equally reflect the large payout amounts? Don’t we need questions+ concerns answered to all not just individually? HELP!
V. Melvin 9737
A one-time Special Assessment???
The Board approved a One-Time Special Assessment to be charged to you in June 2023.
It will come out to an 154% increase over your regular monthly maintenance.
Using average (170 shares) STUDIO the charge would be $740.00 PLUS your monthly maintenance.
Using average (240 shares) 1 BEDROOM the charge would be $1,045.00 PLUS your monthly maintenance.
Using average (340 shares) 2 BEDROOM the charge would be $1,480.00 PLUS your monthly maintenance.
Using average (425 shares) 3 BEDROOM the charge would be $1,850.00 PLUS your monthly maintenance.
THIS is what you get when you elect a Board based on their ethnicity instead of their experience and common sense.
So you didn’t get rewarded for your Board votes, as promised, but you certainly are being screwed.
The original unedited Co-op Prospectus listed 1,091 apartments – 303,849 shares. Both numbers have since been corrected but, using the 303,849 shares and the ‘special assessment’ of $4.3548 per share comes to a total of $1,323,201.63.
That’s One Million, Three Hundred and Twenty-Three Thousand, Two Hundred and Two dollars “to help offset increases in the operating costs of the corporation”. Of course, those increases are not being explained.
I’ve emailed my attorney and asked if it is legal to charge me a “slightly higher” assessment just because the NYC Dept of Finance issued STAR, SCHE, and VETERAN entitled tax credits to me.
When I get a reply, I’ll post it on this website.
Ron Migut
Is it normal that the assessment per share is $4.35 x each share for coming up next months bill? What was it in the past I would like to know. This appears to be a little bit to high. Tia!
There is no more Carol management.
It is now CAH which are the first letters of the children (heirs) of the original builder/co-op sponsor of our buildings (Carol, Alfred, Howard).
Look at the bottom of page 3 of our Certificate of Incorporation [see it at the DOCUMENTS tab on this website]
CAH retains ownership of all remaining rent controlled apartments.
As for the frequency of vacancies – put yourself in the position of any one of the actual renters.
They are not “financially bound” to this co-op and when they see and hear about what’s been happening since the current Board took power – they might either move out at the expiration of their high-priced lease – negotiate an early release with the privileged Holder or Investor Shareholder – or just skip out on the remainder of their lease.
On one hand, those could be the reason for so many cameras in the halls and stairwells… just to protect investor’s income?
On the other hand, invasion of privacy.
I know of one college student who lives in a studio here because its so close to his school (his parents pay for the annual lease instead of a costly dorm room per semester).
He feels this co-op is spying on him and invading his right to privacy and his parents agree and are looking elsewhere and will no longer rent any apartment in this co-op or the Estates co-op.
NYC needs to find space for all of the migrants.
Could we be on the precipice of public housing?
Ron Migut
So how many actual apartments are owned by Carol Management?
ABOUT NEW TENANTS WITHOUT BOARD APPROVAL:
When an apartment is purchased directly from the original Sponsor [Carol Management/now CAH] with no intent to occupy the apartment, they can obtain the classification of “Holder of Unsold Shares”.
That classification allows them to manage their apartment without any consents of the Board of directors. They can rent to whomever they want and as often as they choose and the Board has no power over them. A quote from the Proprietary Lease reads:
“Neither the subletting of the apartment nor the assignment of this lease, by the holder of the block of Unsold Shares allocated thereto, shall require the consents of the Directors or shareholders, as provided in Paragraphs…”. I used bold type to emphasize the meaning.
At one time, I knew of 20 shareholders, owning many more apartments, who claimed to be Holders of Unsold Shares.
The Proprietary Lease contains many benefits to the Holders of Unsold Shares. I could cite the pages and paragraphs but it’s the Board’s duty to know those things – and I don’t work for free.
Ron Migut
It’s probably made up
I’m seeing these posts regarding tenants moving in without board approval. How does anyone know this information unless they’re on the board? Is there another source of information or are these posts just made up? What is your source of information?
List some of the apartments with tenants who moved in without board approval. name and shame.
no board approval tenants keep moving into my building like a big surge
SAY GOODBYE TO YOUR PRIVACY
I decided to walk up the stairs today and noted there is a camera on every level of the stairwell.
You now have no privacy anywhere in the common areas.
How can anyone justify that as “a safety feature”?
This Board is doing everything they can to ensure staying in absolute power – up until they have spent our last dime OR until our finances are so negative that they have to raise maintenance to a level that many will be unable to afford and will be forced to move out.
If the Board takes this co-op into a public housing development they’ll all become very rich and we will have to deal with the type of neighbors that nobody wants… and we will pay the price for it.
Ron Migut
Shareholders get ready for the new updates. Lol Dee Demarzo might be coming back to Management. Lol David, Zarina & Rose called her and asked her to come back and work for Management. Lol the woman that was fired for taking the petty cash on one of her vacations. Lol what a joke. Evil attracts evil🥱🤷🏻♀️😈
Ron, I agree 100% wit what you wrote. And if the present board members would follow these procedures we would have an honest and fair election. Unfortunately, I doubt that there are enough shareholders that read this site along with those that actually come to the annual meeting to counter those that blindly or deceptively vote for the others. It’s said that those that want change have to use the same tactics, but that’s the only way that things will change. I hope I’m wrong since your suggestions would be the best way for an election to be run.
Regarding the below comment.
1. Voting in person will assure concerned shareholders that no one has forged their name on a group or slate proxy – THAT IS HOW THE FRAUD WAS DONE, AND DISCOVERED, LAST YEAR – 389 rejected proxies!.
2. Yes, candidates meeting shareholders face -to-face is a good idea (in the lobby or park – but NOT imposing on their privacy by knocking on doors) and under no circumstance should shareholders be asked to sign anything that a candidate puts in front of them.
3. Legitimate candidates soliciting shareholder votes simply have to speak with a shareholder and HAND the shareholder a piece of paper with their name on it and ask the shareholder to put it on their refrigerator door (for them to remember you when the MAILED BALLOT is received.
4. STOP the soliciting of group-name or slate-name paper proxies. They are the gateway to voter fraud. They offer only an ALL OR NONE choice whether the shareholder likes all candidates listed on those proxies or not.
5. Every shareholder will get a copy of each candidates experience (a Biography with their picture) IN THE MAIL with the LEGITIMATE BALLOT and, they should evaluate who they want to represent them, after reading their Bios.
6. The only TRUE ballot will be the one that we all will receive IN THE MAIL and, while we should bring it to the meeting, you may also hand it to a trusted neighbor to hand in to the balloting company employee.
Also – NO ONE is authorized to knock on your door to collect your TRUE BALLOT.
7. Last year many East-Asian shareholders attended the meeting with their Ballot (that they received in the mail) only to discover that someone forged their name to a group/slate proxy. DON’T LET THAT HAPPEN TO YOU!
Ron Migut
You will never have new candidates elected if you rely mainly on those that vote on the night of the election. The turnout relative to the total number of shareholders is very small. Unless the candidates solicit votes door-to-door and in the lobby, they’ll never outdo the efforts of the present board members. And those candidates have to give people a reason why they should be elected and why the present members should be replaced. At least they can no longer use Chandra or previous boards as bogeymen since they have to run on their own record.
