By Kelly G. Richardson, Esq., HOA Homefront Column
Kelly: Our HOA has not kept up with building maintenance. I along with other residents have reported issues to our board but our requests apparently go unheard. These are reported through a resident portal which allows for pictures to be uploaded so there is a record. Some are blatant safety issues while others are affecting the structures themselves, such as crumbling stucco, wood rot, clogged gutter drains, missing downspouts, water damaged gas and electric meter closets. The deferred maintenance is out of control. I would call it neglected maintenance. Our board and management company are in a “reactive” maintenance mode rather than “proactive” mode. Any advice on how to approach these issues would be appreciated. M.L., Rancho Bernardo
Dear Mr. Richardson: How do homeowners keep HOA leadership accountable for basic maintenance duties instead of resorting to arguments and lawsuits. Our HOA has managed to fire 3 landscaping companies in three years, and it is nearly impossible to get a hedge trimmed let alone get in on a schedule to be maintained. M.A., Oceanside.
Dear M.L. and M.A.: One of the most basic responsibilities of HOA boards is to maintain and repair common areas, per Civil Code Section 4775(a)(1). Most CC&Rs also allocate that responsibility to the board. Shared ownership of common property, whether plumbing, roofs, structure, or amenities, requires the association (through its board) to care for it. Without good care of the shared elements (the common area), one of the greatest benefits of HOA living disappears.
Boards often stall on major maintenance or repairs because of a desire to avoid increasing assessments. However, homes, including HOA homes, do not heal themselves – they need someone to keep them in good repair. That effort costs money. I am reminded of the old auto repair company slogan – “you can pay me now or pay me later” – but that certainly applies to the HOA property. Boards that skimp on maintenance or repair expenses are almost certain to find that the cost only gets worse with time.
Also, nothing in the Davis-Stirling Act says that the HOA’s obligation to repair the property depends upon whether the HOA can afford the expense, so the duty is unconditional. This means that boards should not avoid fulfilling their duty by invoking a lack of funds – their duty is to gather the funds to take proper care of the property.
One would think that homeowners would want a board that focuses on the overall picture and not just the current assessment amount. M.L., HOA boards need to be proactive when they can, because it is not easy raising the funds to pay for significant maintenance or refurbishment costs.
Funding HOAs may become harder – Senate Bill 1007, which originally proposed to prohibit boards from increasing assessments beyond the inflation rate, was just amended to make 8% the proposed cap – can anybody guarantee that HOA operational costs won’t increase more than 8% in a given year? Why can’t HOAs be treated just like individual homeowners- repairs and maintenance cost what they cost.
If boards refuse to properly fund the HOA, maybe it’s time for a new board.
M.A. and M.L, hopefully your boards will refocus from “can we afford it” to “can we afford NOT to do it.” Best, Kelly
By Kelly G. Richardson, Esq., HOA Homefront Column
Dear Kelly: My large HOA has monthly assessments that are the same for all units. The units vary in size from free-standing units with yards to attached housing of varying square footage. I have the smallest sized unit. I have owned this condo for decades. Do I and my fellow like-sized unit owners have any recourse? We are subsidizing a significant portion of the costs of all the other units. What can we do? N.V., Laguna Niguel.
Dear N.V.: Developers typically establish HOA assessment allocations in one of four ways: All pay an equal share of HOA expenses; assessments are based upon number of bedrooms; or based upon the stated square footage; or a hybrid (also called a “variable assessment”), in which part of the budget is split equally and the rest of the budget is allocated based upon square footage figures (which are not always accurate). There are valid arguments supporting each assessment allocation method, making it difficult to decide which system is ultimately the fairest way of assessing homeowners. In 2006, the appellate court ruled on a challenge to assessment allocations in Cebular v. Cooper Arms Apartments. In that case, a homeowner challenged the assessment allocations as unreasonable, but the appellate court said the allocations in the CC&Rs are presumed to be reasonable and there was nothing illegal about it, denying the homeowner’s challenge.
There are some HOA expenses which seem fairer to split equally, but others would seem to be fairer if they varied based upon unit size. However, short of somehow convincing a majority of the homeowners to amend the CC&Rs and revise the assessment allocation, your HOA’s current assessment allocation is unlikely to change. It’s hard to convince neighbors to vote for a change which might increase their assessments and decrease others. That is why when I’m involved with CC&R overhauls, I urge my clients not to even propose a change in assessment allocations- consensus is too unlikely. Sincerely, Kelly
Kelly, Good morning, I really enjoy reading your weekly column. I have a question about equal monthly HOA fees. At a recent board meeting a quorum of the board voted to grant a lower monthly fee to a widow. Our CC&R’s specifically state that “…assessments shall be divided equally among all units”. I believe that this lower rate for one unit violates that, and perhaps the law as well. I value your opinion on this. Thanks, K.W., Santee.
