BOF AGM

[Guest]

Missed it.... anything exciting?

[Tatty]

Becks - did you get elected? We all hope so!!

[Simon]

My comments about the BOF AGM:

Suse Coon withdrew her nomination for BOF councillor and so the other four people (one being Becks) were elected.

The outgoing councillors issued a statement, read at the AGM by Suse Coon. This statement was not complimentory about the BOF management. If someone actually has a copy can it be posted.

Ranald MacDonald (?) started his piece on the membership proposals by quoting from the 1994 AGM about moving to all club members also being members of BOF and then he commented on why ten years later it is still an ongoing discussion. My feeling after the meeting was that it could still be being discussed in another eleven years time without a resolution having been made.

I was unimpressed with the chairman. His knowledge of orienteering is poor - this included not knowing the the club names based on the club initials for the people standing for election (something that he could have researched in advance). Also, more importantly, I felt that his chairing of the meeting left a lot to be desired - especially on how he presented the membership fee increase proposal.

[MarkC]

The outgoing councillors issued a statement, read at the AGM by Suse Coon. This statement was not complimentory about the BOF management. If someone actually has a copy can it be posted.

Unfortunately I didn't write it down, but I think their principal complaint was that too much decision making is being transferred to Management Committee rather than Council, i.e. centralised - the former is supposed to be for day-to-day running of BOF rather than defining policy.

My feeling after the meeting was that it could still be being discussed in another eleven years time without a resolution having been made.

The way they're going at the moment, nothing is going to happen any time soon... Part of the problem is that they seem to want a perfect solution that will keep everyone happy, that just doesn't exist, as well as creating sketchy proposals rather than detailed, costed ones.

I was unimpressed with the chairman.

I agree - the way that he chaired the meeting suggested that he didn't know how any of the procedures worked, which undermines his authority and creates a lack of confidence in the way BOF is run. His lack of background knowledge also created a bad impression, particularly when compared to some of the speakers from the floor who have been involved in the sport since it first appeared in this country. Lastly, at the end of the meeting he just repeated that he was "deeply concerned" about the strength of feeling in the meeting and didn't show any sign of optimism.

And the newer Vice Chairman was even less impressive - he was so concerned about the feelings of the membership that he kept falling asleep!

[PorkyFatBoy]

Becks received a big cheer when she stood up. Not sure whether that was for being under 40, or because her thong was showing over the top of her jeans (I believe it is the fashion these days).

I too was very unimpressed the Chairman's lack of knowledge, it was quite embarrassing really.

Suse's statement made on behalf of all the councillors and made four points. From my notes they were about the "perceived secrecy" of mgmt on matters that concerned council and that the councillors were being deliberately kept in the dark over issues. (notes get a bit hazy here) I think the third point was that mgmt were deciding matters that should be put to council, and I can't read my writing for the fourth point.

BOF Central were however very good at not answering the questions asked of them, especially mine - can we enrol Jeremy Paxman as a member for next year?

Still, Lyn West is now on council - be very afraid of East Anglian women after what they did to the Romans.

[Mrs H.]

I know Suse has sent her statement to Nope - but with the boys all holed up at Dikalot Towers I'm not sure anyone's minding the shop - I have a copy - I'll ask her if she want's me to put it on the thread.

sorry about the noise at Wilf;s I did tell BOF what the set up was - to be perfectly honest i would rather they had gone elsewhere than making my event centre fuggy and spoiling the fun. Had to laugh when John Dalton came in to set up the meeting, became concerned that his PA system hadn't arrived and asked to see the electrical equipment certificate on mine before he borrowed it. The absence of any "please, thankyou" or "would you mind" led me to re-arrange the words Off and Naff in his direction. Beggars shouldn't be choosers - fortunately his man then turned up - otherwise you'd all have been shouting!

I'm thinking of suggesting that man-management courses should be mandatory at BOF central!

