11/06/2019 at 2:44 pm #38013
I recently submitted three Motions for our upcoming AGM hoping to sensibly correct some issues the current committee of rusted-on members see no issue with. I was surprised when the meeting motions and other paper work arrived in the post included a 2 page letter stating the committee advised against voting in favor of all 3 of my motions. Their reasons given were disputable and/or factually incorrect. I feel this has potential to unduly influence owners who respond in advance by postal vote before I can speak to the motions on the day (29 June). I’d be interested in suggestions on if or how I might seek to re-balance this perceived bias. I am in Queensland.
11/06/2019 at 2:55 pm #38016
- This topic was modified 1 week, 6 days ago by Jimmy-T.
The best way to counter this is talk to people one-on-one well before the AGM and explain the purpose of your motions and how they would work. Encourage your neighbours to come to the meeting but be aware that some people are very conflict averse and may not show up if they think there will be anything approaching vigorous debate. Encourage these timid people to appoint you or an ally as their proxy.
I have learned that people often won’t read more than a paragraph or so but will listen to someone talking. Also people often don’t read meeting papers until the day of the meeting. So, you might counter the committee’s written position more effectively than you expect.
Make sure your proposals are consistent with the legislation. Nothing would shoot them down faster than being beyond the powers of a general meeting to decide.11/06/2019 at 4:51 pm #38018
Hi, thanks, points taken. Any thoughts on the value (or potential backfire) of a rebuttal or other advance response ahead of the meeting to at least raise the issue with postal voters who may respond earlier than the meeting and not attend? I thought I may phone around, as I;m doing with some key folk, or write directly to all owners, or seek the Manager to relay my response to all considering it was potentially biased and unfair to have included such in the first instance and they should have known better (The body corp commissioner’s office says the committee must be ‘reasonable’ and tho this is not breaching legislation is bordering problematic? Essentially is there more value in firing now, or better to keep the powder dry for later use?11/06/2019 at 5:56 pm #38023
I think it would not be unreasonable to ask the managing agent to distribute a short paper in support of your motions ahead of the meeting. You are not asking for a change to the now notified agenda. By getting the managing agent to distribute it, you are not going to run into any objections that you might encounter if you asked for the unit roll.
I would carefully stick strictly to explaining the merits of your motions, which would incidentally rebut the committee’s points, and avoid anything that could look personal. Conclude with all your contact full details and invite people to phone, visit or email you if they have any questions or comments. Even if nobody gets in touch, it demonstrates openness and willingness to communicate.