Housing cooperative

A housing co-operative is a legal entity, usually a corporation, that owns real estate, one or more residential buildings. Each shareholder in the legal entity is granted the right to occupy one housing unit, sometimes subject to an Occupancy Agreement, which is similar to a lease. The Occupancy agreement specifies the co-op's rules.

Legal status

As a legal entity, a co-op can contract with other companies or hire individuals to provide it with services, such as a maintenance contractor or a building manager. It can also hire employees, such as a manager or a caretaker, to deal with specific things that volunteers may prefer not to do or may not be good at doing, such as electrical maintenance. However, as many housing cooperatives strive to run self-sufficiently (and recognize the economical efficiency of doing so), as much work as possible is completed by its members.

A shareholder in a co-op does not own real estate, but a share of the legal entity that does own real estate. Co-operative ownership is quite distinct from condominiums where people "own" individual units and have little say in who moves into the other units. Because of this, most jurisdictions have developed separate legislation, similar to laws that regulate companies, to regulate how co-ops are operated and the rights and obligations of shareholders.

Ownership

Each resident or resident household has membership in the co-operative association. Members have occupancy rights to a specific suite within the housing co-operative as outlined in their "occupancy agreement", or "proprietary lease" which is essentially a lease.

In some cases, the co-op follows Rochdale rules where each shareholder has only one vote. Most cooperatives are incorporated as limited stock companies where the number of votes an owner has is tied to the number of shares owned by the person. Whichever form of voting is employed it is necessary to conduct an election among shareholders to determine who will represent them on the board of directors (if one exists), the governing body of the co-operative. The board of directors is generally responsible for the business decisions including the financial requirements and sustainability of the co-operative. Although politics vary from co-op to co-op and depend largely on the wishes of its members, it is a general rule that a majority vote of the board is necessary to make business decisions.

See also Strata title

Management

In larger co-ops, members of a co-op typically elect a board of directors from amongst the shareholders at a general meeting, usually the annual general meeting. In smaller co-ops, all members sit on the board.

The board typically elects its own officers, such as a president, vice-president and so on. Usually, the directors are volunteers, or are paid an honorarium. The board may then establish standing committees from among the shareholders, who usually also volunteer their time, to either handle the business affairs of the co-op or make recommendations to the full board on such issues as its finance, membership and maintenance of its housing units.

Finance

A housing co-op is normally de facto non-profit, since usually most of its income comes from the rents paid by its residents, who are invariably its members. There is no point in creating a deliberate surplus—except for operational requirements such as setting aside funds for replacement of assets—since that simply means that the rents paid by members are set higher than the expenses. (Note, however, that it's quite possible for a housing co-op to own other revenue-generating assets, such as a subsidiary business which could produce surplus income to offset the cost of the housing, but in those cases the housing rents are usually reduced to compensate for the additional revenue.)

It is relatively difficult to start a housing co-op because if the idea is, for instance, to build a building or group of buildings to house the members, this usually takes a significant mortgage loan for which a financial institution will want assurances of responsibility. It may also take a year or more for the members to organize the design and construction, as well as time and foresight to establish even basic organizational policies. It is rare that these kinds of skills of organization are available in a random group of people who often have pressures on their existing housing. It may be somewhat easier to organize a group of closely related housing units. This opportunity may arise, for example, if an existing apartment building's owner is thinking about selling it.

There are housing co-ops of the rich and famous: John Lennon, for instance, lived in a housing co-operative, and most apartments in New York City that are owned rather than rented are held through a co-operative rather than via a condominium arrangement.

There are two main types of housing co-operative financing methods, market rate and limited equity. With market rate, the share price is allowed to rise on the open market and shareholders may sell at whatever price the market will bear when they want to move out. In many ways market rate is thus similar financially to owning a condominium, with the difference being that often the co-op carries a mortgage, resulting in a much higher monthly fee paid to the co-op than would be so in a condominium. The purchase price of a comparable unit in the co-op is typically much lower, however.

