strathspey Archive: AGM

Previous thread: Reel of the 51st
Next thread: Titles

AGM

Message 32384 · Stewart Cunningham · 5 Nov 2002 16:03:34 · Top

Usually someone who attended the AGM is kind enough to give a quick
rundown on the Strathspey net of what happened. Would it be possible for
one of those who were lucky enough to be there to let us who weren't
know of the latest goingson?
I, for one, would be most grateful. Thanks, in anticipation
Stewart Cunningham, Vancouver

AGM

Message 32386 · Jim Healy · 5 Nov 2002 16:55:32 · Top

Greetings!

Stewart Cunningham asks for a "quick rundown" of what happened in Aberdeen.
It _can_ be pretty quick. As I said to a few people it will be remembered
more for what did not happen. To put that in context, this was the year when
the elections to implement the very significant changes in the management
structure decided last year were held.

The Saturday started with the very last Executive Council meeting. All were
aware of the history being made but accepted that an era had passed. The
meeting was as short as it was possible to be. The various Convenors'
reports (including references to my goings-on in the basement) were taken at
a spanking speed and minutes were ratified more or less unanimously with
minimum comment.

We were out in time to attend the second discussion group on the future
format of AGM weekends. It was proposed for the consideration of the
Management Board that, in addition to the AGM proper, it should comprise a
Branch Forum at which Branches could formally raise issues of concern, ideas
for the future etc. i.e. items that would not normally come under the
business of an AGM agenda. Bruce Frazer on behalf of B/H/S Borders Branch
undertook to co-ordinate this and his offer was accepted. It was also felt
that the existing Open Forum at which individual members could raise any
subject under the sun also had a place and should continue. No binding votes
would be taken at either meeting but they would provide an opportunity to
"send messages" to the Management Board.

There was an earlier discussion group on Youth matters which I beleive was
very interesting but I did not attend as it clashed with the Excecutive
Council. Perhaps someone else could comment on that.

The AGM was also brief and all resolutions were passed although many agreed
with Keith Bark of Toronto that the wording of the transitional voting
provisions might have been clearer. However, as Alan Mair pointed out, the
AGM does not take amendments from the floor.

The meeting finished fairly quickly with the announcement of the voting. It
was decided not to announce at the meeting who had been elected for the
various periods (3,2 or 1 year) and the succesful candidates would be
advised separately.

The results (spot the Strathspeyers) are given below.

I would just like to add a tribute to Jim Stott, Paul Anderson and the
Aberdeen Branch committee and members for a superb weekend. They even laid
on the most spectacular storms some of us have seen in years. The waves
crashing over the harbour during the day and walking back to the hotel on
Saturday in rain coming horizontally off the sea in a Force 9 (gusting 10)
will take some forgetting. A special tribute also to the vote processing
team. I understand that inputting the data took some 14 man hours but the
system had been thought through and set up so that the results were
available on cue.

Jim Healy
Perth, Scotland

Chairman
--------
Jean Martin (unopposed)

Chairman Elect
--------------
Stewart Adam

Management Board
----------------
Malcolm Brown
Peter Clark
Bruce Frazer
Linda Gaul
Ian Hall
Dorothy Hamilton
Jim Healy
Jimmie Hill
Andrew Kellett
Anne McArthur
Alastair MacFadyen
Susanna Mayr
Wilson Nicol
Keith Oughton
Jerome Reinstein
Andrew Smith
Rachel Wilton
Irene Whyte

Education and Training
----------------------
Alec Gray (Convenor - unopposed)
Patricia Clark
David Hall
Elma McCausland
Lesley Martin
David Normand-Harris
Sue Porter
Carol Smith
Moira Stacey
Anne Taylor

Membership Services
-------------------
Irene Bennett (Convenor - unopposed)
Sue Duckett
Anne Gordon
Rosemary Gordon-Harvey
Peter Knight
Alastair Reid
Roz Scott-Huxley

