Gerry Hyman has another article for the Toronto Star.
I want to discuss one of the questions raised:
QUESTION: Some of the owners in our condominium want to remove the director who serves as the board president. If we cannot get the owners of at least 50 per cent of the units to vote for removal, must we wait until the director’s term is up in order to replace him?
ANSWER: If you can’t get sufficient votes to remove the director, he will remain in office until his term is finished. He may then decide to stand for re-election, in which case he could be defeated by another candidate for the available position.
This is where the recent changes to the Condominium Act still fails to protect the interests of the owners. In most condominiums there is a core group of owners who are actively involved in the operation of the condominium as well as a large number of owners who are either not involved at all or only occasionally involved. However, the Condominium Act allows a director to be elected by a small number of owners (only 25% of the owners – one in four – are required to attend a meeting to meet quorum.) Yet, to remove a director, it takes a majority of all owners to approve the removal. How is this fair?
If the Province wants to improve condominiums then it needs to empower owners to be able to take back control just as easily. Allow a 2/3 majority of votes cast to remove a director. By having a 2/3 vote it means that the owners are sure they want to remove a director, but by making it based on the owners who actually voted it means that the owners who are actually involved to make the decision.
Currently, any owner who decides not to attend a meeting where a vote to remove a director is taking place is effectively voting against removing the director. How is that fair? Not voting should not have an effect on the outcome of the meeting!
We need the Condominium Act to be further amended to put the power back in the hands of the owners!
Pingback: Board Minutes Should be Vetted | Edward Brain's Blog