Dear K.W.: One stewardship responsibility regarding the HOA members’ funds is to ensure that all homeowners contribute their fair share of the HOA’s expenses, and this responsibility is a basic part of the fiduciary duties of each board member. Even though sometimes neighbors have hard times and well deserve sympathy, the board’s responsibility is to collect the HOA’s assessments and pay the HOA’s expenses. Intentionally violating the CC&Rs assessment allocation, even for a commendable reason, could place the board outside the Business Judgment Rule as well as outside the coverage of the HOA’s directors and officers liability insurance. Discriminating in favor of a single homeowner, no matter how justified it may seem, is not allowed. Perhaps the board’s efforts could be redirected toward seeking help from other neighbors to assist those who are going through very difficult times. Best regards, Kelly
Your emotions aren’t the enemy—they’re your leadership edge.
By Adi Jaffee for Psychology Today
Key points
Leaders who perform best are those who read emotion better.
More than 100 studies found that emotional suppression negatively predicts leadership performance.
Suppression taxes the cognitive resources you need to lead well.
Many organizational leaders use a performance strategy that’s working against them while they take pride in it.
It looks like calm under pressure, like a steady hand. It looks like exactly what we promote people for.
But the research is unambiguous: It doesn’t work.
The strategy is called suppression—controlling your emotional expression, keeping your face neutral, not letting them see you sweat. We’ve built an entire leadership archetype around it. I’ve called it the Myth of the Unshakable Leader—the belief that real strength means never being moved by what happens around you.
A systematic review of 101 studies shows this clearly: Across leadership style, leader well-being, and leader performance, suppressing emotion correlates negatively with effectiveness.
The leaders who perform best don’t feel less. They regulate differently.
In a recent piece on the leaders who can’t switch off, I wrote about the executives who check their phones at midnight not because anything is urgent but because stopping feels dangerous. The hook underneath that pattern is identity fusion, control anxiety, and the deep belief that personal worth equals output. What I didn’t fully address there is what happens when the emotion does surface. When stress hits, when frustration rises, when something lands that threatens your sense of control. The question is, what do you do with that discomfort when it arrives?
Most high performers, when pressed, will say: “Suppress it, get over it, and get on with it.”
The research now shows that this approach has real costs.
What suppression actually costs
The foundational work comes from psychologists James Gross and Oliver John, whose 2003 study became one of the most-cited papers in emotion regulation science. Their finding was counterintuitive and specific: People who habitually suppress their emotional expression don’t feel less. They feel differently: more negative emotion, less positive emotion, all while appearing composed on the outside (Gross & John, 2003).
Suppression doesn’t eliminate the emotion. Suppression locks it inside while consuming cognitive resources to maintain the facade.
We’ve all been there, when stress and anxiety build up inside, but we don’t feel like we’re allowed to release them.
It’s like loading up rocks on a house of cards. And the weight is carried using the same cognitive budget you use for thinking clearly, focusing appropriately, and making good decisions.
Eventually, you can’t carry it all.
Neuroscience adds the next layer. A landmark review in Nature Reviews Neuroscience (2009) showed that even mild, acute, uncontrollable stress causes a rapid loss of prefrontal cortex (PFC) function. The PFC, the region behind your forehead responsible for decision-making, attention, and complex reasoning, is the most stress-sensitive part of the brain. Under threat, the higher-level thinking you need most is critically impaired. This is where fight, flight, freeze, and fawn live.
Now, stack suppression on top of that. When stress activates the fight-or-flight system, and you attempt to suppress rather than process, the activation keeps going, and so does its demand on your cognitive resources. You’ve added a second cognitive task (suppress the feeling) on top of the first (do the leadership work), during the exact conditions when cognitive resources are already depleted.
The poker face requires effort to maintain, and that effort has to be stolen from other tasks.
The stoicism hook
For many high-performing leaders, suppression is a hook—a long-standing behavioral driver that used to serve them well by allowing them to function better in a chaotic home, a highly demanding environment, or during a traumatic experience.
The old “I’ll give you something to cry about” sure teaches many future leaders how to bury any emotion that may arise.
Early in many leaders’ careers, appearing unflappable even got rewarded. It likely happened at school, on the field, and eventually at work. The promotion came. The pattern got reinforced.
By the time they reach the C-suite, suppression has been so consistently rewarded that it no longer feels like a choice. It feels like identity: I’m the one who keeps it together.
Getting unhooked doesn’t mean becoming emotionless. It means having a choice in how you respond to what you feel, rather than following an automatic response pattern wired in 20 years ago and never examined since.
Three moves that change the regulation pattern
I worked with a CFO at a mid-sized health care company, I’ll call her Dana, and she had built her career on being the calm one. Her board loved her for it. But because she was always stressed under the surface, she was having serious thoughts about quitting. She was proud of what she’d achieved, but as she moved up, she wasn’t sure she could keep carrying the stress.
What she discovered was that her composure wasn’t protecting her; it was damaging her. Not only was she experiencing more burnout the more she succeeded, but she was also making more careless mistakes, and her staff was trying to emulate her cool, calm, and collected approach, which kept resulting in crises.
Her regulation strategy and the impact it had on her leadership and ability to think were the problem.