GP & Finance
------------
Richard Turnbull (Convenor)
John Douglas
Fiona Grant
Harry Hall
Roderick McLachlan
Margaret Ross
William Whyte

_________________________________________________________________
Unlimited Internet access for only $21.95/month.  Try MSN!
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/2monthsfree.asp

AGM

Message 32390 · Alan Paterson · 5 Nov 2002 18:22:13 · Top

Jim Healy wrote:
>
> The results (spot the Strathspeyers) are given below.
>
> Stewart Adam (not sure about Stewart, I know he has e-mail)
> Malcolm Brown (but of course!)
> Peter Clark (has e-mail but can't be bothered reading it :-( )
> Linda Gaul (used to be quite quiet when head hied yin)
> Jim Healy
> Susanna Mayr
> Fiona Grant (you ARE here Fiona, aren't you?)

Alan

RSCDS internal chat

Message 32440 · William & Shellagh Whyte · 6 Nov 2002 19:50:36 · Top

With at least 9 strathspeyers now in a committee or on the M/B, is there any
value in having pre-meeting discussions (or private discussions) via a
bulletin board on Strathspey.
It would be particularly helpful for the overseas members, but is it
appropriate?
I would like to think we could do it via the official RSCDS web-site, but
that might take a long time.

Do previous committee members have any experience of this subject?

William

----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan Paterson" <alan.paterson@paranor.ch>
To: <strathspey@strathspey.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 18:22
Subject: Re: AGM

> Jim Healy wrote:
> >
> > The results (spot the Strathspeyers) are given below.
> >
> > Stewart Adam (not sure about Stewart, I know he has e-mail)
> > Malcolm Brown (but of course!)
> > Peter Clark (has e-mail but can't be bothered reading it :-( )
> > Linda Gaul (used to be quite quiet when head hied yin)
> > Jim Healy
> > Susanna Mayr
> > Fiona Grant (you ARE here Fiona, aren't you?)
>
>
> Alan

RSCDS internal chat

Message 32450 · e.ferguson · 7 Nov 2002 00:54:05 · Top

On 6 Nov 2002 at 19:49, William Whyte wrote:

> With at least 9 strathspeyers now in a committee or on the M/B, is there
> any value in having pre-meeting discussions (or private discussions) via
> a bulletin board on Strathspey. It would be particularly helpful for the
> overseas members, but is it appropriate? I would like to think we could
> do it via the official RSCDS web-site, but that might take a long time.
>
> Do previous committee members have any experience of this subject?

I hope that Strathspeyers on Committees or MB will, when a meeting is
coming up, make posts on those agenda items for which they would like
to get reactions (on- or off-list) from the rest of the Strathspey
members. That would make a much wider community aware of what is under
discussion & on what topics decisions are called for, and it might
supply useful ideas for those discussions.

It might be still better if every agenda, with its supporting documents
(omitting confidential items of course), were to be put on the website
by HQ, and a short e-mail sent to all Branches, HQ members and
"Strathspey" to tell us all that the information is available. Then
everyone could react in time.

Mutual discussion via a website is cumbersome, as you depend on the
webmaster to set up the membership and the restrictions of access to
others. If the members of such a group use a shared "common set of
addresses" (direct e-mail) no external help is needed. A temporary e-
mail distribution list is another solution; and is far easier to
operate.

Discussions via such lists work well. If you want to reach decisions,
however, some form of "chairperson" is needed, or the discussion tends
to peter out.

Happy Meetings [no "The" (;-) ]

Eric--
Eric T. Ferguson,
van Reenenweg 3, 3702 SB ZEIST Netherlands
tel: (+31)(0) 30-2673638 mobile: (+31)(0) 6 4437 8997
e-mail: e.ferguson@antenna.nl

AGM

Message 32393 · William & Shellagh Whyte · 5 Nov 2002 19:00:17 · Top

RSCDS AGM Nov 2, 2002

As no doubt everyone knows we were in Aberdeen, and in late autumn one does
not expect much in the way of sunny weather that far North. I suppose it was
only a small gale by local standards on Saturday, but it was impressive
none-the-less. On the other hand the temperature was somewhat mild (say
around 12-14ºC).

