Proxy votes in Mandarin Garden

We wish to point out contradictions in Mr Tan Kok Khoon’s letter, ‘Mandarin Gardens en-bloc sale - committee not involved in AGM” (May 9). 
 
According to Mr Tan, the Mandarin Gardens Collective Sales Committee (CSC) ‘was not involved in the proceedings of the annual general meeting on April 272, but the facts speak otherwise. 
 
Official records show that 200 owners attended the AGM, of whom 93 attended in person and 107 attended by proxy. Of the proxies, 69 were held by two CSC members, one of whom was Mr Tan himself who held 55 proxies. 
 
Yet, Mr Tan says in his letter: ‘We certainly did not organise any collection of proxies’, suggesting this large concentration of proxies in the hands of two CSC members came by without organisation and effort, which is hard to believe. 
 
Mr Tan also said in his letter: ‘One of our (CSC) members present at the AGM declared that none of us would stand for election to the council.’ In fact, a resolution to prevent CSC members from being management council members and vice versa, was soundly defeated by 67 per cent of the votes. Clearly, the CSC did not approve of this resolution and used its proxies to vote against it. 
 
Finally, two CSC members tabled a resolution to bar the management council from spending more than $50,000 on urgent matters. This controversial resolution was passed by a 61 per cent majority, obviously with the help of proxy votes held by CSC members. 
 
It is evident to us who attended the AGM, the longest ever recorded at Mandarin Gardens, that CSC members influenced the proceedings and determined the outcome of the AGM. 
 
K. Kuladeva, Dennis Butler and Jeannette Aruldoss (Ms)

Committee not involved in AGM

PLEASE refer to Monday’s article, ‘En-bloc uproar at Bayshore Park, Mandarin Gardens’ by Ms Jessica Cheam, and the letter by Mr Augustine Cheah, ‘En-bloc system needs relook, as Bayshore shows’. 
 
The Mandarin Gardens collective sale committee would like to clarify that it was not involved in the proceedings of the annual general meeting on April 27. 
 
However, we know of members who attended as legal owners or subsidiary proprietors. One of our members present at the AGM declared that none of us would stand for election to the council. 
 
We certainly did not organise any collection of proxies, although some subsidiary proprietors may have approached committee members in their capacity as neighbours. 
 
Tan Kok Khoon

En bloc impossible

On the en bloc sale potential, Savills Singapore director (marketing and business development) Ku Swee Yong noted that at least $2 billion each would be needed to buy Mandarin Gardens - a tall order even when the market is good. ‘With the current market, the sale is impossible,’ he said.

En-bloc system needs relook,

IF THE Government still thinks the current laws under the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act and the Land Titles (Strata) Act (Amendment) are sufficient to regulate the issues of collective property sales, this tale of two condos may provide food for thought, especially as the Government has invited feedback on these laws. 
 
On April 27, Bayshore Park and Mandarin Gardens both held annual general meetings. These two estates, with more than 1,000 units each, sit on 1 million sq ft of land next to the sea. 
 
Both have got a collective sale initiative off the ground, with sale committees elected. With the support of pro-sale residents, voting powers are then used to control the rest of the estate, even though the votes represent only a minority of residents. Let me illustrate: 
 
In Bayshore Park, the pro-sale group outvoted other residents on crucial issues and in selection of council members. Averaging 60 per cent of votes cast at the AGM, this roughly 20 per cent of residents (as only 30 per cent of owners were represented at the AGM) voted down a proposed increase in maintenance charges in line with current inflation, voted for a lower increase in the sinking fund, voted down crucial replacement of copper pipes in the common corridors and voted down any exploration of corridor upgrading. In addition, they voted for a reduction in council seats to nine, making sure four sale committee members were voted into the council, and ensured that four of the five previous council members retained had exhibited pro-sale inclinations. They made sure two previous council members who did not favour sale were not re-elected. I was one of the two. 
 
At Mandarin Gardens, in a similar vein, the pro-sale camp mustered enough proxy forms to control 65 per cent of the votes in the AGM. They defeated a motion to reduce water ponding of walkways and lift lobbies to improve safety, and passed a resolution to reduce management council (MC) expenditure limits from $300,000 to $50,000 making it almost impossible for the MC to function. Consequently, the incumbent council refused to stand for re-election. Even more devastating, the pro-sale camp fielded no candidates for council. Hence, no council was elected. 
 
The law was not broken at either AGM. However, many of us affected are sure the law was not designed to produce such outcomes. 
 
Augustine Cheah

En bloc potential

There has been much discussion on the en bloc potential of Mandarin Garden. I was wondering how do the residents feel. I grew here and I have mixed emotions about the en bloc that is being proposed by many of the owners here. On one hand I am happy for my parents if they en bloc their unit as they could do with some extra cash, on the other hand I feel kind of sad because it was part of my childhood.