Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
I assume these are clotheslines on common property for general use? If so, and the EC won’t respond to your suggestion put in writing, I suggest 1) talk directly to someone on the EC in person, face to face. Perhaps they are are snowed under with other things? Offer to organise a tradesperson to move one to be higher. Point out the long term benefit of having them at different heights so that one better suits tall people and the other better suits short people. 2) If that gets you nowhere put it to the next general meeting. A decision of a general meeting overrides the decisions of the EC and they have to act on the GM decisions.
On the question of EC numbers the ACT Act has 7 as the maximum unless a special resolution is passed to have more. Perhaps the NSW Act has a similar provision?
Usually we don’t have more nomination than 7 and don’t decide on a particular size. Instead we try to get 1 or 2 nominations from each of 5 areas of the site and pass one resolution to appoint them all. Only once we had a vote on each nomination because one owner had made a point of writing on his proxy form to direct his proxy to vote against me and one other member of the outgoing EC. We were reelected with only 2 or 3 against but someone else failed to get 50% support, the only time someone who wanted to be on the EC did not get to be on it. There were certain ironies that AGM!
@dech said:
…2. The square metre or less of land in which the tree trunk resides could be made common property which of course would be inaccessible to other owners except by trespassing on the surrounding land…I’m not sure that would work. I expect the NSW Act has something about access or opportunity for owners to use and enjoy the common property. What if an owner wants to climb the tree?
This brings to mind a former neighbour. On various occasions we were on the EC together and on other occasions I had reason to knock on the doors of all the neighbours over some issue or other. This particular rather proper lady was always in pyjamas and dressing gown whenever I visited and always apologised as if I had caught her in a very unusual occurrence. It really didn’t bother me in the slightest!
Another very elderly neighbour admonished me for discretely looking aside rather than waving in a friendly fashion when passing her unit and seeing her sitting up in bed.
If your EC wanted to make anything of your snuggly neck-to-ankle jim-jams I would expect them to be laughed out of court. Tell them to grow up!
More seriously, I think by-laws generally only have any validity if consistent the strata laws and other higher laws. If you were dressed in a manner that would not be inconsistent with general public decency laws I doubt the by-law could be applied, not that I’m a lawyer. Indeed, I can’t see the point in it. If you breach a general law use that, if you don’t breach the law then I don’t think the by-law is much use.
@scotlandx said:
No, it applies to all motions and I am surprised that ACT legislation allows for certain types to be moved without notice, which is effectively what that is. That cuts across the general law of meetings. How can someone put in a directed proxy if they don’t have notice of a motion/resolution?There are safeguards if a motion is passed by a ‘reduced quorum’, that is fewer than 50% of owners actually present at the meeting. A directed proxy is not possible on such a motion so the only votes are those of people present at the meeting. A discretionary proxy vote is possible only if the form used allows voting on any motion.
Can you just propose a motion from the floor on the night in NSW? In the ACT only higher classes of motions require certain periods of written notice.
So, has a resolution been passed to make it OC responsibility? If so, I would very quickly check if NSW has a provision like the ACT provisions for a ‘reduced quorum’ meeting. Here if the meeting was actually attended by fewer than 50% of owners (it sounds like your was) you can overturn the decision by a petition of 50% of owners within 28 days of the meeting. If it was discussed but not yet voted on, I would ask your chairman why he supported the proposal and put a motion on notice for the next general meeting to maintain the status quo with reasons given.
You know approximately when the AGM will be held. The EC might not be being secretive, they might be still working out who of the EC has which days available, when the managing agent can attend as well and when the usual venue can be booked. That aside, why not just write to the EC with your motion to be placed on the agenda of the next general meeting, whenever that may be? Copy your letter to the managing agent and anyone else you care to if you are concerned that they might ignore it.
If your proposal requires background information or detailed explanation you could provide a page or two to be mailed out with the meeting notice whenever that occurs, presumably in the next few weeks if you are getting close to the AGM anniversary. The EC cannot refuse to list any motion that you put. Having said that, if the EC does not support your proposal they could put a motion of their own in opposition to yours or include their own statement about why your proposal should not be supported. That would not be inappropriate since a function of the EC is to develop strategic matters for the OC. Once it is on the agenda your proposal can be debated and it can’t be left off the agenda.
It sounds like you did everything correctly and should get on with the work.