The work to change your regulation strategy involves three moves:
1. Name it, specifically. Not simply “I’m stressed” but “I’m feeling frustrated because I don’t have the information I need yet.” Research on affect labeling shows that naming emotions precisely reduces amygdala activation (Lieberman et al., 2007). You don’t have to perform the emotion publicly to name it internally, but it’s the naming that gives your brain comfort and grounding.
2. Reframe the signal, not the situation. The emotional activation is a signal, not noise. “This urgency is telling me something important is unclear.” Reappraising stress arousal as functional—my body is getting ready to perform—shifts activation from threat to challenge. Indeed, employees who held a “stress-is-enhancing” mindset showed higher resilience, lower anxiety, and more adaptive cortisol responses than those who held the opposite.
3. Use it, don’t manage it. Recent research using fNIRS (functional near-infrared spectroscopy) imaging found that the cooperative neural synchrony between people increased under acute stress. Connection under pressure is a real resource.
Leaders who remain accessible—meaning they’re readable, regulated, and present—create the conditions for their teams to think alongside them. Dana didn’t need to emote in board meetings; she needed to signal that the emotion was present, acknowledged, and acceptable.
The reframe
Leaders who consistently perform under pressure don’t have the most emotional control, but they do have a more sophisticated relationship with their feelings. They can name an emotion quickly, read its signals accurately (in themselves and others), reframe its meaning in real time, and stay connected to the people around them while doing so.
And while emotional intelligence is often called a “soft skill,” I would argue that it provides good leaders with precision. It’s the capacity that 101 studies found to be the positive predictor of leadership performance.
If the earlier piece on always-on leaders helped you identify the hook beneath your availability, this is the next question: When the stress hits, when the activation rises, what do you do with it?
The answer isn’t to suppress it. The answer is to understand it, acknowledge it, reframe it, and use it.
At the bedrock of a shared interest community, like a co-op or condo, is how and by whom the property is managed. While self-management may make the most economic sense for smaller communities, and there are certainly good examples of effective self-management in larger communities, most co-ops and condos of any size engage professional on-site management.
In most cases, those services are provided by a management company. Like all businesses, property managers seek a profitable provider/client relationship, and their services are generally subject to a contract designed to protect both the management and the community, laying out all the responsibilities and obligations assigned to both parties.
The Same, But Different
“A contract is a legally enforceable agreement between two parties bound by promises they make to each other,” says Jeremy Kay, an independent attorney located in East Bridgewater, Massachusetts. “In the case of a management contract, it is an agreement for the manager to perform services for an association in exchange for payment by the association. The scope of services and the amount of the payment are up to the parties to determine. Putting the agreement in writing is done to memorialize the terms of the agreement and allow both sides to revisit what was agreed upon. The goal should be that the written contract is clear on its terms and that the management company’s obligations are clear. Clear terms help resolve disputes and avoid potentially expensive litigation.”
Most modern management contracts are fairly similar, says William McCracken, a partner with Moritt, Hock & Hamroff, a law firm with offices in New York and Florida. “Paragraph 1, we appoint you…,paragraph 2, these services will be provided…,etc., etc. Everything is covered there, but it’s initially a boilerplate document, so it needs clarification. It’s important for the board to look at this closely to make sure the management company understands the board’s expectations. Then there are other typical provisions about money, term, and length of contract, indemnification, etc. That’s the heart of it.”
That said, every community is different, and each has its own specific menu of expectations and requirements. In today’s highly diversified and increasingly case-specific world, management contracts are tailored to the specific needs of a community—and they’re evolving as a result.
“Basic terms depend on the needs of the association and conversely, that’s what the management company is contracted to do,” says Michael Simone, an attorney and principal of Simone Law Firm, located in Cinnaminson, New Jersey. “For example, some associations are only seeking assistance for the financial aspects of their operation. Other associations may be more interested in the physical maintenance of the property or the management of tenant relations. Each should be handled in specific clauses in the agreement outlining the details of management’s responsibilities.”
Nuts & Bolts
Regardless of what specifics your community may require, there are certain basic components that should be reflected in all contracts. These include very basic things like the terms of the contract, the parties’ names, delineation of responsibilities, fees and charges, and reasonable expectations for things like how and when meetings are held, or who should attend.
Other important clauses include protocols for providing a smooth transition in the event of a management change (a next clause provision), the circumstances under which a contract can be terminated, who has access to computer programs, banking logins, proprietary legal information, and any other systems used by management. “It’s all about who owns what,” says Simone. “One of the main issues that should be clear and protected is always for the association to have ownership of their own products. The association, not management, should own its website, accounting software, and any other related computer products.”
In terms of how long a typical contract is, McCracken explains that it varies. “Anything from one to five years; most typically they are year-to-year. At some point they all become a year-to-year arrangement. They don’t just expire; typically, they roll over. The reason why there is a longer initial term is because it’s expensive for a managing agent to start up a new client relationship. The management company doesn’t want to be terminated after six months; they need to make back their initial investment. From a legal point of view, from the board’s side, you want the ability to exit the agreement on reasonable terms at any time. Boards need to be able to terminate without cause on 30- to 60-day notice. To be able to say it’s not working, and we are moving on. That makes the term requirements in the contract nearly moot. The ability to exit is what’s important—not the length of the term in the contract.”
When it’s Time to Part Ways
Like some marriages, client/management relationships don’t always work out. When that happens, what’s to be done? And what are some of the reasons why a building or association might feel it’s time to cut ties with their management company and take their business elsewhere?
Breach of contract is a big one, say the pros. Kay explains that “breaching a contract is when a party fails to perform their obligations under the agreement. But there is a distinction to be made between breaching a contract and terminating it. If a party breaches a contract, it can become liable for damages caused to the other party. Massachusetts General Laws, c. 183A, Section 10(e), provides that any contract between a manager and an organization of unit owners can be terminated by the organization of unit owners for cause with 10 days notice, during which time the manager has an opportunity to cure any default. In any case, the organization of unit owners can terminate the contract with 90 days notice without cause.”
Simone adds that in New Jersey, “In any contract [dispute], you look to see if there was a duty breached that would be considered material. No company is perfect, and they will make mistakes. The question is, how egregious were the mistakes? If a board determines that an action on the part of management was a material breach, that’s when the association puts in writing why there’s a provision to cancel. Typically, the contract will have recourse for either party, since sometimes it’s the association that has breached their duty, and the manager will want out.”
In other words, says Simone, the door swings both ways. If a client community doesn’t uphold their side of the contract, the manager or management company doesn’t have to stick around; “They can quit.”
Kay concurs. “The management company can terminate the relationship as is permitted by the terms of the contract,” he says. “Were a manager to terminate the relationship in violation of those terms, that would be a breach of contract and potentially result in the manager becoming liable to the association for ensuing damages.”
That said, Kay continues, “Most disputes between management companies and associations tend to arise contemporaneously with their disengagement. Accordingly, I advise that the management agreements be as clear and unambiguous as possible when it comes to their respective obligations. This is especially true when it comes to terminating an agreement before its term is up.”
Advise & Consent
Given the stakes, it’s vital to involve your building or association’s attorney in reviewing and negotiating your management contract. After all, it’s a legal document, and as such, it makes good sense to get some expert eyes on it before signing on any dotted lines.
“As attorneys,” says McCracken, “we always talk to our clients about their specific goals with respect to their management contract, new or renewal, and which goals might be particular to their building. For instance, did they have a problem in the past with an agent, and want the new agreement to reflect that experience, for instance? Generally, the things we are looking for are agreed-upon duties, and that the agreement covers the field. We want to make sure the management will do what needs to be done. Sometimes you have to add in specifics. It’s also very important to avoid the hidden charges in an agreement. Typically an agreement will say if ‘X’ happens the manager will get paid ‘Y.’ We want to make sure that that only happens if the board agrees to it. For instance, upon the refinancing of an underlying permanent mortgage for a co-op, whether the management company earns a mortgage brokerage fee. Did they actually earn it ‘with the board’s consent?’ Those terms and conditions should be clear in the contract.”
Management contacts should always be reviewed by counsel, and should contain language that adequately outlines and delineates the manager’s responsibilities and fees. They should reflect the needs of each specific community, and provide a path out for that community if issues arise that can’t be fixed. Effective management contracts are a vital administrative and legal component for shared interest communities, and boards should take them seriously.
A.J. Sidransky is a staff writer/reporter for CooperatorNews, and a published novelist. He may be reached at alan@yrinc.com.
When a condo or co-op resident runs for a seat on their board, the decision to do so generally comes from a desire to ‘step up’ and participate in the governance of the place they call home, and the building or association community as a whole.
Often, the residents willing to serve on their board aren’t necessarily those with finely-honed skills and formal education in law, finance, and practical business management. And they don’t have to be—with competent management, legal, and accounting professionals on their side, a board composed of ‘civilian’ members can absolutely meet its oversight responsibilities and run a solvent, functional building or association.
But having said that, it’s also worth considering that a solid, practical base of knowledge in law, finance and management can be invaluable to a board, enabling them to interact more confidently with contractors and other professionals, make prudent financial decisions, and understand the implications of legislation and legal decisions impacting their community.
A Little Knowledge…
Given that, what base of knowledge does a board member—especially a newly elected one—need in order to contribute most effectively to the administration of their community? Most experts agree that understanding financial reporting, and to a slightly lesser extent, the laws and regulations governing shared interest communities in their area are the biggest help.
“Every board member needs to develop a basic skill set,” says Steve Silberman, a CPA and partner with PBG, a financial services firm located in Glenview, Illinois. “At a minimum, they need to learn to read and understand a financial statement, rather than just relying on the treasurer. The board has a fiduciary responsibility over the financial information of the association or corporation, so all the board members need to understand their finances.
