I just received a monumental letter in the mail from Board Member Eric Mandelbaum addressed to people who are on the Garage and Storage lists. The letter discusses vital issues related to these lists. I am frankly astonished at his candor in discussing these issues with those affected by them, and was astounded to learn that the "storage bin" list that I am on does not include "storage rooms"! Mr. Mandelbaum's letter openly calls for robust procedures, transparency on the part of the Board, and vigilence on the part of Shareholders. I will certainly follow up on issues raised here, but for now, let me just say that this letter is a must-read. Congratulations to Mr. Mandelbaum for taking this bold initiative.

For the purpose of on-line presentation, I have not published Mr. Mandelbaum's apartment number or phone number as they appear on the letter. His intention of being accessible is clear though, so I retained his email address, eric@sphc.net. I have also changed a URL into a direct link. Mr. Mandelbaum uses a variety of color, bold, italic, underline and symbols in his typography. In the interest of attending to my full-time work, I converted all the typography into boring bold and equally boring horizontal lines.

Dear Neighbor,

I write this letter more as a neighbor, than as an SPHC Director. And I write you because you are on the Garage Wait List (or the Storage Bin Wait List).

Hopefully, you are aware by now of the November 17, 2005 (Thursday), 7pm Informational Meeting sponsored by the Board at the Educational Alliance Theater at 176 East Broadway. Among the presenters will be the Garage Committee. There are some issues about the garage that may be of interest to you. These were summarized by shareholder Dan Strum and published in an on-line article. In his article, Mr. Strum reports several critical points (Go to the article).

The specific points of the article are not disputed by the leadership of the board, nor the executives in charge of managing the garage and its waiting list, President Stanley Friedland, and 2nd Vice President Carlos Rosado. Specifically Dan reports:

1. In the period between the posting of the last waiting list and the current one, approximately 6 or 7 parking spots became vacant, but only 3 of those could be identified as having been filled by people from the wait list. It is unknown who filled the other spots, but assurances were made that because of the need for not losing the revenue from them, they were filled.
   
   
2. People at the top of the list are regularly removed from the list because of an inability to reach them by phone, and no attempts are made to reach them either in writing, or at their apartment. Also, there is no log of any sort recording the attempts to contact shareholders.
   
   
3. The list is not published as a function of objective criteria. That is to say it is not published regularly (monthly, for example), nor as a function of updates (after 10 removals and/or additions, for example). Therefore, long periods go by before people can know if they were added to the list, as requested, or removed, incorrectly. Therefore, most of the time, those listed are unaware of the speed with which the list is moving…
   
   
4. There are duplicate names, duplicate apartments, and not all the dates are in sequence.
   
   
5. Receipts are not provided to people when they request to go on the list, and there are many allegations of requests to be put on the list not being honored.

Aside from these issues, we have another problem. As noted above, in the last publication cycle of the list, less than 50% of the newly available parking spaces can be verified as having been filled from the list. It was a small, one time sample to be sure. Nonetheless, in effect, that rate would double the already-long wait time.

Moreover, even if all the open spots had been filled from the list – as is possible – there is no mechanism in place to ensure that they would continue to be. The problem is a real one… I am not sure how this could be resolved. And, I am not optimistic about the possibility, nor the will, to correct past mistakenly assigned parking spaces, if there are any (more later).

Despite this, I believe there are many positives and opportunities present just now. Here are some:

• By virtue of Mr. Strum being granted a meeting with the Garage Committee, we see a demonstrated concern on the part of our leadership.
  
  
• Similarly, that the Garage Committee will be presenting – indeed, even the fact of an informational meeting itself – demonstrates a heightened sense of urgency on the part of the leadership to address these problems, as does the promise of soliciting questions from the audience.
  
  
• More to the point, Stanley and Carlos have promised to provide receipts to people requesting to be on the list, and also to provide written notification to those awarded a space.

I would like to emphasize that Stanley and Carlos have acknowledged the problematic history that we have had with the garage; something for which they both deserve a great deal of credit. I urge you – for the sake of the overall mental health of our four buildings, and for the success in implementing the changes – to avoid enmity regarding the existence and resolution of these problems.

(As an aside, I have also observed first-hand, and from the shared experience of others,
that enmity has little currency in these parts.
Indeed, it would not be an overstatement to say that it might even feed our problems.)