The AGM was preceded by a final tidying-up-meeting of the surely un-lamented
Executive Council, which consisted mostly of approving the minutes of
various sub-committees.

The Earl of Mansfield could not attend due to ill-health (this is his 25th
year as Honorary President), so Alan Mair and then Jean Martin conducted the
meeting.

The AGM itself had as its highlight the transfer of chairmanship from Alan
Mair to Jean Martin. This was particularly apposite in her home town. During
Lana Mair's tenure we have seen a continuation of the changes inspired and
initiated by Linda Gaul, and hopefully we will see this modernizing style
continued by Jean Martin. Noteworthy was the visual evidence of excellent
rapport between the old/new chair and the Secretary Elspeth Gray, which
augurs well for the future.

The transfer of chairmanship had a new tweak in that conforming to the new
constitution whereby the past President makes a clean break in terms of
official involvement in the affairs of the Society, Alan Mair symbolically
left the rostrum.

Jean Martin presented two scrolls of honour and cited others who were not
present, one these absent recipients being Muriel Johnstone who was
receiving her scroll later that very day in the US.

There were three motions, each involving changes to the constitution and
requiring a two-thirds majority. All were passed easily.

10.1 Revisions of the remits of the Management Board and the various
Committees.
No debate took place; obviously further discussion or change should await
the hard lessons of reality.
10.2 Definition of 'terms of office'.
No debate except that the Montreal delegate made a valid point. The proposer
of the motion stated that the three year cycle of elected members of the MB
and committees would be ensured by awarding three years incumbency to the
top third of those elected, two years to the following third and one year to
the bottom third. However the actual wording in the motion left this
unsaid, probably because it matters only once, and anyway one would like to
keep temporary arrangements out of the constitution. There was one lone
abstainer but no one voted against this motion.
10.3 'Postal voting'
Although there was equally no debate on this matter, it seems that others
shared my thoughts that this motion could have drafted more carefully.
Postal voting, or indeed fax, email or other future electronic arrangements
seem very appropriate for certain items such as voting for candidates to
committees and convenorships and the chair. Other items such as important
financial decisions or organizational changes may well be less suitable for
decision without a debate at the AGM, and yet the drafted motion did not
allow the Management Board flexibility to decide. The motion as it was
drafted makes remote voting available as a right to branches for all
decisions except changes to the constitution. In the event there was no
debate but a number (small) of abstentions and opposants. Apparently the
final motion was an amalgam of the wishes of GP committee and the Executive
Council, and this may explain its slightly messy form.
It is worthy of note that currently the sum of branches produces an
entitlement of about 440 delegates, a figure plainly unlikely to be met in
terms of physical attendees to the AGM. On the other side of the coin
however is the need to prevent the AGM being reduced in importance because
of heavy reliance on postal voting. We shall see at Perth.

Last but not least the results of the voting for various committees etc were
announced, (no small feat in the limited time available) but no actual
voting numbers or ranking was given. This surprised me a little although on
reflection it might well have been embarrassing for candidates (losing or
winning) to have their numbers read out. Apparently the successful
candidates will be informed in writing whether they have been given a 1,2 or
3-year term. The question in my mind is does this meet the appropriate
standards of transparency. I look forward to discussing this in committee
in future.

Excluding the uncontested positions those appointed were:
Chairman Elect - S Adam
Management Board - all candidates less S Adam (see above)
Convenor of GP & F - R Turnbull
The names of the other successful candidates will no doubt be published
shortly on the official RSCDS site.

The two dance events were packed out, and as usual, most enjoyable, so the
weather didn't matter at all !