With limited equity, the co-op has rules regarding pricing of shares when sold. The idea behind limited equity is to maintain affordable housing. A sub-set of the limited equity model is the no-equity model, which looks very much like renting, with a very low purchase price (comparable to a rental security deposit) and a monthly fee in lieu of rent. When selling, all that is re-couped is that very low purchase price.

In the USA

In the United States, housing co-ops are usually categorized as corporations or LLC's and are found in abundance in the Greater New York metropolitan area, and more precisely within New York City itself, Westchester County, New York (which borders the city to the north) and towns in New Jersey that are immediately across the Hudson River from Manhattan, such as Fort Lee, Edgewater, or Weehawken. Unlike in other parts of the world, most of these housing co-ops did not develop as a result of social engineering. Apartment buildings and multiple-family housing simply make up a more significant share of the housing stock in the New York City area than in most other US cities, and the cooperative form of ownership has dominated over the condominium form. Reasons suggested why cooperatives are relatively more common than condominiums in the New York City area are^[1]:

1. Inspired by Abraham Kazan, Cooperatives appeared at least as far back as the 1920's while a legal basis for condominium form of ownership was not available in New York State until 1946.¹ (Passage of the Condominium Act then opened a wave of construction of condominium buildings.²)
2. The cooperative form can be advantageous as a building mortgage can be carried by the cooperative corporation, leaving less financing to be obtained by each co-op owner. Under condominium ownership only the separate condo owners provide financing. Particularly when interest rates are high, a conversion sponsor may find unit buyers more easily under the cooperative arrangement as buyers will have less financing to arrange on their own; the apparent purchase price of a unit in a cooperative building holding an underlying mortgage is lower than a condo purchase. Cooperative unit buyers may not accurately weigh their share of the building's mortgage.³
3. Also, later in a building's life after conversion, major new investments required to repair or replace building systems can be raised by a new central mortgage in a cooperative, while in a condominium funds could only be raised by onerous assessments being required of each individual unit owner.⁴ However, the New York State's condominium law was amended in 1997 to allow condominium associations to carry building mortgages.⁵
4. A co-op building's board can impose restrictions and legally discriminate in their selection of new tenant owners.⁶

In New York City, another significant factor in the rise of co-op or condominium ownership is strict and complicated rent control laws that have made many landlords want to get out of the rental property market.

Most of the housing cooperatives in the Greater New York area were converted to that status during the 1980s; generally they were large buildings built between the 1920s and 1950s that a single landlord or corporation owned and rented out that were now unprofitable as rental units. To encourage individual ownership of units, the initial buyers buying units from the seller (in this case the owner of the entire building) do not have to be approved by a board. Also, the rental tenants living in the building at the time of the conversion were usually given an option to buy at a discount. Many of these buildings, especially in Manhattan, are actually quite luxurious and exclusive; many celebrities live in them and some famous people are even rejected by the board. In the 1990s and 2000s some rental buildings in the Chicago, Washington, DC, and Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach areas went through a similar conversion process, though not to the degree of New York.

Many of the cooperatives originally built as co-ops were sponsored by trade unions, such as the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America. One of the largest projects was Cooperative Village in Lower East Side of Manhattan. The United Housing Foundation was set up in 1951 and built the Co-op City in Bronx, and were built by architect Herman Jessor.

Student housing cooperatives

However, multiple person cooperative models exist all over the country. Artist, student and community co-operatives are common in the San Francisco Bay Area, for example. Many of these housing co-operatives are members of organizations such as NASCO.

Student-owned and -operated housing co-operatives exist to provide low-cost housing to university students. One of the first was Michigan Socialist House founded in 1932 near the University of Michigan campus in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Examples of such cooperatives exist in Berkeley, California; Irvine, California; Santa Cruz; Chicago, Illinois; Minneapolis, Minnesota; Oberlin, Ohio; East Lansing, Michigan; Stanford; Ann Arbor, Michigan; Austin, Texas; Providence, Rhode Island; Olympia, Washington; Eugene, Oregon; Ithaca, New York; West Lafayette, IN; Worcester, MA; Princeton, New Jersey; and Buffalo,NY.