I have many recommendations for us all in light of these developments:

1. Please attend the Informational Meeting.
   
   
2. As soon as you possibly can, send your various phone numbers and email addresses – in writing – to the main office, to prevent being removed from the list over a lack of accurate reach information. (It would probably not be a bad idea to cc them to me [2 copies], as well, at the main office. I will present them to Stanley myself, just in case, and present a signed copy back to you. If you do this, and you do not hear back from me, call me.)
   
   
3. Please provide encouragement to Stanley and Carlos to provide receipts prospectively, as they have committed to doing. No doubt the receipt book they select will have pre-printed sequentially numbered receipts (to avoid skips), carbon copies, and each page will be copied and stored in a safe, remote and accessible location. And the receipts will be signed by both an SPHC official, and the shareholder going on the list.
   
   This is important because depending on the speed with which people relinquish spaces, months-long delays in getting put on the list can potentially result in additional years of waiting.
   
   Even though this issue no longer affects us (we all are on a list), we are a cooperative, and we all need to care about what is good for each and every one of us to self-govern effectively…
   
   
4. Please provide encouragement to Stanley and Carlos to provide written notification to those who have been chosen from the list for a space, as they have already committed to doing.
   
   
5. Please provide encouragement to Stanley and Carlos to provide monthly postings of the list.
   
   
6. Please encourage the Board to include mention – in writing, as part of the package – of the various waiting lists at closing, so all new shareholders have an equal and fair opportunity to get listed.
   
   
7. Check the list for accuracy regarding your apartment and the spelling of your name, and report any inaccuracies to Stanley (or me).

Many – I among them – call for transparency, openness, communication. But really, the core issue here, I believe, is self-governance. Stanley, Carlos – and let’s not forget Dan Strum – are providing the opportunity to actually exercise this. Let’s not allow this opportunity to deteriorate into recriminations and more bitterness.

Perhaps – and this is just an idea that may not have been sufficiently examined – we could form a shareholder committee from people on the list to monitor new vacancies, and movement from the list. Perhaps these people could be elected by those on the list…

I do know that this problem has been given a great deal of thought by a great many others. If a different, better solution has already been developed, but is simply awaiting implementation, now is the time for it to see the light of day. Please do share it with us.

While we are on the subject of waiting lists: SPHC has both storage ROOMS and storage BINS, which are distinct from one another. In responding to a neighbor’s inquiry, I have learned that there is a separate, distinct storage ROOM waiting list, which, obviously, has not been published. I have also learned that this list is closed, because of its size.

The storage BIN waiting list has not been updated even once since its establishment 9 months ago. Does this mean that there have been no openings? Are the storage ROOMS becoming available at a greater frequency? Whatever the answers, how can they be verified? Since we are addressing the issue of waiting lists and parking spot availability, it would seem that now would be a natural and logical time to address this, as well.

(If you are curious: I have cross referenced the storage BIN waiting list with the garage waiting list, and 43% of the storage BIN waiting list [more than 90 people] is also on the parking waiting list.)

What do we do if the storage ROOM waiting list does move faster than the storage BIN waiting list? I imagine the answer is very much dependent on the size of the storage ROOM waiting list…

I have only recently brought this up. Stanley naturally will have much to think about as this issue is contemplated with his already-full plate. While I have an aversion to ever advising patience, I have no aversion to strongly urging calm, and so I do now.

I attempted to write this as factually and objectively and informatively (and quickly) as I could. I have excoriated no one, and praised a few. Nonetheless, nerves are raw, and feelings often tender, often justifiably, I have learned, around here. If I have managed to offend, I do apologize, and of course, I encourage you to let me have it, if I have. Moreover, I make my share of mistakes. And I agonize over the potential consequences of my own, unknown, unforeseen and unintended carelessness. So I ask, quite sincerely: “What have I missed?”

Yours,

[Signature]

Eric Mandelbaum
Neighbor

cc: Stanley Friedland, President, Carlos Rosado, 2nd Vice President

PS#1: This letter is something any shareholder could have written and mailed. I obtained this list from the list posted in the bulletin boards, and not by virtue of my presence on the Board.

PS#2: It is possible that I will be doing more outreach like this. May I ask: Would you be willing to volunteer to put such outreach letters under people’s doors?

PS#3: The name(s) on the envelope is (are) how your name(s) appear on the list(s).

PS#4: The solutions to the many topics of this letter will not flower immediately. If you found this letter to be welcome, and you are open to it, please email me your name, phone number(s), apartment(s), and comments at eric@sphc.net. That will help me in keeping you posted, and with follow-through.

PS#5: No SPHC dollars were used in the making of this letter.