“Revenue, minus expenses, equals net income,” says Jayson Prisand, an accountant and principal with Prisand Mellina Unterlack & Co, an accounting firm located in Plainview, New York. “That’s pretty much the starting point. The primary goal of maintenance or common charges is always to pay for expenses. It seems obvious, but if you don’t have the revenue, how can you pay for the expenses? Board members have a clear need to understand these basic processes. Cash and reserves and their differences are also important concepts in terms of short-, medium-, and long-term planning. Board members must know short-term concepts and goals for operating, and long-term concepts for capital projects. Especially in the current environment, they should understand inflation, and in New York City (and everywhere really), local regulations. It’s not an easy task.”
“The other concept they need to understand is fund accounting,” Silberman continues. “Operating accounts are based on fund accounting. They must also understand what a reserve fund is. A major issue for boards is the possible co-mingling between operating accounts and reserves. That requires understanding the difference between accrual versus cash-basis accounting. Most board members, regardless of their overall knowledge of accounting, understand ‘cash-basis’ accounting, as that’s how a personal checkbook works; income is accounted for when received, and expenses accounted for when paid. By contrast, accrual is more true to [a community’s] current financial position, because it records income when earned and expenses when incurred.”
“Financial literacy,” says Mark Love, principal of M. Love & Associates, CPA, with three offices in Massachusetts, “requires knowledge of matters involving finance, accounting, budgeting, taxes, investments, insurance, debt, financial planning, capital planning, and even economics.”
Michael S. Simone, an attorney and principal of The Simone Law Firm, based in Cinnaminson, New Jersey, focuses in a little more: “Board members must ensure that their association has a budget, and then make certain to run a monthly budget variance report to monitor the progress of the budget throughout the year. Understandably, everyone wants dues to be as low as possible, but an association needs to avoid having too many special assessments. Having special assessments every year is a red flag indicating that the budget is not properly funded. Furthermore, given the current stricter mortgage regulations, an association that does not have a properly funded budget might result in a potential buyer not being able to obtain a traditional mortgage.” Understanding basic accounting and financial principles is necessary for this.
Are All Board Members Equal?
Do all board members require the same level of knowledge of financial, management, legal and accounting issues? In a word, no.
However, according to Prisand, “Those board members who don’t have the most in-depth financial knowledge shouldn’t necessarily be the treasurer. The treasurer should have a solid grounding in financial data in their background. That’s not to say they couldn’t otherwise do the job, but you’re managing money—everybody’s money. There is always reliance on the management company, but don’t give them carte blanche. Overall, at least one person on the board needs to have a more complete, more complex understanding of finances and financing.”
Love concurs. “To be sure, at least one board member, generally the treasurer or the president, should have a moderate to semi-high level of understanding and awareness of these financial matters.”
Another area about which board members should have basic technical understanding is what their governing documents say and require relative to the financial management and maintenance of the property. “The first thing every board member should look at and understand are the bylaws and declarations of their association,” says Silberman. “The bylaws, etc., hold information about financial audits, what to do with excess cash from operations, and other details of financial management under the laws and regulations governing the association.” A law degree is not necessarily required for this, but as with the treasurer’s position, it certainly doesn’t hurt to have an attorney on the board. If that’s not possible, the community’s legal counsel can be tapped to provide any needed clarification.
Training Available
There are several organizations whose mission it is to help educate board members in the unique aspects of governing a building or HOA—including this publication, and its companion annual and biannual Expos, which offer rosters of free educational seminars, expert panel discussions, and legal advice booths. (Visit coopexpo.com for more information, registration, and descriptions of seminars.)
Another valuable resource —and the largest U.S. organization devoted to board education—is the Community Associations Institute (CAI). “CAI has over 40,000 members,” says Simone. “Their courses are offered both online and in-person, and are an excellent way to learn more about the role of being a board member. Further there is a web forum group where associations post problems and issues they are being confronted with, which is another way to learn from other potentially similar association’s issues.”
Along with these, “Boards should avail themselves of all manner of tutorials, workshops, seminars, and education courses on financial, operational, and management of an HOA,” says Love. “There are hundreds available at many organizations dedicated to the shared-interest sector.”
Spreading the Knowledge
In cases where a building or association is fortunate enough to have an accountant, attorney, financial or real estate professional as a board member—or even as a non-board resident—is it advisable for that person to help board members understand what can often be complex matters? The answer might depend on the community.
One co-op shareholder on Manhattan’s Upper West Side who is a professional commercial mortgage broker shares anonymously that in the 30 years he’s lived in his building, the corporation has refinanced its underlying mortgage twice. On both occasions, while not serving on the board, this shareholder offered his expertise to review the refi and advise the board in their decision making. The board turned down his offer both times—and in his opinion, they made serious mistakes, including the prepayment clause on the original refinance some 20 years ago, which precluded the corporation from taking advantage of lower interest rates when they had the chance.
On the other hand, Silberman says, “Boards could and should take advantage of members’ knowledge base. Depending on the size of the community, they might also have a finance committee or subcommittee apart from the board that would allow those with financial background but not on the board to serve on that committee, thereby bringing more people with knowledge into the equation.”
