Saturday, April 19, 2014

Home - Tell me what Riveredge Cooperative is all about (INTERNET EXPLORER (as a browser) does not display marquee line correctly)


// HAPPY NEW YEAR 2014 // WOW! Sept 12, 2013 - Click this link or above to view - The Official website of 1 David Lane Yonkers , NY 10701  - // What did this years May 2013 Annual Meeting remind you of ? ANSWER - It was like going to see the same new car dealer every year since 1993 and only being to be able to purchase a new 1993 model car every year, NOTHING IS EVER DIFFERENT ABOUT IT - NO NEW FEATURES - NO NEW IDEAS - NO NEW THOUGHTS  // April 26, 2013 - Riveredge Board of Directors, when I read your memo's , and measure the results , you embarrass me as a shareholder , and you embarrass yourselves // January 23, 2013 - MAINTENANCE "....decrease the maintenance by $1.25/share beginning in March."  So that means the "excess maintenance" beginning in March will be what $ ?.?? / per share ? I will say, greater than, $ 2.50 (actual number is $2.78 your 2013 budget) / per share, STILL , at all time record highs and STILL surpassing  the "assessment" that we were told "was a burden" and ended in August 2006 (six years ago), give me a break really, really give me a break, might I suggest reviewing section 6 of the By Laws  //  PETER MERSON'S COMMENT IS PUBLISHED IN: - The Cooperator -  go to bottom of article // JOKE: 10/2013 - One Shareholder remarks to another on the recently redone Hallways - "You know, the Riveredge Board of Directors stated that they "worked long and hard on this project", but it still reminds me of a place I would go if I wanted to rent a room by the hour". To which the other shareholder replied, "think what it would look like if they hadn't", ha, ha, but true - Let's all give a special shout out & thanks for this GREAT job to Jane Hand AND Janet Henry. // For the latest on PETER MERSON, Plaintiff, - against - RIVEREDGE OWNERS, INC., Defendants. click here

Riveredge Cooperative is located at 1 David Lane (aka 1161 North Broadway) in Yonkers, New York 10701. This is north-west Yonkers bordering Hastings-on-Hudson, 10706. 

The property consists of one concrete eight story building over two garage levels with two elevators on 4.68 acres , pictured below the red arrow on the screen , you are looking east from NJ. 

158 apartments are available, comprised of 96 one bedroom, 32 two or three bedroom and 30 studio apartments, measuring approximately 780, 1,100 & 480 square feet.  These 158 apartments are allocated a total of 85,027 cooperative shares.  

221 parking spaces are available on the premises, comprised of 53 inside, 53 carport and 115 outside spaces at a monthly cost of $50, $38 & $25 respectively.

Listed below are two different views of the cooperatives Fixed , Variable and Discretionary costs PLUS the Cash balance & Capital Expenditures for 23 yrs. All numbers are from the Audited Annual Financial Statements. The 2013 Budget numbers are from the Board of Directors (seriously). 

" If you can't measure it, you can't manage it. " Mayor Mike Bloomberg  // " He (John Ricci - Property Manager) has vast experience and shall work with the Board of Directors and Shareholders to make sure that Riveredge Owners, Inc. is a well managed property. " John Lamorte - President Westchester Property Management  // " Riveredge Board of Directors, when I read your memo's and measure the results, you embarrass me as a shareholder and you embarrass yourselves. " - Peter Merson  // Riveredge Board Members: Glenn Keegan  25+ years / Janet Henry  12 years / Les Lew 10 years /  Karen Gongora 10 years / Mike Hertz 6 years / Nami Kaur 2 years / Alan Fine 1 year / - Peter Merson




Friday, April 18, 2014

Brian Dunn leaves Riveredge after 11 years here as a Porter. He will be missed

Brian Dunn has decided to leave Riveredge. 
He has been here since 2003, 11 years.
He will be missed. He was someone you could always trust , depend on and he had a sense of humor. My best wishes.
Peter Merson
...

