Page 9 - The NY Cooperator August 2020

COOPERATOR.COM THE COOPERATOR — AUGUST 2020 9 crimination or harassment suits. And with put on notice about the issues and/or com- their representative governance structure of plaints raised by \\\[the\\\] correspondence. Sec- a micro–democratic state, board members ond, you’re much more likely to succeed in are prone to being both targeted by and ac- cused of harassing behavior. Each of these members are themselves usually owners permutations requires a diff erent approach or shareholders and are volunteering their to resolution. Here are some real-world ex- amples. Bart Steele, CMCA, AMS, a portfolio for both senders and recipients of com- manager at Boston-based Barkan Manage- ment recalls a time when the only eleva- tor at a building he was managing stopped ner adds that “it’s also a good idea to read working on a Friday night. “Th e elevator your house rules to determine if complaints was nearly 90 years old, so a part that was are required to be sent to your building’s needed for repair had to be custom made, managing agent,” as was the case with the and thus the elevator had to be shut down Boston-area condo that Steele managed. for the weekend. Cut to the board being ha- rassed throughout—in hallways, stairwells, associations and condos are regulated by even at their units—by residents who were the Nevada Real Estate Division (NRED), personally angry at them, as if the break- down was the board’s fault. Th e attitude of disputes about board actions or behavior to many residents seemed to be basically, ‘I ensure that all directors are abiding by their pay my condo fees, and it’s your job to make fi duciary obligations. Sheila Van Duyne, sure that the elevator works; there are elder- ly residents who you’re ignoring,’ et cetera. Reno, Nevada, describes a situation where People were posting nasty messages in the an angry owner fi led more than 100 letters halls, on the elevator doors, and on board of complaint with their board. Aside from members’ doors.” Apparently these residents forgot—or complaints, their volume and frequency in- disregarded—that their building policy terfered with the timely and effi cient opera- stipulated that complaints be sent to man- agement, who would then fi lter issues to the one had to be presented individually to the board as necessary. Steele notes that such a NRED, requiring the time and resources to policy “is especially helpful due to the mas- sive volume of email traffi c—especially money that the association had to pay for at larger buildings—and also allows us to such interventions. On top of all that, ev- document everything that transpires.” Ad- ditionally, he continues, “the board spends While not rising to the level of criminality, a lot of its time doing unpaid work, and such behavior costs the entire association— when not acting in offi cial board capacity, not only in terms of money, but also in members do not like to be bothered in the terms of good will and harmonious living. hallway, or have folks come to their units and interrupt their personal spaces.” So resident-owner was exchanging emails with Steele put out a building-wide notice ad- vising all residents of the proper commu- nication protocol. “We reminded them that ings, and references in text that could be they should never be bothering the board at considered overly familiar.” Aft er Kim sent their units about building issues,” he says. the owner a letter asking him to “modify his “Th e board puts in a lot of unpaid time in communication techniques,” the inappro- order to increase the value of everyone’s in- vestment, and for that they deserve thanks, er’s cordial attitude toward the manager. not criticism.” In another example, a New York City res- ident was accused of harassing the board of is, in a word: context. “When an employee her building with her practice of repeatedly isn’t welcoming of the informality,” notes sliding notes under their doors whenever Kim, “it’s risky to use such language with- she had a complaint. When this resident out having that background \\\[that would wrote to Th e Cooperator for advice, attor- ney Rachael Ratner, a colleague of Hakim’s high-rise, urban environment, for example. at SSRGA, advised that while the behavior … If you’re using, for lack of a better term, is not likely to be considered harassment in ‘words of endearment,’ they’re not off ensive the criminal sense, the resident still might in the same sense as situations when some- be in violation of her building’s bylaws or one uses words of vulgarity or things like proprietary lease. Usually such documents that, but it just sets a diff erent kind of tone. will prescribe a proper method of commu- nicating with the board, with ‘notice’ provi- sions that contain specifi c instructions on ues, “but at the same time, you have to be how to send correspondence. “Following these instructions off ers two overly familiar, which can be a distraction advantages,” says Ratner. “First, the board becomes legally charged with having been getting your message across.” Since board time in service to their communities, fol- lowing proper protocol has mutual benefi ts plaints, in addition to being much less likely to generate accusations of harassment. Rat- In the state of Nevada, where housing the agency gets involved in complaints or owner of the Van Duyne Law Group in the borderline-harassing substance of the tion of the association. Additionally, each go through that process, not to mention the ery single complaint was unsubstantiated. Kim recounts a case where a Chicago the condo’s property manager that, says Kim, “essentially included salutations, clos- priate verbiage ceased—but so did the own- “It’s a tough call, because where’s the magic boundary line?” asks Kim. One clue imply a more familiar relationship\\\]. In a “Th ere’s nothing wrong with a cordial relationship with a manager,” Kim contin- careful that the language that you use is not continued on page 10