If the doors need to be replaced due to age, then yes the Board should be changed (i.e. this is being done for a mechanical reason as the doors may begin to breakdown if not replaced.) However, as for the colour of the garage doors, the Board should be required to put this to a vote of the owners. Cosmetic work should always be done with the input of the owners, not on the Board’s own choice. It is a shame that the recent changes to the Condominium do not require cosmetic work to be put to a vote of the owners as this Board has demonstrated that it is following the word of the law, but not the spirit of the law.
QUESTION: During our annual general meeting, can an owner make a motion to dismiss the board?
ANSWER: No. The Condominium Act provides that at a meeting of owners, no vote shall be taken on any matter other than routine procedure unless that matter was clearly disclosed in the notice of the meeting.
Under the recent to the changes to the Condominium Act, the owners can request items to be added to the Agenda for the AGM, but there is no requirement, unless a requisition is received, to add any item to the Agenda if the Board chooses not to do so. Plus, as the Board can still hold a large number of proxies, even a majority of units represented at the meeting, even if the owners get the item added to the Agenda there is a good chance that the Board can simply vote down the item with their proxies.
The Act needs to be amended to limit proxies to no more than two per person (or better still the people from a single unit can only hold two proxies combined, so a couple cannot hold four proxies between themselves). This limits the Board’s opportunity to squash the will of the owners.
Plus, to remove a director from the Board requires a majority of all owners to agree. Why should a few owners be able to elect a director, but so many to remove the same director? Election of directors should be done by a majority of votes cast (like other motions) instead of by plurality (i.e. first-past-the-post), and the removal requirement should be reduced to either a majority vote of those present at the meeting, or a 2/3 vote of votes cast. This means that sufficient owners agree, but owners who do not attend the meeting do not have any bearing over the final results.
I also believe that motions made at the meeting should be valid. For one, if an owner chooses not to attend the meeting, who’s fault is it that the owner wasn’t at the meeting? It is not the fault of those who took the time to attend. Plus, if the By-laws are amended to dictate when the meeting is held (i.e. the second Monday in June), then everyone knows when the meeting is going to be held for any time into the future (i.e. it will always be the second Monday in June unless the By-law is changed.)
The Condominium Act needs to be amended to allow for the owners, not the Board, to make the final decisions on how their condominium, and their community, is run. That’s not only the right thing to do, it’s also the democratic thing to do.
Edward Brain's Blog 