William Whyte

----- Original Message -----
From: "Stewart Cunningham" <stewartc@telus.net>
To: "Strathspey Net" <strathspey@strathspey.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 16:03
Subject: AGM

> Usually someone who attended the AGM is kind enough to give a quick
> rundown on the Strathspey net of what happened. Would it be possible for
> one of those who were lucky enough to be there to let us who weren't
> know of the latest goingson?
> I, for one, would be most grateful. Thanks, in anticipation
> Stewart Cunningham, Vancouver
>
>

AGM

Message 32395 · William & Shellagh Whyte · 5 Nov 2002 19:07:05 · Top

I was never very good at geography, and apologies to Keith Bark of Toronto.
However maybe it is a compliment to be considered as coming from Montreal (I
liked the place when I visited it recently) !?

William

AGM

Message 32405 · redrose_solutions · 5 Nov 2002 23:02:00 · Top

Just for the record - there was in fact one vote against this motion.

Susi Mayr
Vienna, Austria
susi@redrose.co.at

RSCDS AGM Nov 2, 2002
10.2 Definition of 'terms of office'.
No debate except that the Montreal delegate made a valid point. The proposer
of the motion stated that the three year cycle of elected members of the
MB and committees would be ensured by awarding three years incumbency to
the top third of those elected, two years to the following third and one
year to
the bottom third. However the actual wording in the motion left this unsaid,
probably because it matters only once, and anyway one would like to keep
temporary arrangements out of the constitution. There was one lone abstainer
but no one voted
against this motion.

AGM

Message 32408 · Jim Healy · 6 Nov 2002 01:09:32 · Top

Greetings!

I wrote <spot the Strathspeyers> and Alan Paterson bit.

Pretty good effort, Alan, but no see-gar. You missed number one on the list
- Jean Martin - who managed to fit a quote from a Strathspey posting into
her acceptance speech 8)>

Jim Healy
Perth, Scotland

_________________________________________________________________
Get faster connections -- switch to MSN Internet Access!
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp

AGM

Message 32443 · ron.mackey · 6 Nov 2002 22:42:40 · Top

> Pretty good effort, Alan, but no see-gar. You missed number one on the list
> - Jean Martin - who managed to fit a quote from a Strathspey posting into
> her acceptance speech 8)>
>
> Jim Healy

Jim, are you implying that Jean is a -- lurker? --- ?
Does this admit one into full membership of Strathspey??? :))

Happy Dancing
Cheers :)
Ron

Ron Mackey. London Branch (and Croydon)
39, Grove Park Road,
Mottingham
London SE9 4NS

AGM

Message 32417 · Andrew Smith · 6 Nov 2002 09:59:36 · Top

Wrt Mgt Bd and Committee membership, the amendment to the Executive Council
motion on Constitutional change proposed by Leicester last year suggested
that retirement of one third should be "determined by ballot (the drawing
of lots) amongst the remaining longest serving members." It was probably a
memory of this which was behind the comments made, but as William said, it
is as well to keep temporary arrangements out of the Constitution, and if
the Management Board is not competent to arrange its succession
arrangements, one should be asking if it would be competent to run the
Society.

With respect to postal voting, I am a very insignificant shareholder in 3
organisations, as well as the National Trust for Scotland, and they all seem
to be able to accommodate postal voting at their AGMs, and one can in most
cases instruct the proxy either to cast your vote as directed or in response
to the debate.
I would like to reiterate the thanks to Aberdeen Branch, especially to all
the stewards who patiently shepherded us up and down stairways and along
corridors.
Thanks should also go to all those who stood to serve the Society but were
not elected.

By now Alan may have realised that he missed at least two more
"Strathspeyers" from his list. :-)

Andrew,
Bristol, UK.