Riveredge Board of Directors take note ot this fact

Study Finds That Monkeys Can Do Math

View Comments
File photo of a macaque monkey. (credit: YOSHIKAZU TSUNO/AFP/Getty Images)
File photo of a macaque monkey. (credit: YOSHIKAZU TSUNO/AFP/Getty Images)
BOSTON (CBS Connecticut) – According to a new study, monkeys can do math.
Neurobiologist Margaret Livingstone of Harvard Medical School and her colleagues taught three rhesus macaques numbers zero through nine and letters with values zero through 25.
When given a choice between two symbols the monkeys generally chose the larger number. They were then given more drops of water, juice, or soda as a reward.
Researchers then wanted to know if monkeys could add numbers. The monkeys then were given a choice between a sum and a symbol. Science Mag reports that within four months the monkeys learned how it worked and were able to add the two symbols and compare that number to a single symbol.
Researchers wanted to make sure the monkeys were not just memorizing combinations so they then presented a new set of symbols. The monkeys were again able to add the value of these new set of numbers.
Researchers analyzed over hundreds of tests. The monkeys did not score 100 percent. They realized that the monkeys had trouble understanding the symbols when the numbers were close in value.
“What they’re doing is paying more attention to the big number than the little one,” Livingstone explained to the magazine.
The team said that further research is needed to determine how monkeys estimate the value of numbers.
The findings were reported online in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Thursday, March 13, 2014

Peter Merson against Riveredge Owners inc - Glenn Keegan MOTION FOR DISMISSAL - FAILED - read Judges decision under "Building Code/Legal" tab on the right


CITY COURT OF THE CITY OF YONKERS
COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------X
PETER MERSON                                                                                            Index No. SC 416 / 11YO

                                                             Plaintiff
                              -against-

RIVEREDGE OWNERS, INC.

                                                             Defendants.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------X

                                                            NOTICE OF MOTION
SIRS:

       PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the annexed Affidavit of Glenn Keegan duly sworn

 to May 4, 2012 the Affirmation of Kenneth J. Finger, the Pleadings herein, the Exhibits annexed

hereto, and upon all the papers, pleadings and proceedings heretofore had herein, the Plaintiffs 

will Move this Court at the Part at the City Courthouse at 100 South Broadway, Yonkers, New 

York 10701. Small Claims Part, on June 11, 2012, at 1:00p.m. in the afternoon of the day, or as 

soon thereafter as counsel can be heard, for an Order (a) granting the Defendant's application for 

summary judgment to dismiss the complaint on all grounds set fourth in the Civil Practice Law 

and Rules and (b) for such other and further relief as to this Court appears just and proper in the 

premises. 

           Please take further notice that more than the requisite time having been given of the 

making of the instant motion, pursuant to CPLR 2214 the answering affidavits, if any, of the 

                                                        1

Defendant(s) to the within motion, must be served and received by the Plaintiff's counsel at least 

seven (7) days prior to the return date of the motion herein or same will be rejected.
  
Dated: White Plains, New York 10601
             May 4, 2012 

                                                _______signature on file_________________
                                                           Kenneth J. Finger, Esq.
                                             Finger & Finger, A Professional Corporation
                                                              Attorneys for Defendant
                                                                     158 Grand Street
                                                           White Plains, New York 10601
                                                                       (914) 949-3080

To: James G. Dibbini, Esq.
             Attorneys for Plaintiff
      570 Yonkers, New York 10704


                                                                                     2







CITY COURT OF THE CITY OF YONKERS
COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER
---------------------------------------------------------------------------x

PETER MERSON                                                                         Index No. SC 416 /11YO
                                                         Plaintiff
                              -against-

RIVEEDGE OWNERS, INC. (this is how it was spelled-pm)

                                                        Defendants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------x
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT DISMISSING
                                                     THE COMPLAINT 

State of New York:
County of Westchester: ss:

              Glenn Keegan, being duly sworn, deposes and states:

              1.       I am the President of the Board of Directors of the Defendant herein and am fully

familiar with the facts and circumstances of this matter.

BACKGROUND: 

             2.        This affidavit is made in support of the motion for summary judgement on behalf

of the Defendant seeking to dismiss the complaint and is submitted on behalf of the Defendant

Riveredge Owners, Inc. a cooperative corporation.

            The following documents are submitted in support of the motion:

                  a) Small Claims Summons and Complaint;
                  b) (Oral Answer in denial given in court)
                  c) Proprietary Lease
                  d) By Laws of Defendant
                  e) Bill of Particulars submitted by Plaintiff;
                  f) "Detail of Claim" submitted by Defendant.

PLAINTIFF'S CLAIM


            3.         The Plaintiff has predicated his lawsuit on what he claims "excess maintenance"

charged the shareholders as a result of the Board of Directors' increasing maintenance for

reasons that he objects to, among other things, to build up a reserve fund in excess of what he

claims are the cash requirements necessary for the Defendant and that it did so retroactively.


DEFENDANTS' POSITION


           4.          The Defendant's position is simply that it has the right, under the "business

judgment" rule, to operate the cooperative in the fashion it deems appropriate.


           5.          The Board of Directors met yearly and discussed the budget. It determined, in its

business judgment, that it was financially prudent for it to build up an appropriate reserve fund,

and it did so.

