The future governance of YCC #42

By the spring of 2011, the Court had to make a decision about the future of YCC #42.

In late 2010, Andrew Atrens informed the Court That he intended to seek a discharge after completion of the current restoration work at 340 Dixon Road. This work would be completed in the summer of 2011.

The questions Judge Brown posed were:

1.	How much longer should the Administrator remain in place?
2.	If the Administrator is to be discharged at some point, what process should be put in place to transfer the management of YCC #42 back into the hands of an elected board of directors?

At the end of 2010, Justice Wilton­ Siegel’s provided a “road map” for the future of YCC #42. They included:

The transfer of the governance of the corporation to the board of directors must await completion of the current renovation work. It also requires an orderly transition which, in turn, requires an acceptable business plan for the corporation given its present challenges.

In this regard, several factors must be taken into consideration.

First	It is unclear whether a majority of the owners would be prepared to have governance returned to the board of directors or would prefer the appointment of another administrator.
Second	If the preference of the majority of the owners is to return governance to the board of directors of the corporation, it would appear to be necessary to conduct an election to establish that the directors seeking such an order have the confidence of the owners.
Third	If the preference of the majority of the owners is to return governance to the board of directors, it will be necessary for the board of directors to propose a business plan for the corporation based on a current comprehensive Reserve Fund.

Justice Brown elaborated further in the spring of 2011:

1.	The Administrator prepared a report to the Court setting out his views on governance and operational issues and proposing a course of action;
2.	Unit owners should have the opportunity to file in Court written comments on the Administrator’s report, specifically on the Administrator’s proposed course of action;
3.	A fair process should be put in place to find out whether a majority of the unit owners would prefer to have the court appoint another administrator or would prefer to see the governance of YCC #42 transferred into the hands of an elected board of directors;
4.	If a majority of the owners would like to see elections for a new board of directors, then a fair process should be put in place to hold such elections;
5.	Once a new board of directors is elected, it must prepare a financial and operating plan which demonstrates to the Court that governance of YCC #42 can be returned to the board of directors.

Only when the Court is satisfied that governance should be transferred to the board of directors will the mandate of the Administrator come to an end.


top  contents  chapter  previous  next