----- Original Message -----
From: "William Whyte" <wlwhyte@attglobal.net>
To: <strathspey@strathspey.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 6:00 PM
Subject: Re: AGM

> RSCDS AGM Nov 2, 2002
>
> As no doubt everyone knows we were in Aberdeen, and in late autumn one
does
> not expect much in the way of sunny weather that far North. I suppose it
was
> only a small gale by local standards on Saturday, but it was impressive
> none-the-less. On the other hand the temperature was somewhat mild (say
> around 12-14ºC).
>
> The AGM was preceded by a final tidying-up-meeting of the surely
un-lamented
> Executive Council, which consisted mostly of approving the minutes of
> various sub-committees.
>
> The Earl of Mansfield could not attend due to ill-health (this is his 25th
> year as Honorary President), so Alan Mair and then Jean Martin conducted
the
> meeting.
>
> The AGM itself had as its highlight the transfer of chairmanship from Alan
> Mair to Jean Martin. This was particularly apposite in her home town.
During
> Lana Mair's tenure we have seen a continuation of the changes inspired and
> initiated by Linda Gaul, and hopefully we will see this modernizing style
> continued by Jean Martin. Noteworthy was the visual evidence of excellent
> rapport between the old/new chair and the Secretary Elspeth Gray, which
> augurs well for the future.
>
> The transfer of chairmanship had a new tweak in that conforming to the new
> constitution whereby the past President makes a clean break in terms of
> official involvement in the affairs of the Society, Alan Mair symbolically
> left the rostrum.
>
> Jean Martin presented two scrolls of honour and cited others who were not
> present, one these absent recipients being Muriel Johnstone who was
> receiving her scroll later that very day in the US.
>
> There were three motions, each involving changes to the constitution and
> requiring a two-thirds majority. All were passed easily.
>
> 10.1 Revisions of the remits of the Management Board and the various
> Committees.
> No debate took place; obviously further discussion or change should await
> the hard lessons of reality.
> 10.2 Definition of 'terms of office'.
> No debate except that the Montreal delegate made a valid point. The
proposer
> of the motion stated that the three year cycle of elected members of the
MB
> and committees would be ensured by awarding three years incumbency to the
> top third of those elected, two years to the following third and one year
to
> the bottom third. However the actual wording in the motion left this
> unsaid, probably because it matters only once, and anyway one would like
to
> keep temporary arrangements out of the constitution. There was one lone
> abstainer but no one voted against this motion.
> 10.3 'Postal voting'
> Although there was equally no debate on this matter, it seems that others
> shared my thoughts that this motion could have drafted more carefully.
> Postal voting, or indeed fax, email or other future electronic
arrangements
> seem very appropriate for certain items such as voting for candidates to
> committees and convenorships and the chair. Other items such as important
> financial decisions or organizational changes may well be less suitable
for
> decision without a debate at the AGM, and yet the drafted motion did not
> allow the Management Board flexibility to decide. The motion as it was
> drafted makes remote voting available as a right to branches for all
> decisions except changes to the constitution. In the event there was no
> debate but a number (small) of abstentions and opposants. Apparently the
> final motion was an amalgam of the wishes of GP committee and the
Executive
> Council, and this may explain its slightly messy form.
> It is worthy of note that currently the sum of branches produces an
> entitlement of about 440 delegates, a figure plainly unlikely to be met in
> terms of physical attendees to the AGM. On the other side of the coin
> however is the need to prevent the AGM being reduced in importance because
> of heavy reliance on postal voting. We shall see at Perth.
>
> Last but not least the results of the voting for various committees etc
were
> announced, (no small feat in the limited time available) but no actual
> voting numbers or ranking was given. This surprised me a little although
on
> reflection it might well have been embarrassing for candidates (losing or
> winning) to have their numbers read out. Apparently the successful
> candidates will be informed in writing whether they have been given a 1,2
or
> 3-year term. The question in my mind is does this meet the appropriate
> standards of transparency. I look forward to discussing this in committee
> in future.
>
> Excluding the uncontested positions those appointed were:
> Chairman Elect - S Adam
> Management Board - all candidates less S Adam (see above)
> Convenor of GP & F - R Turnbull
> The names of the other successful candidates will no doubt be published
> shortly on the official RSCDS site.
>
> The two dance events were packed out, and as usual, most enjoyable, so the
> weather didn't matter at all !
>
> William Whyte
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Stewart Cunningham" <stewartc@telus.net>
> To: "Strathspey Net" <strathspey@strathspey.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 16:03
> Subject: AGM
>
>
> > Usually someone who attended the AGM is kind enough to give a quick
> > rundown on the Strathspey net of what happened. Would it be possible for
> > one of those who were lucky enough to be there to let us who weren't
> > know of the latest goingson?
> > I, for one, would be most grateful. Thanks, in anticipation
> > Stewart Cunningham, Vancouver
> >
> >
>
>
>

