The Council That Kept Meeting in the Hallway
Riverside Place is a 120-unit strata in Surrey with a five-member council. Over eight months, the president has conducted most decision-making by group text among three council members, then recorded the outcomes as "council resolutions" in the minutes of quarterly meetings that the other two members did not attend. Owners have twice requested copies of the text threads. The strata manager has been told by the president that "council business is not owner business" and that minutes need only record motions carried. A bylaw amendment passed last year requires council to give seven days' notice of council meetings to all council members. A owner has now requisitioned a special general meeting (SGM) signed by 24 owners, and the president has not acted on it. The manager must decide what to do and what to advise.
1. Evaluate the lawfulness of the text-message decision-making and the minutes practice. What must the manager do?
Read the worked answer
Text-message decisions are not valid council decisions. Council may only exercise its powers at a properly convened council meeting at which a quorum is present, or as the bylaws otherwise permit. A group text among three members is not a meeting: no notice was given under the bylaw (seven days to all council members), no quorum was formally established, and the two excluded members were deprived of participation. Resolutions purportedly made this way are vulnerable and should be regularized at a properly noticed meeting.
Minutes. The president's view is wrong. Minutes are part of the strata corporation's records and must be available to owners for inspection and copying on request, subject to the Act's limits (e.g., matters involving individual owners' personal information may be redacted, and certain records like litigation advice may be withheld). "Council business is not owner business" is not a lawful basis for refusal.
Manager's obligations. The manager should: (1) decline to record text decisions as resolutions and insist on a noticed meeting; (2) advise council in writing that the text practice and the minutes policy breach the Act and the bylaw; (3) ensure the SGM requisition is placed before council and, if council does not call the meeting within the statutory period, advise that the requisitioning owners may call it themselves at the strata's expense; (4) document all advice given. If council persists, the manager must consider whether continued compliance with the president's direction would breach the manager's own regulatory obligations.
2. The president directs the manager to ignore the SGM requisition because "24 owners is not enough for 120 units." Is the president right? What is the manager's response?
Read the worked answer
The president's arithmetic is the wrong test. The threshold for an owner requisition is a percentage of owners (or a specified number under the Act/bylaws), not a percentage of unit entitlement, and it is not measured against the number of units in the way the president assumes. In any event, the manager should verify the actual statutory threshold and the signatures rather than accept the president's assertion.
If the requisition is valid, council must call the SGM within the time the Act allows; if council fails, the requisitioning owners may call it and recover the cost from the strata. Refusing to act exposes the strata and individual council members to challenge and to cost consequences.
Manager's response. Write to council: state the verified number of valid signatures, the applicable threshold, and the deadline. Recommend a council meeting within days to set the SGM date, place and agenda. If the president continues to refuse, the manager should not obstruct the owners - provide the requisitioning owners with the information they are entitled to and record the refusal in writing. The manager's duty runs to the strata corporation, not to the president personally.