In Canada

Housing co-ops in Canada take on many different forms. In Ontario, there are co-ownership, equity and occupant-run co-ops.

Co-ownership co-ops are generally older apartment buildings, incorporated before the Ontario Condominium Act, 1973 came into existence, where shareholders each own one voting share in the corporation that owns the building and have a registered right to occupy individual units as described on their share certificate. Most of these types of co-ops date from the thirties, forties and fifties and are in the city of Toronto. They are similar to condominiums, in that units may be bought and sold by private sale or on the open market. Until relatively recently, these units tended to be bought by older people with home equity who could buy the unit outright, as it was difficult to get a mortgage against these units. However, a number of Ontario credit unions are now offering limited financing, provided that that individual co-op corporations meet their fiscal standards, making these units affordable housing options for younger buyers. Incoming owners must be approved by the building's Board of Directors, and agree to abide by building bylaws and Occupancy Agreements.

Equity co-ops are buildings in which individuals purchase a percentage share tied to the square footage of their unit. More credit unions will offer financing against them than against co-ownerships. They are a relatively new form of construction, designed to encourage owner occupancy by having the building's corporation hold back a percentage of the unit's share equity to ensure owner occupancy.

Then there are co-ops that provide all the privileges of ownership except for the right to make (or lose) money on a primary residence and are run by the people who live there.

The federal and provincial governments in Canada developed legislation in the 1970s that aided potential co-ops by providing start-up funding and financing through mortgages via an agency called the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). The government simultaneously began to encourage the development of resource groups to contract with fledgling boards of directors of housing co-ops to develop co-operatives either in turnkey buildings or buildings designed and constructed by architects and builders with which the board contracted to deliver the service. Supervised by the board, the resource groups marketed the units to suitable members, educated them about their rights and obligations as co-operators, and established a management structure which usually included paid staff. These organizations helped in forming initial policies and holding the organization together while all the necessary work is done.

The federal government tied its loan assistance to requirements that these housing co-ops provide a percentage of their units, usually at least 15 to 20 per cent, for what are termed income-tested residents. These people voluntarily provide information to the co-op on a confidential basis about their gross income, and their rent is calculated according to a formula. If the calculated rent is less than the market rent of the units, then the federal government, through another formula, would provide funding to those units to bring their unit revenue up to the market rate. This produced mixed-income co-op housing, in which relatively well-off people lived side-by-side with relatively low-income people and worked with them on committees. This often had the ripple effect of improving the financial health of those less well-off. (It's interesting to note that, depending on your political point of view, such government payments for offsetting the rent could be considered subsidy of the low-income people, or a contractual business arrangement between the government and the co-op which helps to stabilize revenue to the co-op in exchange for accomplishing a social goal for the government for a specific period. This dichotomy is typical of the fact that a housing co-op is somewhere between a corporation and a social agency, and where one places it depends on one's viewpoint -- and the collective viewpoint of each housing co-op.)

Political will dissipated in Canada in the 1990s, however, as other issues occupied politicians and financial belt-tightening by the governments reduced the funds available for the mortgages. In 2004 and 2005, however, the political winds shifted back towards the idea of developing more low-income housing. However, not-for-profit housing co-operatives are committed to the mixed-income concept and have not been able to make much use of the few opportunities that have come available in recent years.

In Canada, there are associations of housing co-operatives. The major one is the Co-operative Housing Federation of Canada (CHF Canada). Most provinces have similar organizations for their area, but many are stand-alone members of the CHF Canada, as opposed to being branches of it. Each such organization charges its member co-operatives a fee based on the number of housing units in the co-op to pay for staff to do its work. This includes lobbying governments, setting up self-help funding and the like. In most jurisdictions there are no organizations for members of housing co-operatives, although there can often arise conflicts between the co-op board and individual members or groups of members.

