We had our board elections lately. Our manager was repeatedly soliciting owners, sending them emails, asking them to send him their proxies. The message was not “in case you did not submit your proxy yet” but simply urging owners to send him their proxies, specifically telling owners who were asking, to do so EVEN IF THEY ALREADY SUBMITTED ONE earlier to someone else "in case the original proxy-holder does not show up to the meeting"... Towards the end of the meeting, when the ballots were counted, the manager suddenly told owners the board decided to VOID ALL DOUBLE-PROXIES ALTOGETHER... So first double proxies were OK, and even encouraged, then they were deemed void and were not counted.
What was behind this change of heart is a bit complex to explain, but is this at all acceptable?
Only guessing but this sounds like it was a clumsy way to make sure that as many owners as possible voted. Actually it's not arbitrary so long as one of the two proxies was used. However, the real question is which of them. The general rules are that if you show up and vote in person, the proxy can't be used and if you give a second proxy that one controls. But if the result is that the WAY the proxy was to be voted changed from the first to second proxy, and people were not made aware of that, then the entire election may be void. Ultimately it will depend on whether people are comfortable with the people elected to the board or whether any one or more want to put a fight up. Also, it may depend on whether there is a specific by-law governing this issue, and/or whether the association is a corporation or not as there could be a conflict between the bylaws and the not-for-profit corporation act.
Years licensed, work experience, educationLegal community recognition
Peer endorsements, associations, awardsLegal thought leadership
Publications, speaking engagementsDiscipline