Prisand cautions that sometimes a little knowledge can cause friction. “I work with all types of people on boards. Senior fortune-500 types to housewives. Sometimes those with knowledge can present a different kind of problem; they think at too high a level. It’s not plain vanilla—every building is different—but it’s important to keep it fairly simple.” In the end it ‘takes a village’ to effectively run a village.
A Pressing, if Not-so-New Issue
Another issue has come to the fore for boards in the aftermath of the deadly Surfside, Florida, building collapse in 2021: reserves, and reserve studies. The high dollar amounts—and high stakes—make this yet another area where board members need to have at least a working knowledge and basic understanding of both their building’s physical condition, and the financial planning needed to properly maintain it.
According to Silberman, “Boards should plan for a reserve study, and a plan for investment of those funds. They need an investment policy, and should understand the financial and accounting principles underpinning that policy, including why and how reserve money is invested, its safety and liquidity, and yield. If you’re funding a reserve project, you’ll have a better idea of why the money is invested the way it is.” That knowledge of investment strategy is a good partner to understanding the financial principles relating to your regular operations as well.
It all boils down to boards and board members being as informed as possible about what goes into governing and administering their community from day to day, from its physical upkeep to financial decision-making and long-term planning. Reading—and understanding—your governing documents, consulting your legal and financial professionals when necessary, and taking advantage of educational and training opportunities are all great ways to make the most of your tenure, and make your board the best it can be.
A J Sidransky is a staff writer/reporter for CooperatorNews, and a published novelist. He can be reached at alan@yrinc.com.
Attention spans have systematically shrunk across time.
This is reflected in changes in how we consume media. In 1986, song intros for Billboard’s Top 100 averaged at 23 seconds before vocals began. By 2015, the average intro had shrunk to an average of five seconds. This is a reduction of more than 78 percent. Similarly, TV show intros also got shorter, reflecting viewers’ decreased attention spans. As an example, the show Bewitched, highly rated in the late 1960s, had an intro of 45 seconds. In contrast, Young Sheldon, the highest-watched comedy in 2020, has a show intro of 20 seconds—less than half the length.
Researchers have studied this huge change in attention span at work. In 2004, the average time spent on any screen before task-switching was 2.5 minutes. By 2012, it was only 75 seconds. Since 2020, it’s about 47 seconds. It makes you wonder how we get anything done at work.
Enter the Age of AI
A recent study found that 74 percent of Gen Zs (those born between 1995 and 2006) and 77 percent of millennials (those born between 1983 and 1994) “believe Generative AI will impact the way they work within the next year.” Importantly, these groups are generally optimistic about that impact. More than three-quarters report that AI “has improved the quality of their work (78 percent of Gen Zers and 82 percent of millennials), and that it has helped to free up their time and improved their work/life balance (77 percent of Gen Zers and 73 percent of millennials)” (Deloitte, 2025).
Many say artificial intelligence has helped with simplifying routine tasks to improve efficiency and productivity, which allows them more time to focus on strategic work, and report that it has enhanced creativity and innovation.
So how can we harness the powers of AI to help offset our shrinking attention spans at work?
Redesign Workflows for Depth
AI is great at handling shallow work and can help to free up time for work that requires more critical thinking or creative abilities. For instance, lean into using AI to help create agendas, summarize key takeaways from meetings, or create first drafts of routine reports. While AI should always be double-checked and not relied on for a final draft, it’s a great time-saver for rote tasks. This allows you to block your time for longer chunks of deep work that requires creative problem-solving or strategic thinking.
Use AI to Protect Focus Time
Attention spans easily die a death of a thousand pings. Constant interruptions make it impossible to do any deep work. How many of us have ended the day feeling like we were constantly busy and “doing things” only to realize that none of the things that really mattered were accomplished? This is the difference between what’s urgent (e.g., constant pings, emails, and interruptions) versus what’s important (often larger projects or tasks that require sustained attention).
AI can help with that. If you’re having trouble distinguishing urgent tasks from important ones, feed your to-do list into AI and have it help create a schedule. Then, use AI to block deep work time across calendars so you aren’t being constantly interrupted from email, Slack, or other workplace communications. Constant task-switching lowers productivity and erodes attention. With fewer interruptions, you’re able to focus on more high-value work.
Retrain Attention as a Workplace Skill
Source: Chitokan/Pexels
Focus isn’t a fixed trait—it’s a skill you can build. Treat focus like your fitness goals: Consistency matters more than intensity. Set a timer for 30 minutes and stick to one deep work task at that time. When the timer goes off, you can reward yourself with a little break or reset it for another 30 minutes if you’re in a flow state. Not only will the timer help to give you a manageable goal, but it also gives you permission to task-switch when it goes off (checking email, grabbing a coffee, etc.).
Over time, you can work to increase the timer to 40 minutes, 50 minutes, an hour, or more. With practice, you will train yourself to dive straight into the task at hand rather than being pulled in many directions.
AI can help you accomplish this. AI tools can act as smart focus timers, gently nudging you when it’s time to start, break, or reset. They can also reduce cognitive friction before you begin by summarizing what you worked on last, outlining next steps, or helping you decide which task deserves your attention during your focus block. By lowering the mental effort required to get started, AI makes it easier to build and sustain attention across time.
