I think that probably due to excited commentary by media types (excluding our esteemed administrator) who just listen to or read the headline of a media release, this whole debate is being very much hyped-up!
As I read the proposed Act, where the provisions involving the sale of an entire building comprises a significant proportion, the process of booting-out Aunty Mabel (apologies Jimmy) is hardly straight forward or can in any way be rushed.
What with the need for an Owners Corporation (O/C) to resolve at a General Meeting to even explore the possibilities of selling their entire building to assist themselves and the State Government’s process of “urban renewal”, followed by the election of a Committee to examine possible scenarios, reports back to the O/C at every stage of that examination over a timeframe of up to 2 years, followed by yet another General Meeting to resolve IF the O/C still wants to proceed…. bla bla bla.
Then…. IF the O/C agrees and the original Committee hasn’t been reformed due to Owners’ challenges about self-interest and other matters of dissent, it has to obtain properly executed documents of support from 75% of Owners (which seems to be the only component of this convoluted process that is reported upon in the media), and if there’s insufficient support at the end of 12 months, then the whole process comes to an abrupt end.
On the other hand, if Owners aren’t totally put-off within that 12 month period, and at least 75% do offer support, then there’s yet another General Meeting, where a special resolution (≥75% in favour by unit entitlement) needs to be passed in order for the agreement to be this time taken to the NSW Land & Environment Court, where any dissenters can again put their case before a final decision is made that could still, even at this late stage, go either way!
So frankly, even though it’s early days and as I haven’t read every word of the proposed Act/s, right now I can’t conceive of any situation where Aunty Mabel could be forced out of her Unit if she genuinely objects. I must say though, that in addition to the unit entitlement “bias” that is incorporated, I think that one favouring votes by Resident Owners over Absentee/Investor Owners would have been worthwhile.