            6.          The Plaintiff claims that one increase was "retroactive" in violation of the bylaws.

While the Board voted the increase in during the month of April and made it effective from

January in terms of computing the monthly payment, the amount was not invoiced until May,

2006 and June, 2006, in futuro. The assessment (increase) was payable in the future for the

balance of the year and it could easily have been divided into 9 payments rather than 12. The

board, again in its business judgement, determined that it was easier for payments to be 1/12th

(with 2 lump sum payment in May and June) than 1/9th per month. However, that is just a "nit"

in the overall scheme and refers to a $360 claim (January, February and March, 2006). The

payment was not due until after May and June 2006, thus rendering the "retroactive" argument

erroneous since the actual payment was not retroactive.

              7.         Regarding the 2007 through 2010 increases objected to by Merson, it was the

Board's business judgment that in view of the fact that the building was getting older, that there

were many significant expenditures that were anticipated, such as renovation of the hallways and

lobbies, new laundry room machines; windows (estimated to be over $500,000), renovation of

the building's health club; possible expansion of swimming pool and replacement of the elevator

controllers.

           8.         The judgment exercised by the Board to build up a reserve fund rather than

continually assess shareholders was a proper decision made within its business judgment.

Moreover, this is a proper "cash requirement" for both building up and replacing reserve funds.

          9.         Additionally, having an adequate reserve fund is something that was

recommended by our accountants as well as other professionals. It not only makes the monetary

swings in expenditures less pronounced, but it assists in the valuation of our units for sale

purposes. One of the first things that any person looks to when they look to buy a cooperative

building is the size of the reserve fund. The last thing that a new purchaser and cooperator

wants is for that person to move in and immediately be hit with an assessment for repairs /

renovations / capital work that should have been anticipated and funded with contributions to

reserve finds. Moreover, it has enabled us to achieve our Triple A rating which is very

significant in view of the fact that we have to refinance our mortgage.

         10.         Therefore, in accordance with our fiduciary responsibilities, we acted within our

proper business judgment and raised maintenance sufficiently to cover expenses as well as reserves.

          11.      By reason of our understanding of the law, the Cooperative is protected from suit

challenging our method of acting in our business judgment.
 
             Wherefore, for the reasons set forth herein, the Court should grant the motion to dismiss

the Complaint and for summary judgement on behalf of the Defendant together with such other

and further relief as appears just and proper in the premises.



                                        Signature on file_______________
                                                             Glenn Keegan

Duly sworn to before me May 4, 2012


                               signature on file
         KENNETH J.FINGER
Notary Public, State of New York
            No. 02FI6044648
Qualified in Westchester County
    Term Expires: July 10, 20?? (illegible or scratched out)

Greenburgh, Ossining, Yonkers to reassess property‏

Click Here To Read The Property Reassessment News Article

Recap:
  • The last time Greenburgh revalued its real estate was in the mid-1950s. For Yonkers, it was 1954. Ossining's most recent reassessment was in the early 1970s.
  • The purpose of the process is not to increase revenue; it is to spread the property-tax burden fairly, said Fernando Gonzalez, the town of Ossining's assessor. Revaluation traditionally results in a higher value for one-third of properties, a decrease for one-third and the status quo for one-third.
  • Westchester communities are notorious for not updating property values, a process fraught with controversy, particularly in the county that pays the highest property taxes in the nation.
  • It also cuts down on property owners successfully challenging outdated assessments and getting tax rebates.
  • Yonkers, Greenburgh and Ossining each will sign contracts with Tyler Technologies, a software company headquartered in Plano, Texas, and Michael Haberman Associates Inc. of Mineola, Nassau County, real estate appraisers and consultants. Haberman Associates will be the monitor, ensuring the projects stay on schedule.
  • The Yonkers revaluation is scheduled to begin in August, and the new assessment roll would be finalized in 2018.
  • The process is a shared one between city government and taxpayers, Yonkers assessor David Jackson said. There will be public information programs to inform different parts of the city when property inspections will take place. Owners should read any information sent to them and make sure it's correct.

  1. A Tax Certiorari  (challenging outdated assessments and getting tax rebates) was done by Riveredge Cooperative in 1997 and 2009 
  2. This process appears to be a CASH BONANZA for Law firms , legal fees in 1997 were $94,000 and in 2009, $104,000 seriously, look at the audited annual report numbers above. If someone were to do an actual cost benefit analysis of this shit , you might scratch your head and ask more questions.

Sunday, March 9, 2014

Chart Programs





























Friday, October 11, 2013

Hallway Renovation Project - Chronology of incompetence - recapped from my point of view - IN PROGRESS - THIS IS A DRAFT


 Comments will be added



>