Strata decisions can become surprisingly complicated.

A typical owners corporation meeting might involve dozens of lot owners, proxies, multiple motions, different voting requirements and, in some jurisdictions, voting weights based on lot entitlements. Add remote attendees and electronic voting to the mix, and keeping everything accurate can become a real administrative task.

That is where owner corporation voting software can help.

The right system does more than replace a show of hands with a digital button. It can help manage voter eligibility, proxies, voting rules, participation, results and records in one place.

But software should support the governance process — not replace it.

The rules governing strata voting vary between Australian states and territories, so the first step is always understanding what your scheme’s legislation, regulations and governing documents require. For example, NSW legislation allows votes at meetings to be cast electronically where the meeting notice specifies an electronic voting method, while NSW regulations also provide for pre-meeting electronic voting where the required resolution has been made.

The technology then needs to fit around those requirements.

What is owner corporation voting software?

Owner corporation voting software is a digital platform designed to help strata schemes, owners corporations, body corporates and their managers conduct votes and elections.

Depending on the system and jurisdiction, it can support:

The basic idea is straightforward: instead of managing voter information, ballot papers, spreadsheets, proxy forms and vote counts separately, the voting process is brought into a controlled workflow.

That can make a significant difference when a meeting has a large number of owners or several motions to work through.

Why strata voting is more complicated than it looks

At first glance, a strata vote seems simple.

Ask the owners a question, count the votes and record the result.

The difficulty is that the answer to “who gets a vote, and how much is that vote worth?” can depend on the legislation, type of resolution, lot ownership, proxies and the scheme’s governing arrangements.

Voting is not always one person, one vote

This is one of the most common misunderstandings.

In Victoria, for example, Consumer Affairs Victoria explains that owners corporation voting can be based on lots or lot entitlements rather than simply counting individual people. A person who owns more than one lot may therefore have more than one vote.

Other jurisdictions have their own approaches.

NSW, for instance, uses different voting rules depending on the resolution. The current Strata Schemes Management Act provides that the value of a vote for a lot in determining a special resolution is generally linked to its unit entitlement.

This is why a generic online polling tool is not necessarily suitable for strata voting.

The system needs to understand the voting rules being applied.

Proxies add another layer

Owners cannot always attend a meeting themselves.

A proxy allows another person to represent an owner and vote on their behalf, subject to the applicable legislation and scheme rules.

Victoria, for example, has specific rules governing proxies and restrictions on how many proxy votes an individual can hold.

NSW also has specific requirements around proxy voting, including restrictions applying to proxy holders depending on the size of the scheme.

A voting system therefore needs to do more than record “John is voting for Mary”.

It should help administrators maintain a clear record of who is entitled to vote, who is acting as a proxy and how that vote should be treated.

What should good owner corporation voting software handle?

Not every voting platform is designed for strata.

When assessing software, look beyond the appearance of the ballot screen. The more important questions are what happens before, during and after the vote.

1. Voter eligibility

Before a vote starts, administrators need confidence that the people receiving voting access are entitled to participate.

A good workflow should make it possible to establish the voter list and apply the relevant eligibility rules before voting opens.

This reduces the risk of discovering halfway through a meeting that the wrong person has been issued a ballot.

2. Proxies

Proxy management should be part of the voting workflow rather than an entirely separate spreadsheet.

Administrators should be able to record proxy appointments, identify the person voting on behalf of an owner and ensure the appropriate voting rights are applied.

3. Quorum

A vote may be perfectly counted and still be unable to proceed if the required quorum has not been met.

Quorum requirements vary between jurisdictions and circumstances, so software should allow the relevant rules to be configured rather than assuming a single formula applies to every scheme.

4. Unit entitlements and weighted voting

This is another area where manual calculations can create unnecessary risk.

Where legislation requires votes to be weighted according to unit entitlement or another prescribed measure, the system should apply those values consistently.

For example, the NSW legislation specifically provides for the value of votes to be linked to unit entitlement for special resolutions.

The objective is not simply faster counting.

It is repeatable, transparent counting.

5. Multiple motions

A strata AGM may contain many separate decisions.

Each motion can have its own wording, voting method and threshold. A voting platform should allow each item to be configured separately rather than treating the entire meeting as one generic poll.

This becomes particularly useful when a meeting includes a mixture of routine resolutions, elections and more significant resolutions.

6. Electronic and hybrid voting

Electronic voting can make participation easier for owners who cannot attend a physical meeting.

NSW Government guidance, for example, recognises in-person, proxy and electronic voting methods, with specific requirements around electronic participation and notice.

A well-designed system should therefore work alongside the meeting rather than forcing everyone into a completely separate process.

Owners in the room should not be disadvantaged simply because other owners are participating remotely.

7. Audit trails and results

A result is only part of the story.

