The model hasn’t adapted to modern transparency standards and is little inclined toward doing so, given the political power that comes with such economic might. The upside for anyone who’s accepted is the guarantee of community, but the incalculable downside is exclusion for countless others – the secrecy allows for discrimination with impunity. They resemble country clubs and private social clubs, assuring shareholders – those who have bought units in the building – that they’ll be surrounded by others who look and earn money like they do. They’ve been around for more than 100 years, a 20th-century model for an urban “planned community”. ![]() “The point is, we have no idea.”Ĭo-op boards – a small group of building shareholders entrusted with overseeing everything from the financial health of a building to maintenance – are seen as directors of a private corporation, which is what co-ops are, so they aren’t legally required to disclose their reasons for denying applicants.Ĭo-ops are a significant part of New York City housing, making up about 74% of Manhattan’s apartment stock. ![]() “It could have been based on the fact that my partner is Asian American, or it could have been that they wanted someone with more money, someone who would pay all cash,” Claire said. Their broker couldn’t explain why – he didn’t know. “I remember I looked at my phone,” she recalled, “and all the blood drained out of my brain.”Īlan had texted to say they’d been rejected by the co-op board.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |