Skip to content

Narrow screen resolution Wide screen resolution Auto adjust screen size Increase font size Decrease font size Default font size default color brick color green color
CAFCOR Forum
_GEN_GOTOBOTTOM Post Reply
TOPIC:
#448
Jony ()
Under Other business 2007/07/27 23:22  
In agenda,there is a item called "Other Business".Can we talk about anything under "other business" topic ? can we pass any motion under "Other business" ?
is there any limits ?
  The administrator has disabled public write access.
#452
Yvon ()
User Offline
Re:Under Other business 2007/07/28 02:58  
Hello Jony,

I'm not certain whether your question refers to Board or Owners's meetings. Perhaps you should retitle this category "New Business". In any event, this may be of some assistance to you.

Board Meetings:

Subsection 45(3) of the Condominium Act, 1998 states;

Content of notice-The notice shall state the time and place of the meeting and the general nature of the business to be discussed at the meeting.

In my opinion, no vote should be held unless the subject matter was disclosed in the Notice of the meeting. However, I believe that the Board may discuss any matter relevant to the affairs and business of the Corporation, raised by a Director, whether or not it was disclosed in the Notice. Having said that, I do not believe that Directors can be made to vote on matters not disclosed in the Notice unless all Directors consent to the vote.

Owners' Meetings:

Subsection 45(1) of the Condominium Act, 1998 states;

Meetings-Subject to the other requirements of this Act, anything that this Act requires to be approved by a vote of any of the owners shall be approved only at a meeting of owners duly called for that purpose.

Subsection 45(3) of the Act states;

Matters for annual general meeting-At an annual general meeting, an owner may raise for discussion any matter relevant to the affairs and business of the corporation.

Subsection 45(4) of the Act states;

Other meetings-The board may at any time call a meeting of owners for the transaction of any business, and the notice of the meeting shall specify the nature of the business.

The Act and case law clearly explain that unit Owners are able to vote only on matters which were first clearly disclosed in the Notice of any Owners meeting. At an AGM however, any unit Owner may bring a discussion on any matter relevant to the affairs and business of the Corporation even if it was not in the Notice of the meeting although no vote can be held.
  The administrator has disabled public write access.
#455
Jony ()
Re:Under Other business 2007/07/28 07:08  
Thanks Yvon.I wish i have your knowledge.
  The administrator has disabled public write access.
#458
argonut ()
Re:Under Other business 2007/07/28 17:00  
Yvon wrote:
Hello Jony,

SNIP ...

At an AGM however, any unit Owner may bring a discussion on any matter relevant to the affairs and business of the Corporation even if it was not in the Notice of the meeting although no vote can be held.


Hello Yvon,

Agreed with all of snipped material.

Just a comment on the last part of the answer to Jony. In my opinion, the fact that owners can raise any matter for discussion, but NOT vote on it, is probably what prevents owners from forcibly indicating its will to the BOD. The matter is raised, arguments for and against are presented, (much time is wasted) but NO CONCLUSION is clearly and definitely established.

My question is : How can owners get BOD to do what it considers right if it can't express that through a majority vote.

argonut
  The administrator has disabled public write access.
#459
wotan ()
User Offline
Re:Under Other business 2007/07/28 17:37  
Currently through three options:

1) Elect Diretors who will actually listen and involve the owners.

2) Requisition a meeting (or requisition a matter -or number of matters - to be added to the Agenda for the AGM.)

3) Petition the Board.

#1 is the easiest route. #2 requires at least 15% of the owners to sign. #3 has no legal strength as the Board could ignore it, but at least it provides some idea for the Board as to whether or not a certain thing should happen.
  The administrator has disabled public write access.
#460
Jony ()
Re:Under Other business 2007/07/29 01:28  
" #2 requires at least 15% of the owners to sign.."

I thought it was 19%..
  The administrator has disabled public write access.
#461
wotan ()
User Offline
Re:Under Other business 2007/07/29 06:14  
  The administrator has disabled public write access.
#462
Yvon ()
User Offline
Re:Under Other business 2007/07/29 07:09  
Hello Argonut,

I agree wholeheartedly with your concerns however this is another area in which unit Owner interests are prejudiced by this current legislation. This very topic provides a further example of the need for reforms to the Condominium Act, 1998.

The courts have ruled on the issue of the need for clear disclosure in the Notice of a Meeting prior to the holding of a vote in both:

Koletar v. Peel Condominium Corporation No. 516 (April 16, 1998), Doc. CU-145525 (Ont. Gen. Div.).

and

McDonough v. York Condominium Corporation No. 41 (April 26, 1990), Gotlib D.C.J. (Ont. Dist. Ct.).
  The administrator has disabled public write access.
#463
Yvon ()
User Offline
Re:Under Other business 2007/07/29 07:15  
Hello Jony,

Subsection 46(1) of the Condominium Act, 1998 states;

Requisition for meeting-A requisition for a meeting of owners may be made by those owners who at the time the board receives the requisition, own at least 15 per cent of the units, are listed in the record maintained by the corporation under subsection 47(2) and are entitled to vote.
  The administrator has disabled public write access.
#464
argonut ()
Re:Under Other business 2007/07/29 16:58  
wotan wrote:
Currently through three options:

1) Elect Diretors who will actually listen and involve the owners.

2) Requisition a meeting (or requisition a matter -or number of matters - to be added to the Agenda for the AGM.)

3) Petition the Board.

#1 is the easiest route. #2 requires at least 15% of the owners to sign. #3 has no legal strength as the Board could ignore it, but at least it provides some idea for the Board as to whether or not a certain thing should happen.


Agreed wotan but easier said then done.

Your #3 is dependent on a successful #1.

We did #2 in reaction to a notice to owners of a change. We requested that a proposed change be placed on the AGM agenda. The PMC organized an owner's meeting 2 weeks prior to the AGM (more bucks in pocket). It was shown that the change was "substantial" required a vote which came to 66 and 2/3 per cent of those "present" plus the proxies in favour. We're now arguing that the result had to be 66 and 2/3 per cent of ALL owners.

As for your #1, we just had an election of 2 directors for 3 years without opposition and 1 for 1 year without opposition. Now how do you get owners to be involved, when they realize that the BOD is mesmerized by the PMC ? Definitely NOT EASY!

argonut
  The administrator has disabled public write access.
#465
Yvon ()
User Offline
Re:Under Other business 2007/07/29 17:39  
Argonut,

I fail to see why you would have to argue with your Board. The Act could not be more clear in this regard. Subsection 97(4) clearly states;

Approval of substantial change-..., the corporation shall not...unless the owners who own at least 66 2/3 per cent of the units of the corporation vote in favour of approving it.

Agronut, please feel free to contact us in regard to this issue. Perhaps CAFCOR can be of assistance to you in this matter. info@cafcor.org or I can provide you with our telephone number.
  The administrator has disabled public write access.
#467
argonut ()
Re:Under Other business 2007/07/29 23:05  
At the suggestion of our PMC they stop reading at s. 97(3), and cook the numbers to arrive at "less then 10 per cent".

A few owners are questioning the arithmetic that is used

We'll be in touch.

argonut
  The administrator has disabled public write access.
#516
Roland ()
User Offline
Re:Under Other business 2007/08/01 09:13  
Bottom Line: If the board and PMC/PM seem to be spending on improvements without the owners involvement then get a new board because it is obvious that the Condo Act is a minimum standard and the board should be communicating with the owners on all improvements otherwise mistrust sets in.
  The administrator has disabled public write access.
_GEN_GOTOTOP Post Reply
contact webmaster