[Queenslandissue]

thank you everyone, the AGM is tomorrow (22nd Jan), let’s hope common sense prevails. Will be back to say what happened. 

[Queenslandissue]

Hi Dave, interesting thought, re tax.  Should it pass I will keep that in mind. Yes all 25 townhouses have the same entitlements, we all pay the same. Thank you.

[Queenslandissue]

Hi PeterC, thanks for your answer.  Regarding the meeting papers, they have already gone out for AGM on 22 Jan, 2015.  I sent an email to all owners raising the subject and the person who the committee is backing (bar one committee member) has answered it by saying how vitally important it is that we have someone to carry out the role.  2 pages of defense. To me, this is conflict of interest and Im going to speak to a lawyer tomorrow.  Also, this will shock you.  The figure of $21,450 has been arrived at by a figure given to the secretary of the BC by Hays.  Hays places professional roles, technical roles, high level roles.  Not someone sitting at home making phone calls to tradesmen and sending emails to owners.  Again, I have to look into this tomorrow as soon as the business world is operating again.  The sec of BC sent us all a ‘job description’ which reads like it is a very complex role, two pages of tripe such as ‘must be an exceptional communicator with the ability to grasp key points’ etc. That type of thing.  The people in the complex who are against it are all utterly horrified, there will be votes against the motion for sure but what we fear is that as there are only 9 owners on-site (and 4 of them are on the committee that want the motion) some of the balance of owners may not even vote, some of them will give their proxy to the committee and some will vote for it, being cajoled into it by the committee saying it is a great thing and ‘only’ costs $15.50 per week per owner.  With rents of $450 and up, that is indeed a small figure but the ramifications are huge. 

[Queenslandissue]

Hi, thank you for your input. Kiwipaul, unfortunately this proposed motion is for her to be a ‘contractor’ so on her nomination ballot where is says payment sought it reads ‘nil’ as she is not seeking compensation to be a committee member, rather as maintenance co-ordinator. Yes you’re so right, it does beggar belief that the owners here seem to be accepting of what is so detrimental to the value of their property.  The committee however has done an excellent propaganda campaign that tells owners it will ‘only’ cost them $15.50 per week and is terribly necessary to have a so called maintenance co-ordinator who knows the complex etc.  I have emailed every single owner, can only hope common sense prevails. 

[Author]

Replies