Measure Results, Not Responsiveness
In many workplaces, busyness can be mistaken for productivity. The smart boss will shift attention toward outcomes (i.e., what got accomplished) rather than how quickly someone responds to an email or a ping. AI can help to track progress, summarize milestones, or highlight achievements so you can focus on results instead of constant activity. This reduces the pressure to always be “on” for employees and allows for deeper, distraction-free work.
Use AI to Spark Creativity, Not Replace It
AI is great for helping to generate new ideas or offer fresh perspectives. Just don’t fall into the trap of letting it do the thinking for you. People fatigue faster in the “blank page” stage of work. Use AI for brainstorming multiple perspectives or solutions, which the team can discuss and refine. Have it offer brainstorming prompts, reducing cognitive load while expanding options. Instead of feeling that attention is thinly spread, you can channel it into deeper, more creative outputs.
AI can be polarizing, but it doesn’t have to be the enemy. While tasks may shift, organizations will always need humans. When used thoughtfully and intentionally, AI can help people work more efficiently and create space for the work that benefits most from human judgment, creativity, and connection. With the right approach, AI can be part of the solution to shrinking attention spans at work.
Q: A shareholder in a Queens co-op recently found a buyer willing to pay cash for her apartment. Documents were provided showing that the buyer could afford the apartment, the fees and the renovations. But the co-op board rejected the application. The shareholder emailed the board to ask for clarification on what it’s looking for in a buyer. She never got a response. How can a shareholder find out what the co-op board is looking for in potential buyers?
A: In New York City, a co-op board does not have to tell you why it rejected your buyer. It has the power to reject a purchase application “for any reason or no reason” — and isn’t obligated to spell out the reason. The members probably won’t tell you what they’re looking for, either.
“I’m always loath to give any particular criteria, because it locks the board into something,” says Steven Sladkus, a co-op board president and partner at the law firm Schwartz Sladkus Reich Greenberg Atlas.
The financial health of applicants is important, such as how much money they will have after closing, their debt-to-income ratio, a good credit profile and stable employment, Sladkus says. Other factors include whether applicants have a history of filing lawsuits, particularly against landlords.
A seller’s best move is probably to hire a broker who is familiar with the building and has experience guiding sellers through the process there. “If you have a broker,” Sladkus says, “they’re hopefully vetting purchasers for you so you don’t waste your time.”
Though vast, a co-op board’s powers are not limitless. A board cannot reject buyers for illegal reasons under federal, state and city fair housing laws. This would include basing a decision on their status in a protected class such as race, religion, national origin, age, disability, sexual orientation and gender identity, says Julie Schechter, a partner at the law firm Fox Rothschild. If the board does not disclose the reason for the rejection, and there is no other evidence, discrimination cases can be difficult to prove in court.
There have been repeated efforts to make the application process more transparent in New York City. Most recently public advocate Jumaane Williams sponsored a bill that would require co-op boards to provide their reason for denying a sale to a potential buyer within five days of making their decision. Such bills have met with stiff resistance from co-op advocates, and so far none has advanced in the City Council.Westchester County, however, does have a law that requires a board to disclose to an applicant its reason for rejection.
By Kelly G. Richardson, Esq. CCAL, HOA Homefront Column
Many HOAs inquire about installing security monitoring cameras. Such cameras may or may not be required by the specific history of a given property, under the rulings in California Supreme Court decision in Frances T. v. Village Green (1986), California Supreme Court case of Ann M. v. Pacific Plaza Shopping Center (1993), and Pamela W. v. Millsom (1994). That subject should be discussed with the association’s legal counsel. Whether or not the HOA must install cameras depends upon the specific circumstances.
If a board chooses to install monitoring cameras, what considerations might be considered?
As with most decisions, the Business Judgment Rule requires boards to seek competent expert advice on the decision, and such expert advice most likely will come from a security consultant or company. Good managers should be able to refer the HOA to someone who fits that bill.
There are three basic variations on the security camera theme that I am often asked about – live monitored security cameras, recorded monitoring cameras, and dummy cameras. Perhaps your HOA security vendor may suggest a fourth alternative. Of course, the decision will depend upon cost, the severity of the problem, and the impact of monitoring upon the residents. Associations with staffed security gates or security offices may have live monitoring of all cameras, but the most common variety of security monitoring I encounter is recorded monitoring, in which cameras are recording events in their field of view, with recordings saved for a given length of time (often 30-60 days).
Camera locations: Care should be taken as to the locations of cameras, to ensure that they do not inadvertently intrude into areas in which privacy is expected, such as private patios, balconies, yards, or residence windows or doorways.
Signage: Signage may be necessary at the locations of monitoring cameras or at the property entrances. First, signs should warn of recorded video surveillance, to alert residents that running toward a camera may not immediately bring help. Second, if sound recordings are also made by the cameras, California law may require notification that audio recordings are made at the location along with video recordings. Third, such signs hopefully discourage bad actors from the area.
