› Flat Chat Strata Forum › Proxies – blind faith or good sense? › Current Page
- This topic has 4 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 4 months ago by .
-
CreatorTopic
-
31/10/2011 at 6:14 pm #7751
Voting
There seems to be an unclear definition of voting.
I assumed when referring to Owners Corporation it did just that, it seems to be assumed to refer to owners present at a meeting.
Hence the special resolution is passed based on attendees to the meeting.
I thought this was wrong and there are special ways to handle situations where there is less than required owners present.
-
CreatorTopic
-
AuthorReplies
-
02/11/2011 at 4:51 pm #14095
I'm not sure what the point of this posting is but I'll take a stab at it:
leif said:
Voting
There seems to be an unclear definition of voting. I assumed when referring to Owners Corporation it did just that.
OK, the Owners Corporation is all the owners, whether they want to be members or not. A general meeting is when all the owners are given the opportunity to meet, discuss and vote on issues. This is different from the Executive Committee and their meetings.
It seems to be assumed to refer to owners present at a meeting.
General Meeting votes are based on the number of people at the meeting and entitled to vote (including proxies), not on the number of owners in the building. If a general meeting has been properly notified and the agenda circulated and large numbers of people don't turn up and can't be bothered to give anyone a proxy, then that's too bad.
Hence the special resolution is passed based on attendees to the meeting.
Correct, the only time the raw numbers turning up at a meeting makes a difference is if the meeting doesn't have a quorum. A quorum is 25 percent of the owners (or proxies) entitled to vote or owners and proxies representing 25 percent of the unit entitlements of the building and entitled to vote.
I thought this was wrong and there are special ways to handle situations where there is less than required owners present.
Well, proxy votes on the correct forms are counted as attendees. However, if a meeting is inquorate half an hour after it's called to order then it is suspended for at least seven days,. If the resumed meeting is then inqurate after a half hour, those in attendance are deemed to be a quorum.
This system works, in the main. You can't have buildings run on the whim of people who can't be bothered to attend meetings or appoint proxies.
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.
03/11/2011 at 1:26 am #14097Resolution: A decision of the meeting (after taking a vote) and 25% or more owners present
Special Resolution: No more than 25% of votes are cast against and 25% or more owners present
Unanimous Resolution: No vote is against, and 25% or more owners present
As a normal AGM struggles to get the quorum 25% of owners is the Special Resolution then possible to be No more than 25% of 25% of owners vote against.
Or in plain English
If a quorum is at the meeting (25% of owners), it takes 50% precent
of the attendees (that is equal to 12.5% of the owners) to pass a special
resolution provided less than 25% of the attendees (that is equal to 6.5% of the owners) do vote againstAnd if based on majority of votes, and there are owners abstaining from voting the actual percentage of owners voting in favour could be even smaller.
This would then comply with the “definitions” of the ACT
And in the ACT
27 How is strata managing agent appointed
…. By a resolution at a meeting.
47 Amendment or repeal of by laws
An owner’s corporation, in accordance with a special resolution (does not refer to a meeting)
62 What are the duties of an owner’s corporation?
(3) This clause does not apply to a particular item of property
if the owner’s corporation determines by special resolution that: (does not
refer to a meeting)The question is does it mean owners corporation or a quorum of owners corporation members when in some instances it says meeting and in other it does not.
I assumed it meant as printed majority of all owners, not as seems to be the case the majority at a meeting with quorum. A possible change from 50% of owners to possible 12.5% or even less if there is owner present that abstains from voting.
I can recall but not find the source. When the required number cannot be achieved in a meeting and no negative vote is casted a second meeting can be called and only a majority at the meeting is required.
Hence my understanding owner’s corporation means Owners Corporation and not a quorum of owners unless specifically defined as in case one.
Thanks Jimmy for your first reply
03/11/2011 at 3:24 pm #14098leif said:
Resolution: A decision of the meeting (after taking a vote) and 25% or more owners present
Special Resolution: No more than 25% of votes are cast against and 25% or more owners present
Unanimous Resolution: No vote is against, and 25% or more owners present
As a normal AGM struggles to get the quorum 25% of owners ………
From the Strata Schemes Managment Act Schedule 2 clause 12 regarding quorums:
(2) There is a quorum for considering and voting on such a motion or at such an election only if:
(a) at least one-quarter of the number of persons entitled to vote on the motion or at the election is present, either personally or by duly appointed proxy, or
(b) at least one-quarter of the aggregate unit entitlement of the strata scheme is represented by the persons who are present and entitled to vote on the motion or at the election, either personally or by duly appointed proxy.
Notice the quorum of part (a) is one quarter of those entitled to vote. Being entitled to vote means being financial even though the Act says that a non financial persons vote does not count at clause 10 sub clause 8. It does not say the owners is no longer entitled to vote, it just says the vote is not to be counted. The interpretation of sub clause 8 has consequences for submitting motions and other parts of the Act that refer to people entitled to vote but that is another issue.
(8) Voting rights may not be exercised if contributions not paid
A vote at a general meeting (other than a vote on a motion requiring a unanimous resolution) by an owner of a lot or a person with a priority vote in respect of the lot does not count unless payment has been made before the meeting of all contributions levied on the owner, and any other amounts recoverable from the owner, in relation to the lot that are owing at the date of the notice for the meeting.So the 25% of owners present is 25% of owners who are financial being present. Say you have a 100 unit SP and 20 people are not financial. The quorum is not 25 people it is 20 due to the unfinancial status of some owners.
Just remember it is 25% of those eligible to vote and to be eligible to vote apparently means being financial (unless it is a unanimous resolution that is being determined).03/11/2011 at 8:46 pm #14100It's a fair point but I think it's really quite simple – clause 8 is headlined “Voting rights may not be exercised if contributions not paid.”
It then goes on to say “A vote at a general meeting … does not count unless payment has been made…”
That covers all the bases for my money. So voting rights 'may not be exercised' AND the vote 'does not count' if you are unfinancial. I'd go to the barricades to say that people who turn up at general meetings who are unfinancial don't count towards the quorum or any vote for or against, (except for issues that require a unanimous vote which are spelled out in the Act).
It's quite clear that the intention of the Act is to exclude people who are not financial from taking part in meetings. Let's not muddy the water any more than it already is by splitting hairs over wording.
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.
-
AuthorReplies
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
› Flat Chat Strata Forum › Proxies – blind faith or good sense? › Current Page