AGM

Message 32426 · Fiona Grant · 6 Nov 2002 15:25:33 · Top

Jean Martin's speech in accepting chairmanship of the Society was excellent,
encouraging and most apt. I wonder if she would consider posting a
summarised version to Strathspey?

Fiona Grant
Bristol

AGM

Message 32432 · William & Shellagh Whyte · 6 Nov 2002 17:24:37 · Top

My hope would be that the minutes of the meeting, noteworthy speeches (which
would include that of Alan Mair as well as Jean Martin), and voting results
would be posted on the official Society site as soon as practical. It is
only by keeping the site active will it engender frequent visits and thus
the Society's image.

William Whyte

----- Original Message -----
From: "Fiona Grant" <fiona@freespiritfilms.co.uk>
To: "Strathspey" <strathspey@strathspey.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 14:59
Subject: Re: AGM

> Jean Martin's speech in accepting chairmanship of the Society was
excellent,
> encouraging and most apt. I wonder if she would consider posting a
> summarised version to Strathspey?
>
> Fiona Grant
> Bristol
>

AGM

Message 32439 · William & Shellagh Whyte · 6 Nov 2002 19:50:34 · Top

Andrew, I am not against postal voting, rather the reverse.

However there are some things which do not lend themselves to postal voting,
and I would have preferred the M/B to have had the power to decide whether a
particular subject merited voting by physical presence. Perhaps that is too
flexible, Ron might say :-). However the new constitution now ordains that
all motions except constitutional amendments (section VIII - Alteration to
the Constitution, item 1... 2/3 approval required from delegates present)
can be voted upon without physical presence, which is indeed an improvement.

All branches, but especially the bigger ones, like NZ, London, Toronto, etc
now have to think through how to handle their (much larger) voting powers,
and how to organize their presence/voting at the AGM. One suspects that up
till now many branches have given mostly carte blanche to their
representatives. It is now a new ballgame and I hope there will be fresh
consideration of this at the branch level. But then there has to be more
time for review and probably more ventilation of the pros and cons of
motions before the actual AGM. How the M/B arranges this should be high on
their to-do list. To repeat, postal voting is only successful with fully
informed voters, and/or fully explained choices, and always with sufficient
time. Not easy to arrange....Just watch the euro vote in UK when it comes.

William Whyte
P.S. It was the Aberdeen stewards who stood at the front door and braved the
elements who have my biggest thanks and sympathy.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Smith" <afsmith@bristolbs94lx.freeserve.co.uk>
To: <strathspey@strathspey.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 09:44
Subject: Re: AGM

> With respect to postal voting, I am a very insignificant shareholder in 3
> organisations, as well as the National Trust for Scotland, and they all
seem
> to be able to accommodate postal voting at their AGMs, and one can in most
> cases instruct the proxy either to cast your vote as directed or in
response
> to the debate.
> I would like to reiterate the thanks to Aberdeen Branch, especially to all
> the stewards who patiently shepherded us up and down stairways and along
> corridors.

Previous thread: Reel of the 51st
Next thread: Titles
A Django site.