– • Letters to the Editor • –

The Co-op City Times welcomes issue-oriented letters to the editor to be considered for publication. All letters, in prose, not poetry, must be addressed to the editor, verify the authenticity of the authors. Anonymous or unsigned letters will not be accepted for publication. Letters cannot exceed 350 words. Ideally, they should be typed. All letters must be in the Co-op City Times in that week’s edition. Views and opinions expressed in letters are solely the writer’s and not necessarily shared by the Co-op City Times

I have never been so bored by a shareholders’ election not a single one with a hint of taint to their recent reputation. itics since before I came to possess my own apartment. I believe Co-op City’s “annual shareholders meeting” is sustained not by civics, but by politics. And all of our divisions and disputes have been settled. Almost everyone with a hint every time one hears of a problem impacting Co-op City, the powers that be seem extraordinarily quick to put their vered machines in the buildings, the in-person voice in the lobby that it’s time to “vote,” traditions that sustained the act of civic participation. We have made it easier to vote, but with none of the social connection attached, we have made it easier to pass.

Now we have yet another “problem,” one of such disinterest that we cannot even meet a quorum of interested shareholders. I’m sure that this, too, will be met with a competent and honorable response, free of drama, rancor, or controversy.

There is a great deal of comments about the conclusion a quorum of one-third, even though the election was extended for two weeks. I am extremely disappointed, just as many of you are.

I believe that more should be done to educate people tors. There should be cooperation among the Shareholdshareholder, I have several ideas.

First, for potential shareholders or those moving in, information about voting should be inserted into the introductory letter that precedes the apartment application form. If information about criminal conduct and reasonable accommodations are discussed, then so should voting. Secterview with potential shareholders and in the New Coopeducation about voting, and voting should be included in tion sessions and current shareholders. This video should Furthermore, non-voters should be educated about the process; they should be directed to attend the New Cooperator ing Community Complaint should be added with a warnvit are assessed 50% of their carrying charge fee; and successive non-voters ought to be investigated to determine if they are subletting.

meeting to discuss shareholders’ recommendations on

more than simply just unprecedented. It is just not the choice for the shareholders to make!

Indeed, participation by shareholders is disappointing.

made on behalf of shareholders despite prevailing shareholder sentiments.

The decision to extend the election and incur the cost of the extension should be for shareholder to make. Why? The reason is shareholders must ultimately shoulder the costs.

If you want more shareholder participation, we need more shareholder inclusiveness in decisions made on our

of the Co-op City Times budget to extend the election to reach a quorum. Why were those efforts aborted prior to reaching our election budget and the required quorum?

infuriating we now reside in a community where voting is not an essential necessity for our voices to be heard.

Too many shareholders chose to remain silent and hope for the best versus casting a ballot. This negative attitude impacts our quality of life on every level.

count, if any candidate that would numerically be eliminated should not be afforded an extended term of service. The vote to abort the election process should not have been taken; in my opinion, that option should not be available for quired quorum is all we have and we either vet sharehold-

I’m very thankful there are members of our community member position. Those efforts should not be cast away. All the work that was done by the election process organizers, shareholders who reviewed the information, attended candidates’ forums, emailed questions, the candidates who were out meeting shareholders in the community, we can-

We must do better and consider all aspects of the process and the impact this dysfunction will have on our community.

quorum is needed to validate our elections?

“translated” and italicized.

We welcome letters to the editor, only from Co-op City shareholders, at Letters should address issues of interest to the Co-op City community. Comments should be fact-based and responsible. Letters should not personally attack others and must be written in a respectful manner.

tions are executed.

I believe this would be a start to turning shareholder responsibility to vote around. If not, what would be the alternative? Allowing our community to decline, comparable to public housing? I feel certain that this would be unacceptable to our shareholders.

“The annual meeting of shareholders of the Corporation, for the election of directors … 1 an election. It does not require physically gathering. Attendance by one-third of the shareholders entitled to vote shall constitute a quorum, … 2 director election, we have a quorum. [Voting Attendance … and if a quorum shall not attend … 3

(Continued on page 10)

Co-op

Submissions must include the writer’s address and phone number so authenticity and residency of the Thank you for your cooperation.