- This topic has 3 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 10 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
Is it usual to name an individual owner who suggested a proposed item on the agenda for an Annual General Meeting?
I suggested two items for our AGM which may be considered controversial by an Executive Committee member or two and possibly our Strata Manager; one about not smoking on Common Property and one about limiting short-term letting.
I don’t mind being know for these concepts – they have been approved in other Stratas – but in the past, I feel our EC and SM have used this as a ‘naming-and-shaming’ type of tactic to marginalise and alienate anyone who disagrees with them, causing bad vibes in our strata community of 32 apartments.
-
Replies
-
I don’t know if they *should* be, but my experience is that they are. I found this out by putting a very controversial item on the agenda of an AGM myself early on in my ownership. What it does do though (at least in my scheme), is allow the person who raised the item to explain it and give further information, which is pretty valuable for those voting on the agenda item.
I’ve requested another item for our next AGM (not so controversial this time), and am looking forward to explaining the reasons for the motion at the meeting (generally the vote goes pretty well in my OC if there’s a clear understanding of the reasons behind the motion).
Motions normally only get considered by a meeting if the motion is proposed by someone and seconded. Seconding tests that at least one other person wants to see the motion put to a vote. If nobody seconds the motion lapses (due to lack of interest).
Motions put on the agenda by the EC are presumably there with the support of the majority of the EC so they don’t need anybody’s name on them. If someone convinces the EC to adopt some proposition as their own and put it to the meeting, then the originator might not be made known.
If someone wants to put some proposition without EC support, then I think they should put their name to it, and I think the EC should not put the motion on the agenda unless the motion is seconded by someone. On the other hand, if the motion has a proposer and seconder then the chair should accept it and put it on the agenda for the meeting. The only exception would be if the motion is for some proposition that a general meeting cannot properly decide. A proposal for the OC to do something that is outside the powers of an OC should be rejected. Also, a proposal that is so poorly worded that it would not be clear what had been decided should also be rejected.
Bottom line: If you have a controversial proposal, I think you should have the courage of your convictions to put the motion. On the other hand, if you can’t find anyone to second the proposal, you should accept that there is little or no support for the proposal and not waste people’s time.
I am not familiar with the ACT law, but for NSW and generally the rules are:
– any owner can request that a motion be included on the agenda – generally you forward that to the strata manager for inclusion on the agenda. Provided you do that within the requisite time it should be included on the agenda.
– it is not up to the EC to decide if a motion should be included on the agenda. I believe that ECs often think that they have a power of veto, but they don’t – the owners collectively do, by way of consideration at the relevant meeting.
– there is no requirement for a motion to be seconded – why should there be? A motion succeeds or fails on its merits.
More generally – a motion may be ultra vires, or poorly worded, or just not possible. That is a matter that can either be raised at the time an owner submits it to the strata manager, or if they insist on proceeding, at the meeting. If the motion is ultra vires or otherwise legally impossible, then it can’t be approved. Even if it is approved it will have no effect. If it is poorly worded or unclear then it can either be amended at the meeting (within limits) or the owners can simply not approve it for that reason.
In terms of putting a name to a proposed motion of course the person should be identified, if it is not coming from the EC. The way we do it is we identify the specific motion as being proposed by the owner of Lot X, and in that way it is distinguished from the standard motions and others that may have been included by the EC,who otherwise stand in the shoes of the OC. That is standard procedure for all types of meetings – if someone wants to put a motion up then surely they want to stand behind it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.