For contentious decisions, administrators may later need to establish:

That is where a proper audit trail becomes valuable.

The aim is not to create unnecessary bureaucracy. It is to make the decision easier to explain if someone later asks, “How did you arrive at that result?”

Why online voting can simplify strata meetings

The biggest benefit of dedicated voting software is often not the voting itself.

It is everything around the vote.

Consider a 150-lot building holding an AGM.

Under a traditional process, the manager may need to prepare attendance records, distribute papers, check proxies, count votes, calculate weighted results and reconcile everything afterwards.

Now add owners joining remotely.

Every additional manual step creates another opportunity for an error.

With an appropriate digital workflow, much of this administration can be brought together:

Prepare → Verify → Notify → Vote → Count → Report → Archive

That creates a much clearer process for the strata manager and the owners.

Common mistakes when choosing strata voting software

Using a generic survey tool

A survey platform might be excellent for asking residents what colour they prefer for a communal area.

That does not automatically make it suitable for a formal owners corporation vote.

A governance vote may involve proxies, eligibility requirements, quorum, voting weights, resolution thresholds and formal records.

Those are very different requirements.

Assuming every state has the same rules

Australian strata legislation is not uniform.

Terminology differs as well. Depending on the jurisdiction, you may encounter terms such as owners corporation, body corporate, strata corporation or body corporate and community management scheme.

Queensland, for example, operates under the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997, which provides the legislative framework for community titles schemes.

A platform should therefore be configured around the relevant jurisdiction and scheme rather than relying on a one-size-fits-all voting formula.

Treating electronic voting as automatically compliant

Moving a paper ballot onto a website does not, by itself, make the process compliant.

The meeting notice, voting method, resolution type, voter eligibility and other procedural requirements still need to be considered.

NSW provides a good example: electronic voting methods are permitted in specified circumstances, but the legislation and regulations distinguish between voting during meetings and pre-meeting electronic voting.

Forgetting about the record after the meeting

The result should not disappear when the meeting ends.

Meeting records are part of good governance. In Victoria, for example, minutes must record information including the resolutions considered and the outcomes of voting.

A voting platform should therefore make it easy to retain and export the information needed for the scheme’s records.

How to choose the right owner corporation voting software

Before selecting a platform, ask these questions.

Does it support your jurisdiction?

Start here.

Confirm that the voting process can accommodate the requirements applying to your scheme rather than assuming the software’s default settings are appropriate.

Can it handle proxies?

If your scheme regularly uses proxies, proxy management should be a core feature rather than a workaround.

Can it handle weighted voting?

Ask specifically how unit entitlements or other voting weights are entered, calculated and reported.

Do not settle for “yes” without understanding how the calculation works.

Can it manage quorum?

The platform should help administrators understand participation against the applicable quorum requirements.

Can owners participate remotely?

If your organisation uses hybrid meetings, make sure the voting process works for people attending online as well as those physically present.

Are results easy to verify?

Ask what happens if an owner challenges the result six weeks later.

Can the administrator retrieve the voting record?

Can they explain how the result was calculated?

Can they produce a clear results report?

Those questions are often more useful than asking how attractive the voting interface looks.

Where Vero Voting can assist

Vero Voting’s strata voting platform is designed specifically around the practical requirements of strata voting.

The platform supports strata AGM and EGM voting, committee elections, motions, proxies, quorum requirements and unit-entitlement or weighted voting. It can also support online, hybrid and paper-based voting workflows, with exportable reporting and an audit trail.

That matters because strata voting is not simply an online survey.

The process needs to connect the voter, the motion, the applicable voting rules and the final result.

Vero’s workflow allows administrators to create the meeting or ballot, add motions, import lot and unit-entitlement information, configure voting requirements, issue voting access, monitor participation and export the results.

For committees and strata managers, the practical advantage is having these steps managed within one voting process rather than piecing them together across spreadsheets, email and paper forms.

Vero Voting also states that its platform is ISO/IEC 27001:2022 certified and SOC 2 Type II audited, providing independently assessed information-security controls alongside its voting services.

The goal is better decision-making, not simply faster voting

Good strata governance is ultimately about making decisions that owners can understand and have confidence in.

Software cannot decide whether a proposed building project is sensible. It cannot resolve a disagreement between owners. And it should never be treated as a substitute for understanding the legislation applying to a scheme.

What it can do is remove a lot of the administrative friction around the decision.

When voter eligibility is clear, proxies are properly recorded, voting weights are applied consistently and results can be verified afterwards, everyone has a better basis for trusting the process.

That is the real value of owner corporation voting software.

Key takeaways

If your owners corporation or strata management team is looking to move away from spreadsheets, paper ballots and manual vote counting, contact Vero Voting to discuss your voting requirements or request a demonstration.

Sources

The following are the primary authority sources used for the legal and governance information in this article: