AGM Motions & Ommissions

[StevieHilton]

A question about Proxies.
Should proxies along with instructions by the person issuing the proxy be published.
Failure to do so would lead to the questioning of the vote.

[mclarke]

A question about Proxies.
Should proxies along with instructions by the person issuing the proxy be published.
Failure to do so would lead to the questioning of the vote.

I don't think they have in the past - but that would seem fair to me.

[Derek Howie]

Carrying on the theme of AGM omissions there appears to be some more:

1. Accounts - still not published. Are they going to just be issued at the AGM? It is not giving members time to review them and come up with questions. It is disenfranchising those members who are unable to make the meeting. They are not being given the chance to vote for whether they should be approved or not.

A similar thing happened at the Council meeting where members were given the proposed budget on the day with virtually no time for review.

2. Standards Committee - I see from the reports that the Standards Committee are recommending 4 members be appointed.
a) Surely this should be open to all CS members to apply and not just be hand-picked by one or two on the existing committee? IU had someone say to me this week that they would be interested but it seems that CS members are being excluded from applying.
b) There is no agenda point for the appointment of the new members. Is this just so that it can be slipped through on the day at the AGM, against excluding and disenfranchising those members who are unable to attend? There should be a clear agenda point allowing members to vote for or against each of the suggestions.

[Andy Howie]

Carrying on the theme of AGM omissions there appears to be some more:
1. Accounts - still not published. Are they going to just be issued at the AGM? It is not giving members time to review them and come up with questions. It is disenfranchising those members who are unable to make the meeting. They are not being given the chance to vote for whether they should be approved or not.

After speaking to David on Saturday, He had given me a copy to scan in and put on the site. I had not realized this. Fault is entirely mine and I have rectified it today as I am back at work and have access to a scanner.

[David G Congalton]

Not entirely your fault Andy. I should maybe have been clearer but we were both running around a bit on the Sunday at Marymass trying to organise GP presentation to ensure it was done before round 5 start time. Don't know about you but I've never liked Stevie Clark growling at me.

[JMcNicoll]

Steve Clark was the least of your worries. :ymdevil:

[Ianbrownlee]

me I scared of andy McCulloch (only kidding Andy, honest)