Committee Elections
Christine Verschoyle
To all committee members.
Ever since the recent A.G.M. I have been aware that a number of unit owners were very unhappy with the way committee nominations were handled.
I have been advised today that this discontent has now come to a head in the form of written proposals, by a significant number of owners to call for an E.G.M., and to move for the removal of the current committee, and call for new nominations and elections.
I have not actually sighted these signed proposals but believe there are enough to carry their motion at an E.G.M. should it be called. As this group is well in excess of 25% of the owners I understand that it is their right to request this action.
I have requested that they hold off pursuing this course of action until I have a chance to discuss the situation with you the committee, which they have agreed to do temporarily.
After taking advice I believe we have the following two options:-
A
We simply accept that they call their E.G.M.and their motion either succeeds or fails. If it succeeds we will then need to call a second E.G.M. to hold the elections. If this E.G.M. goes ahead Aspire’s
open records will show that a group of owners were so unhappy with the election process that they forced the committee into a situation whereby they had to hold new elections, which would not read well to a potential buyer. This process of calling two E.G.M.’s would also mean the committee was impotent for close to two months.
If the motion fails I believe there will still be huge resentment amongst a large group of owners, that really can only be put to rest once and for all by holding new elections.
OR
B
We as committee members can all resign and call for an E.G.M. to hold new elections, citing that we are aware of concerns by a significant number of owners,and that we believe we need to clear the air once and for all. Under these circumstances I believe our open records will read much more favourably.
To summarise I definitely favour option B as it :-
1. Directly and permanently addresses serious concerns amongst owners.
2. From a timing point of view the whole issue would be resolved within approx. 30 days
3. Leaves our open records relatively untainted.
If you agree with option B. I ask that you forward to me your letter of resignation by C.O.B. Friday 31/10/14
I have run these two proposals through with B.C.P. who confirm that we really are faced with a situation whereby we only have the two viable options listed above.
Regards
Richard Verschoyle
Pam Burgess
Hi,
Due process is that members may call an EGM, in accordance with the Act, if they choose. Let due process occur.
Richard, could you please advise who our manager is so that I can send that person the flying minutes, agenda, etc.
Thanks
Pam
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2015.0.5315 / Virus Database: 4189/8441 - Release Date: 10/23/14
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2015.0.5315 / Virus Database: 4189/8441 - Release Date: 10/23/14
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Aspire Body Corporate Committee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to aspire-body-corporate...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to aspire-body-cor...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/aspire-body-corporate-committee.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Christine Verschoyle
Hi Pam
I have requested the name of our nominated contact person at B.C.P.but have been advised that this has not yet been decided and until they sort out a number of issues relating to the change over information handed over by AAA they will not be making a decision in this regard.
Suggest you send any correspondence to :-in...@bcpstrata.com.au
Regards
Richard Verschoyle
Mark D Franzmann
Sent from my iPad
--
Linda Myers
Sent from my iPhone
--
Christine Verschoyle
Hi Mark
I am aware of the main reason, being that two owners were summarily disenfranchised by AAA in the nomination process for this years committee elections.
Myself, because I foolishly put in two nominations and Cameron Macmillan because he was the son-in-law of the owner rather than the son of the owner . A son in law is actually not entitled to be a nominee whereas a son is.
Both my nominations were thrown out , when queried, the AAA response was that even though the nominations were put in approx 21 days prior to finalising the A.G.M. agenda, the error was not discovered until the closing hours of the closing day, and they had no opportunity to contact me, and ask which nomination I wished to withdraw. Apparently a phone call did not occur to them..
In Camerons case, he had been a nominee for a number of years, and without warning his nomination was also summarily thrown out , citing lack of time to advise him of his new situation. Given warning he could have organized a “ power of attorney”, which would have legitimised his position, and which I believe he had in place by the time the A.G.M. was held.
I must confess to being surprised that these anomalies were discovered so close to the closure of the A.G.M. agenda, given that the nominations were sent in approx 21 days ahead of time.
The body corporate regulations do not appear to cover these situations, however AAA taking it upon themselves to deny an owner the right to vote without warning, is I believe ,at the heart of the matter.
I believe there may also be an issue with the timing of the issuing of the agenda and motions.
There may well be other issues that I am not aware of.
Be aware that in order to maintain a degree of neutrality, I am neither a signatory to the call for an E.G.M. nor did I promote the concept.
Regards
Richard Verschoyle
Pam Burgess
Dear Committee
The code of conduct for Body Corporate Committee states that committee members must be familiar with the Body Corporate Management Act (see extract from fact sheet below).
The code of conduct for committee voting members
The Code in Schedule 1A of the BCCM Act applies to each voting member of the committee. The code sets out basic principles and standards expected of each voting member of the committee. The code requires the voting members to:
· have a commitment to acquiring an understanding of the BCCM Act and the code
· act honestly and fairly and with confidentiality
· act in the body corporate’s best interests
· comply with the BCCM Act and the Code
· not cause a nuisance
· disclose a conflict of interest.
The decision not to accept the ineligible nominations was clearly based on the Regulations. There was no issue with the timing of the AGM notice which was sent in accordance with the Regulations.
Our committee certainly could not distribute an EGM notice which cast aspersions on Anne’s professional conduct as I believe this could be considered defamatory. I believe Anne has recently joined the legal profession and I am sure would defend herself vigorously.
You also might like to consider that Richard, Barry, Bob and Cameron may not be able to vote at an EGM on this matter due to their conflict of interest.
I believe it is a matter of urgency for all committee members who have not done so to undertake the online training for Body Corporate Management (see Justice Department Queensland website). So many of the issues which have plagued this Body Corporate stem from a lack of knowledge of the regulations and due process. For example: fighting for years with the caretaker when simply a review would have resolved the issues; changing of minutes; ineligible people serving on the committee; not having a dispute resolution policy in place.
As a committee and as individuals, myself included, we need to take responsibility for these things and work together to provide better processes.
We obviously need to formulate a dispute resolution policy. Then if people have a grievance, they have an opportunity to be heard and to undertake a process to resolve their grievance. Once a dispute resolution process has been undertaken internally and in a case where it is still not resolved, only then will the Justice Department provide further assistance.
If it was possible, that is, no limit to the number of people on a committee, I would personally prefer that all owners or their representatives served on the committee. As it stands, with notice to the Secretary, all owners are able to attend committee meetings. They may not be able to vote but they can be involved in discussions and I am sure that the committee would be happy to reach consensus where possible.
“GoToMeeting” software would provide remote and easy access for all owners to all meetings including general meetings. They simply join the meeting on their phone or computer, they are able to see all participants on the screen and are also able to see the meeting documents.
Regards
Pam
From: aspire-body-cor...@googlegroups.com [mailto:aspire-body-cor...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Christine Verschoyle
Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2014 8:25 AM
To: aspire-body-cor...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: Committee Elections
Hi Mark
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2015.0.5315 / Virus Database: 4189/8441 - Release Date: 10/23/14
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2015.0.5315 / Virus Database: 4189/8447 - Release Date: 10/24/14
Christine Verschoyle
B.C.P. have advised that Michael Wyllie will be our Body Corporate Manager.
Regards
Richard Verschoyle
From: aspire-body-cor...@googlegroups.com [mailto:aspire-body-cor...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Pam Burgess
Sent: Friday, 24 October 2014 6:20 PM
To: aspire-body-cor...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: Committee Elections
Hi,
