Urban Spaceman said:
'gslatts' and Jimmy, there are nine EC members; bar emergencies, surely doing things properly with a legitimate quorum at a properly convened but relaxed and informal EC meeting would solve the problem in a better way.
There aren't always nine EC members and even when there are, they're not always active. Sometimes there are small ECs running big buildings and vice versa – committees of nine in buildings with only a dozen units.
Executive Committee business being conducted by email and decisions being made, including some very important ones probably, mean nothing will be on file with the Strata Manager.
The ECs I know who communicate by email include the strata manager in the round robin – and if they don't they should.
Decisions aren't truly made until they are ratified at an EC meeting or an AGM. Any EC that makes major decision, especially involving spending large sums of money, without holding an open EC meeting is asking for trouble. However, a minor decision – like, say, paying a tradesman to fix a door closure, shouldn't have to wait weeks for an open EC meeting.
It's all very well to have the best intentions of ratifying decisions at meetings but in practise I bet that would seldom happens. And doing this retrospectively is probably wrong.
All EC decisions have an element of retrospection about them since the EC is subject to the will of the Owners Corporation which usually meets only once a year. In a large building a monthly meeting to ratify minor decisions and debate major ones is a good compromise. That way you don't spend all meeting explaining to someone who doesn't understand, for instance, that the aforementioned door closure is common property a an essial part of your fire safety measures.
Don't forget that the AGM can suggest who gets to read the ECs emails and how often meetings should be held. There are safeguards and at least there is a digital paper trail in email meetings which has to be an improvement of the rumour and gossip methods of days gone by.