New development condo (50-100 unit) I live in recently formed our first board. There were 4 seats to elect / +1 appointed by sponsor. End result was 3 out of 5 board members are directly tied to sponsor (partner/employee/lawyer) and 4th seems to be a broker that knows sponsor well. One of the elected members doesn't even live in building, is an investor only... which I found odd. How unusual is... [more]
New development condo (50-100 unit) I live in recently formed our first board.
There were 4 seats to elect / +1 appointed by sponsor.
End result was 3 out of 5 board members are directly tied to sponsor (partner/employee/lawyer) and 4th seems to be a broker that knows sponsor well. One of the elected members doesn't even live in building, is an investor only... which I found odd.
How unusual is this arrangement? How worrying is it?
My concern was generally managing for marketability/resale-ability of units vs livability/quality of life.
I was worried the sponsor was going to hog the board as the management co gave 2 day notice to people who wanted to run.
They further distributed the list of candidates far too late for anyone to vote by mail/proxy (2 days before vote even though they knew the list for 2 weeks)
Given the attendance of the meeting, and lack of proxy, the sponsor was probably 50% of the votes.
[less]
Response by steve123
over 7 years ago
Posts: 895
Member since: Feb 2009
Apologies for the white space.. no idea how that happened. Let me try again below
New development condo (50-100 unit) I live in recently formed our first board.
There were 4 seats to elect / +1 appointed by sponsor.
End result was 3 out of 5 board members are directly tied to sponsor (partner/employee/lawyer) and 4th seems to be a broker that knows sponsor well. One of the elected members doesn't even live in building, is an investor only... which I found odd.
How unusual is this arrangement? How worrying is it?
My concern was generally managing for marketability/resale-ability of units vs livability/quality of life.
I was worried the sponsor was going to hog the board as the management co gave 2 day notice to people who wanted to run.
They further distributed the list of candidates far too late for anyone to vote by mail/proxy (2 days before vote even though they knew the list for 2 weeks)
Given the attendance of the meeting, and lack of proxy, the sponsor was probably 50% of the votes.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by Squid
over 7 years ago
Posts: 1399
Member since: Sep 2008
Your condo's governing documents should have board election requirements specifically spelled out. Two days' notice of candidates/meeting does not sound like correct procedure for any board.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by 30yrs_RE_20_in_REO
over 7 years ago
Posts: 9877
Member since: Mar 2009
The idea is to worry about such things before the election, make your arguments and get proxies. But it's a lot of work so most people don't bother doing it.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by steve123
over 7 years ago
Posts: 895
Member since: Feb 2009
@30 - Agreed, we were contacting the managing agent every few days to get the list out.. it was always “going out tomorrow” for 2+ weeks.
We also politicked quite a bit with the verbal list we had heard (which conveniently left out all the sponsor affiliated candidates) to get people onboard with our ticket.
Was doubly surprised that a non-resident owner who owns thru an LLC managed to run (and win), but of course he is the sponsors business partner..
Hopefully this is only a hamfisted powergrab and not something more malicious in how the building is run between now and the next election.
I guess it’s good to hear that it was as weird as it seemed at the time.
'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)
Apologies for the white space.. no idea how that happened. Let me try again below
New development condo (50-100 unit) I live in recently formed our first board.
There were 4 seats to elect / +1 appointed by sponsor.
End result was 3 out of 5 board members are directly tied to sponsor (partner/employee/lawyer) and 4th seems to be a broker that knows sponsor well. One of the elected members doesn't even live in building, is an investor only... which I found odd.
How unusual is this arrangement? How worrying is it?
My concern was generally managing for marketability/resale-ability of units vs livability/quality of life.
I was worried the sponsor was going to hog the board as the management co gave 2 day notice to people who wanted to run.
They further distributed the list of candidates far too late for anyone to vote by mail/proxy (2 days before vote even though they knew the list for 2 weeks)
Given the attendance of the meeting, and lack of proxy, the sponsor was probably 50% of the votes.
Your condo's governing documents should have board election requirements specifically spelled out. Two days' notice of candidates/meeting does not sound like correct procedure for any board.
The idea is to worry about such things before the election, make your arguments and get proxies. But it's a lot of work so most people don't bother doing it.
@30 - Agreed, we were contacting the managing agent every few days to get the list out.. it was always “going out tomorrow” for 2+ weeks.
We also politicked quite a bit with the verbal list we had heard (which conveniently left out all the sponsor affiliated candidates) to get people onboard with our ticket.
Was doubly surprised that a non-resident owner who owns thru an LLC managed to run (and win), but of course he is the sponsors business partner..
Hopefully this is only a hamfisted powergrab and not something more malicious in how the building is run between now and the next election.
I guess it’s good to hear that it was as weird as it seemed at the time.