- This topic has 2 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 3 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
The new model bylaws seem pretty reasonable, and potentially preferable to our schemes bylaws based on the pre-1996 model bylaws.
If we wished to change our standard bylaws to the new model bylaws, is it similar to adding a new special bylaw, in that we just need an appropriate motion and vote (75% to pass) at a properly convened meeting of the OC?
Considering we already have a special bylaw, and others are being considered, can you just edit the base, leaving the special bylaws as is?
Sorry if these seem like simple questions, just want to ensure we get this right if there is a move to change.
-
Replies
-
You are on the right track. Change the by-laws you want to update and leave the other special resolutions or scheme-specific by-laws in place.
New or amended by-laws need to be approved by 75 percent of those voting at a general meeting.
We are also all obliged to review our by-laws by December 1st next year.
A sensible approach would be to look at your existing by-laws and see if the model by-laws are worded better or reflect the wishes of the community more closely.
Then, well in advance, send out an advisory to your owners, explaining the process, showing the proposed changes and inviting their comment.
There will be contentious issues, such as pets, smoking and occupancy limits so be prepared for a lively discussion (if you are lucky), then present your best-guess by-laws at your next AGM or a special general meeting called for that purpose.
Bear in mind that by-laws can’t supersede superior laws (such as local council zoning) and you can’t change by-laws that, for instance, give exclusive use to an owner without that ownewr’s consent.
The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers.
Our OC went through a multi-stage process of reviewing our ‘rules’, ACT-speak for ‘by-laws’. We had a mix of default and our own customised rules that were adopted at our first general meeting in 1976. None had changed or been added since.
We first proposed a set of amendments that we thought would be utterly uncontroversial. These were mainly just directly substituting the current default rules for the nearly equivalent old default rules and making some other amendments that merely modernised the language to be consistent with the current Act. A few rules were rescinded because they were unambiguously out of date. For example, some were redundant because their provisions had become part of the body of the Act so the rule would have no effect anyway since the provision in the Act took precedence. Others referred to activities or bodies that only existed during the development and construction phase and were no longer relevant.
With owners accustomed to the process, we proposed another set of changes that addressed matters that were not previously covered but had occasionally been uncertain. These sought to document and put beyond doubt various matters that had been established practice.
Then we just did the animal keeping rule. At earlier stages we foreshadowed that this one would be done later since there was more diversity of opinion on this matter. After quite a few rounds of drafts and comments etc. this one passed, though with a lower level of support than the earlier easier matters.
We were glad we had done this in stages because the whole lot might have been derailed if we had tried to do it all at once.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.