What are co-op boards so scared of?

Re: “New bill will hamper co-ops,” May 16

Stephen Budihas ignores the intent of both Intro 0188-2010 and similar measures before the City Council. They’re about accountability.

Witness the scenario I personally experienced in 2005 to 2007:

I owned a two bedroom co-op in one of Spuyten Duyvil’s larger co-op buildings. Since my first wife passed away in 2004, I wished to move on, and thankfully was able to meet a wonderful woman to whom I am presently married. 

I needed to sell my apartment. After the first buyer was told the building’s board would reject them, I contacted the secretary of the co-op. It was suggested that I contact a specific board member, one who, at the time, had been quite active either in a chairperson’s role or on a committee that dealt with re-sales. I was told to inquire as to what qualifications the board was looking to satisfy in a potential buyer. This process, such as it is, is questionable at best, fraught with subjectivity and no firm guidelines.

So I called this board member and as was told (I will never forget this line): “You are bothering me; I have to go to my country house. That is your problem.”

It took three potential buyers and my carrying two houses for 13 months before I closed on the sale of the co-op — all because there were no guidelines and no one to speak with. My broker and I flew blind the entire time. No board member and/or the board offered any guidance whatsoever in this entire process, verbally, written or via e-mail. 

Is it truly that difficult for a board to fill out forms to be in compliance with a law that insures fair treatment? How on earth does compliance with a law detract from a co-op’s ability to set its own clearly defined standards for admission? Unless of course, there are no guidelines, and the board is just making things up as they go along. 

Mr. Budihaus, please explain how placing strict limitations on the time process would not speed up the process; how transparency, which has been incorporated in most aspects of contemporary life should not and could not work to better this process?

Mr. Budihas, since when is accountability a bad thing? Since when does a guideline “severely restrict the ability of a board to respond to an application in a fair and comprehensive manner?” 

In fact, the board is not required to reply to the applicant, and often does not reply! Who are you kidding? The likelihood is that the process would become and develop into a uniformly fair one as a result of legal guidelines — just the opposite of what you argue.

Using Mr. Budihas’ logic, perhaps we should let major financial institutions self govern as well? After all, the country’s financial system nearly melted down in 2008, after years of “nod wink” lack of regulation. But, who’s counting?

All parties to the process of purchasing a co-op stand to benefit from this or even stronger laws. The process would be smoother, as subjectivity is phased out. A similar law in Suffolk County has produced zero lawsuits, in the first year on the books, so there is already legal precedence with such laws in the New York area.

I can think of no housing situation so uniformly dark, mysterious and subjective as the current New York City co-op purchase process. It is high time that light be shed, and that owners and potential owners be treated with the respect they deserve. Hiding behind all sorts of specious arguments fails tests of both morality and logic. Open up the process! New York City residents and would-be residents deserve far better treatment than the shabbiness to which they are now subject. Uniform standards should be the new order of the day — nothing less.