While it would not necessarily be out of the question, it could just about be. The roof of a block of flats is generally common property. As such all owners have an interest in it. For you do an extension into this area you would need to be granted a special privilege over the common property (an unopposed resolution in the ACT, a special resolution in NSW, I think). There would need to be by laws created to make you responsible for maintenance and so on. Both you and the owners corporation would want good legal advice.
Alternatively, the scheme could be resurveyed with the area made part of your unit area and unit entitlements reassigned. This is also a major undertaking requiring a high level of support from owners.
This was an issue for a while where I am. A particular owner got particularly upset about for sale signs at the entrance to the development. The EC at the time found that Real Estate Agents have a code of conduct about where they place them and how long they are left after a sale. Obviously they like to see ‘SOLD’ across their signs for as long as possible advertising how well they are doing at selling. It would be worth finding out the details of that code and insisting on compliance with that at the least.
I would not assume all owners are offended by the signs. Any owner who is selling will suddenly find themselves wanting the most prominent advertising possible and with a change of circumstances that could be any of us!
Perhaps find someone other than the managing agent to chair? In the ACT the chair has to be an owner and by default the chair of the EC unless that person declines or doesn’t show up. A manager might be good at all sorts of things without being a good meeting chair so perhaps it’s time to try someone else for that task?
With the caveat that I am in the ACT, I would expect that an ordinary resolution is >50%, not just 50%, so in your case that would be 5 of 8 if all take part in the meeting, 4 of 6 or 7 if 1 or 2 don’t take part (in person or by proxy), 3 out of 4 if half your members don’t take part and so on.
As all your units have the same value a poll vote where votes are weighted by unit entitlements would make no difference.
A recent discussion on ‘voting on a special resolution’ might be relevant here.
Again with the caveat that I am not in NSW, I think a special resolution (which you need for a by-law) is also based on whoever takes part. If a few members do not show up or put in a proxy/absentee vote then the vote would be based on 75% of the 5, 6 or 7 members who do take part.
I assume that (like the ACT) a bylaw in NSW is subordinate to the Strata Act and other legislation. So you could only ban smoking (or anything else) if there is not some other law preventing you from banning it. I would think you would not have a problem banning it on the common property but within units might be harder to enforce or defend. I would be pointing out to owners who might not feel strongly about the issue that their unit value is likely to be greater rather than less if they could sell their property as part of a non-smoking building.
@JimmyT said:
It’s legal – just – but is it right? I don’t think so. Firstly, the minutes of the AGM can’t be approved or otherwise until the next General Meeting, so it kind of makes sense that they aren’t sent out until just before … but then how are to people who weren’t at the meeting to know what was decided?In the ACT we have to mail out general meeting minutes within 7 days I think, at least in the case of a reduced quorum meeting (which we almost always have since we get <50% attendence, though >50% take part once proxies are counted). The minutes are formally accepted at the next general meeting but the EC can act on the decisions without having to wait a year, particularly important in the case of the budget for the coming year! Minutes get mailed out again with the next AGM minutes.
But this building manager is only the employee of the Owners, not the other way round and he has to do what they collectively want. So this is what you do, at your next EC meeting (you do have EC meetings, don’t you?) you agree that in future a summary of all General Meeting and EC meeting decisions will be sent out to all owners within two weeks of the meeting. In fact the minutes of the EC meetings (not general meetings) have to be sent out within 14 days by law.
Then you order the manager that the next AGM will be held in the evening at a time that suits the majority of owners rather than them.
If he refuses, sack him. The tail must not wag the dog.
Again, in the ACT, and perhaps in NSW-worth checking-it is the EC who would normally call a meeting, approve the meeting papers and be responsible to ensure proper notice is given etc. It might be the strata manager who copies the papers and stuffs envelopes in practice but the EC should be the ones who are directing the notice to go out with its various particulars by a certain date. Surely the EC can be taken to task if the meeting is not at a convenient time. Certainly our EC was told by those who were not impressed when we made the evening start time earlier by one hour. Certain owners were also very willing to let us know their displeasure when we had the meeting in the local school library one time rather than a local club’s meeting room. So, don’t be shy when you have a reasonable complaint. I’m sure the people with unreasonable complaints are not so shy!
Also, as a matter of general principle, the amendment should not be something that makes a substantial difference to the notified motion that some would have voted on by absentee vote or directed proxy. EG. at a recent meeting our minutes recorded: “The chair declared that the amendments could be considered even though they were not notified because each was ‘within the scope of the original motion and does not alter its nature’ (Joske).” Joske is a book on meeting procedures and our OC had resolved years ago to use it as a meeting guide.