In Ontario, the eviction of members of a housing co-operative is governed by special rules set out in the Co-operative Corporations Act. The Board of Directors of the co-operative initiates the process by sending the member a notice to appear, requiring her to attend at a Board meeting at which her eviction will be considered. If the Board votes to evict, the member has a right of appeal to the membership as a whole. In order to enforce the eviction, the Board must bring an application to a judge of the Superior Court, on which occasion the member has the opportunity to present her case to the judge; the judge considers whether the eviction process was conducted fairly and in accordance with due process, and has a residual discretion to refuse the eviction should the judge consider it fair to do so, notwithstanding the decision of the Board. This process is different from evictions of rental tenants, which proceed in Ontario before a specialized tribunal. The standard of deference that judges should show to the decisions of Boards is a controversial and unresolved issue in the law, with various cases taking seemingly inconsistent positions on the issue.

A co-operative housing project can resemble a traditional apartment building, or it can be the basis of an intentional community.

"Building co-operatives" ("self-build housing co-operatives" in British parlance, which distinguishes them from worker co-operatives in the building trade) are formed by members who cooperate to build their homes but own their houses on completion. Building co-ops were extremely popular across Canada from the 1930s to the 1960s.

In the UK

There are several hundred housing co-operatives in Britain, and most are "par value" rental co-operatives, meaning that the tenants have no equity share in their house or flat. They may or may not be "fully mutual" meaning that all tenants are members and vice versa. They are normally incorporated as industrial and provident societies. While many housing co-operatives occupy permanent accommodation, there has also been a significant sector of "short life" housing co-operatives, especially in London where rents are high. These are formed to alleviate homelessness by making use of empty housing while it is waiting for redevelopment - akin to a form of legalised squatting.

A registering body and support network for housing co-ops, workers co-ops, social centres and land co-ops is Radical Routes.

A representative body for Britain's housing co-operatives is the Confederation of Co-operative Housing (CCH).

The government grant aids some housing co-operatives via its social housing agency the Housing Corporation.

Secondary housing co-operatives - co-operatives of co-operatives - may be formed to help with the legal procedures of buying and renovating property.

In Finland

In Finland co-op membership is the prime form of real estate and home ownership.

Except for a very limited number of co-ops that follow the strict Rochdale Principles of one vote, all Finnish co-ops are incorporated as (non-profit) limited-liability companies (asunto-osakeyhtiö).

Membership of a co-op is obtained by buying the shares on the open market, most often through a real estate agent. No board approval is needed to buy shares. In some older co-operatives old members have the right of pre-emption, i.e. the right to buy the shares at the set market price.

Neither is there any requirement for members to live in the co-operative. Owning of apartments for rent is a common form of saving and private investment.

The first housing cooperatives were built around 1900, many of them in the Helsinki neighborhood of Katajanokka, in the national romantic Jugend style. Initially many co-ops were set up by the future members themselves, often workers or artisans in the same trade. By the 1920s co-op founding was the business of professional real estate developers. After WW II nationwide non-profit developer organizations were formed and a system of government provided loans (ARAVA) was introduced. Sale of shares in co-ops with state loans were restricted by limited equity rules for 50 years, the price of the shares was limited by an index.

The Finnish model of the housing co-op was also the basis of the modern U.S. co-ops, as the first cooperative the Finnish Home Building Association in Brooklyn was started in 1918 by Finnish immigrants. [1] [2]

Sweden

It has been suggested that Tenant-owner's association be merged into this article or section. (Discuss)

Notes and References

• Note 1: ,Note 3: ,Note 6: "Q and A", by Shawn G. Kennedy, New York Times, May 21, 1986
• Note 2: "Residential Real Estate; New Financial Option for Condo Boards", by Rachelle Garbarine, New York Times, September 26, 1997
• Note 4: ,Note 5: "Condo Boards and Loans", by Jay Romano, New York Times, June 1, 1997

1. ^ University of Connecticut Dept. of Economics Paper on Housing Cooperative History

See also

• Affordable housing
• Subsidized housing
• Cohousing
• NASCO
• Intentional Community
• University Students' Cooperative Association
• Tenant-owner's association
• Apartment hotel

Wikipedia information about Housing cooperative This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Housing cooperative". It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer). Help contribute to Americola and edit this article.