It’s not on the agenda
In April 2014, there was an unusual AGM held at a condo in the west end
of Toronto. There were 45 owners in attendance and 150 represented by
proxy. There were no approval of previous minutes because there were no
minutes from previous AGMs. The owners were told that the previous
company had taken all the corporation's records including the AGM
Seems strange that a property management company would take the corporation's AGM minutes.
There were three interesting items of business.
The first was a motion to pass By-law #5 that was to amend By-law #4 by
adding further qualifications to serve on the board of directors. This
by-law passed with 153 votes in favour and eight against.
The auditor stated that the audited financial statements was not a fair
representation of the corporation's financial position as of August
2013 because the previous property management company took most of the
financial records and therefore his report was not fully intact for a
portion of 2012 and 2013.
This makes it sound that the previous property management company were
villains except that at the May 2015 AGM, it was disclosed by a couple
of owners that the "missing financial records" were not missing at all
but were in fact stored in five boxes in a room in the condo
Removal of a
The chair, who was the corporation's lawyer, asked for and got a motion
on the floor to dispense with hearing speeches regarding the removal of
director. The motion was rejected. Then the director was allowed to
make a brief speech on why he should remain on the board.
Then a few owners gave their two cents and the Chair gave his
opinion—that appears to me—to be biased against the director.
The director was removed by a vote of 146 to 9, very close to the vote
that passed By-law #5.
Not on the agenda
Near the end of the meeting, an owner asked why there wasn't an
election for directors at this AGM. There were two open positions. The
chair replied that holding elections was not on the agenda. A very peculiar
don't you think?
There were two open positions on the board for expired terms, one
director resigned and one director was just
removed and elections for replacements was not on the agenda? I would
think that this is a violation of the Condo Act as well as a blatant
ploy for the sitting directors to remain in full control.
The Chair stated that the
corporation's records were missing so they could not determine when the
directors' terms expired so the two remained on the board and a quorum was maintained.