@thehood – sorry, but your ‘argument’ looks weaker each time I read it.
You’re starting with the premise that financial owners are ‘plutocrats’.
That’s nonsense. These ‘plutocrats’ are just people meeting the financial obligations they agreed to. This is not ‘financial status’. They’re not oppressing the downtrodden or anything like it.
Buildings cost money to run and maintain. The levies are there in the paperwork when you buy. They’re set each year at an AGM where everyone who is meeting their financial obligations gets a vote. If the money isn’t raised…
Payment plans are an avenue for owners who can’t currently meet those obligations. While this is imperfect, and it remains to be seen how the recent reforms will play out, it attempts to support people in good faith.
If you want to make a genuine case for something, ditch the alarmist labels and finger-pointing, and state what you think is right – and why.
Incidentally, note the other provisions in the Act that reduce voting power: being the developer or being associated with them. Why? Because these people really can wield ‘plutocratic’ power.
However there’s no provision for taking votes away from lousy neighbours and pains in the neck.
Now that’s an idea worth exploring.