Recording access: To protect the privacy of residents and avoid misuse of security recordings, the HOA may wish to adopt a policy strictly limiting access to the recordings to only the manager, law enforcement, the HOA’s security vendor, and legal counsel. Such a policy would reassure residents that policies are in place to protect against misuse of the recordings by a volunteer who uses the monitoring as a personal hobby.
Rules: To help assure residents that the HOA is appropriately balancing resident privacy and resident security, a set of written policies regarding monitoring cameras and recordings should be considered. In those policies, residents can be reminded that the cameras are not continuously monitored (if that is the case) and assured that no neighbors have access to the recordings. The policies could also be adopted as HOA operating rules, using the 2-step 28-day process prescribed by Civil Code 4360. This approach provides additional transparency and protection for members by requiring proposed rule changes to be announced in advance. The rules could also include requirements regarding individual security cameras.
Security and privacy can co-exist- with some careful planning.
“I wish he’d read his emails before he sends them. The tone. It’s off-putting.”
We all have too much going on and too much to do, and that overwhelm and need for constant action seems to be causing an epidemic of hot-blooded responses that are getting in the way.
We need to pause and think through how we want to respond. We need to reflect on the bigger picture – what might matter to the other person, what their perspectives might be, what stories about them (and the situation) we might be making up, what is our ultimate goal and what is the best way to get there. Taking a moment, or a few days, to consider a different way to view the issue at hand can help us respond more calmly and productively.
We need to pause and take a deep breath, to let ourselves calm down if we’ve been triggered. I’ve very rarely seen a knee-jerk reaction that has helped a situation or remedied a problem. When our buttons have been pushed – when we’ve shot into anger or fear or any other negative emotion – we need time to compose ourselves.
Jill Bolte Taylor, in her book My Stroke of Insight, writes about the ninety-second rule – that when we are provoked, our adrenaline rush kicks in and we have no control over our actions and reactions…for ninety seconds. Only ninety seconds. After that, we can take a breath and choose what we want to do and how we want to respond. We therefore need to pause for at least ninety seconds to get past a habit of knee-jerk reactions.
So how do we build this pause into our life and work? How have my clients successfully learned to do this? The method is simple, but potentially challenging:
Become aware that you, at least at times, react too quickly
Decide that you’re going to learn to pause – for ninety seconds, five minutes, a day, a week
Build a support network to lean on and remind you to practice this new behavior
Practice this new behavior, especially when you’re most emotional or triggered (except in the rare cases of true crises)
Practice this new behavior some more
Notice and reward your successes (and your attempts, even if they don’t succeed)
Keep at it
I’ve learned to (often) do this myself – to step away when I’ve most wanted to step in, to breathe when I’ve most wanted to shout or scream. I’ve witnessed others build those muscles – not responding to an inappropriate email but instead taking time to calm down, and then calling the other party instead of responding via email and successfully talking things through. I’ve heard the feedback of changed behavior – the “wow, now when I approach him with something, I can see an initial reaction, a pause and then a well-thought out response that has helped us solve the issue.”
Many of us need to pause more often before we react too harshly, and all of us can learn to do it. One breath at a time.
Q: It’s not just Donald Trump who’s obsessed with ID cards. A co-op board in Brooklyn is requiring all shareholders to obtain an in-house identification card after showing a valid driver’s license or state identification, a copy of the shareholder’s stock certificate, and a utility bill in his or her name. Shareholders are required to carry the ID at all times while using the co-op facilities, such as the laundry room. Is this legal?
A: Requiring shareholders to carry a building identification card might seem like an invasion of privacy, not to mention annoying, but it’s not illegal, replies the Ask Real Estate column in The New York Times.
Co-op boards are responsible for protecting the building and its residents. The governing documents of most co-ops allow board members to determine how best to do that, including regulating safety and security measures. And the courts give them expansive powers to do so.
While the ID card requirement might seem draconian, it’s possible that the board is pursuing this policy as a way to keep shareholders safe by ensuring there are no illegal subtenants or uninvited visitors in the building. Identification cards would allow staff to confirm that everyone who is there is supposed to be there.
“Even if those rules are strict, they are still likely enforceable, provided that the board acts in good faith and in the interest of the co-op corporation, and the enforcement of those rules does not violate any laws,” says David Fitzhenry, a partner at the law firm Moritt Hock & Hamroff.
If the board wants to institute this policy, it must be consistently applied without illegally targeting or harassing individual residents. It must also accommodate everyone who has a right to be on the premises, including family members and lawful roommates who are not shareholders.
If the identification checks are being enforced in a way that is discriminatory or does not comply with the co-op’s bylaws or rules, you can let the board know your concerns verbally or in writing, says Laura Mehl Sugarman, a partner at the law firm Benesch.
Be respectful in your letter — these board members are likely your neighbors — and stick to the facts. Seek out any neighbors who share your concerns, and have them sign the letter as well. But be advised: given the vast powers and legal protections enjoyed by co-op boards, you’ll be fighting an uphill battle.
