› Flat Chat Strata Forum › Strata Committees › Keeping the stash in the cupboard › Current Page
I am guessing the ‘low status building works’ are multiple, smaller, routine maintenance items rather than a few major urgently needed repairs. If so, why not get some information about their likely cost and put a proposal to amend the admin budget to have an increased maintenance amount to cover these things. Routine minor maintenance works might be needed pretty much continuously so it is appropriate in my view to have an admin fund amount for maintenance. If there is a strong view held that the sinking fund needs to retain a larger contingency amount than you think necessary beyond the identified matters in your sinking fund plan (your have one?) it might be better to argue about that another day. In the meantime, you might not scare the horses so much with a motion to increase the admin fund budget by a smaller amount to do a list of routine maintenance items. A minor amendment to the admin budget, rather than a whole-sale revamp of the sinking fund plan might be easier to sell and harder to object to.
If it is a resolution of a general meeting to authorise spending on those ‘low status items’, then the EC is obliged to act on it.
People can get funny about sinking funds. Some want to accumulate but never spend from it. Then, when it is suggested to spend from the sinking fund on an item they don’t approve of, they get a ridiculously inflated quote to do unnecessary works that they claim are urgent (but are not) which would make the item they don’t like unaffordable. I suggest you take the possibly easier route to getting the ‘low status’ items done. You may be surprised that people grumble and moan but are then happy when they see all the minor bits of maintenance actually getting tidied up. Then they get excited and more supportive of actual improvements, not just maintenance.