MTR has been using different methods to achieve their tender preference, like the lift maintainance contract in SVC, they so "hard sell" OTIS, but luckily owners won developers' vote at the end and saved 60% costs.
I think CK will vote this time too, but MTR fears to repeat the SVC case this time in CC and fear small owners united to vote another option against them, so they try to limit the number of small owners' votes.
We check DMC and BMO law, none of them allow MTR to limit second mortgage owners to vote. This is totally unacceptable.
Besides this, DOC as owners' representative but disallow owners to talk in meeting, this is also crazy! They are good partners of MTR now, we must demand CHANGE!!!
I normally just sit back and let people form their own opinions but I have read your postings on this and other subjects Mr Lam. You are clearly a self publicist whose intentions may or may not be altruistic. I reserve my opinion and only time will tell. You major problem seems to be that the voters just don't seem to want to elect you to a position of authority here in CC or other estates in Tung Chung despite your numerous campaigns.
You advocate democracy but because the duly elected DOC do not follow your agenda you cry foul. The logical reason for limiting speakers at meetings is obvious if you have attended previous meetings which have run into the early hours of the following morning. Unfortunately these matters have a way of degenerating into running arguments over the same issues, unrelated points and end up not resolving anything. That is why all meetings require an agenda, rules and some discipline.
A more important issue here than everybody having their rant is the necessity for a attendance/proxy quorum of 10% of total owners to enable the DOC to question & control the security budgets. If all 10% did attend that would mean over 50 potential speakers??? Without that quorum the MO will have their way and the budgets will pass through. This is a time for unity not personal power brokering.
If you have some overwhelming argument or point, make a written submission to have it included in the agenda. The DOC will accede to it if it has merits or reject giving good cause. Shouting dissent from the back of the room or trying overpower the meeting is not the best way to conduct such important issues.
Constrained by a restrictive DMC, the DOC have done some sterling work in negotiating budget revisions, the replacement of the faulty floor tiles at developers cost and other important matters. Whilst you have a head on attitude to dispute resolution, theirs is a more pragmatic & diplomatic approach which to date has been very effective & without legal cost. Your inference that the DOC are in some way sympathetic or in league with the MO is pure fantasy given the heated and continual battles between the two parties. Their only faux pas if it is one, is perhaps is unlike you they don't "spin" their activities on this and other forums.
If you want to change matters, do so by the rules and get elected. If you really are the peoples champion and voters believe in you and your principles they will elect you. If they don't please don't force your politics upon the majority or decry the system and it's representatives irresponsibly.
BTW. I am not a member of or in any associated with the DOC