[PorkyFatBoy]

Had to laugh when John Dalton came in to set up the meeting, became concerned that his PA system hadn't arrived and asked to see the electrical equipment certificate on mine before he borrowed it.

Glad to see they are focusing on the key issues

My conclusion is that there is not a veil of secrecy over any detailed proposals...there simply are no detailed proposals.

[awk]

I wasn't there (sat in a dentist's waiting room at the time - now that is boring, but was rather more urgent), but I'm told that the proposed increases to BOF membership fees (in case membership structure changes fail) got defeated. I understand lots of concern expressed about proposed expansion of BOF expenditure and transparency (something BOF central were warned about both from within and from outside, but chose to ignore).

I'm delighted to see 4 strongly sceptical councillors in place - BOF and its membership needs that. I also have seen a copy of Suse's statement, and she talks about their need to co-ordinate knowledge. I do hope they all manage that: as the members' reps they need to be very strong minded (and I know are!) and work as a team.

[SIman]

While happy to congratulate DVO, HOC and WCH on gaining Clubmark accreditation, some of us thought that there should have been some acknowledgement of the fact that an English award available only to English clubs was presented at the British AGM.

[Becks]

Becks received a big cheer when she stood up. Not sure whether that was for being under 40, or because her thong was showing over the top of her jeans (I believe it is the fashion these days).

How embarrasing! I lost weight and now my jeans fall down Wonder what half the people present thought of that one?! Any donations to the Becks can't afford new jeans fund muchly appreciated.

The AGM felt like one big muddle. I certainly left it feeling like nothing had been achieved and like Bob said, we weren't really much further on than 1994. Despite the fact I'm not the top boys' biggest fans, it was unbelievable how badly some people reacted to some of the comments, resorting to snide under the breath remarks etc etc.

The new Councillors are here to hopefully make a change. We're meeting in two weeks time just before Development Committee to discuss strategies (and get to know each other!) and so if you have anything to say, then contact myself or any of the other three (Chris James, Lyn West and John Morris). John and I are both active on here and I'm sure Lyn watches. Snide comments do nobody any good.

We can't please everybody but if we are at least aware of the issues from both sides, the membership and the big boys at the top, then we can help the best conclusion to be reached.

I may be being hideously idealistic, but I think the newly elected group of councillors is a good mix of experience, knowledge and ideas (and youth?!), and I really hope we can make a few changes, however small, to the way things are run. What you must remember is that the thing that unites us as Councillors is an incredible enthusiasm for our sport, and we will do everything within our capabilities to improve the present situation. Talk to us, please!

[FatBoy]

How embarrasing! I lost weight and now my jeans fall down

A belt is cheaper...

It would get my vote any day though.

[Blanka]

Today there's news on the BOF page that the vote on proposal 3 (i.e. increase in membership fees for 2006) is invalid! Apparently the reason is because some proxy votes were forgotten and not counted - only acts to increase my lack of confidence in BOF!

[Simon]

I'm told that the proposed increases to BOF membership fees (in case membership structure changes fail) got defeated.

No - it got passed at the meeting. However there has since been found to be a problem, with the proxy votes not having been counted (the meeting pressed for this proposal to go to a formal vote, rather than a simple show of hands). This means that the voting has been voided and, so, the proposal does not pass.

More info on the vote in the news section on the BOF site.

[RJ]

Simon wrote:

This means that the voting has been voided.....

No... definitely not good enough. Doesn't need any snide comments this time... that is straightforward AGM procedure that should have been worked out beforehand... and is in the remit of the Chairman. We are a competent organisation, can we please show that we are. Voiding in the forest is bad luck sometimes, carelessness sometimes, but incompetence rarely. Voiding at the AGM.... that's incompetence!

[Blanka]

First a note that this is not entirely my comment but that of someone in the club who doesn't post on nopesport, but I think they might have a point, so I thought I'd raise it here. I do not know anything about the law loopholes that could be involved, but I am interested interested to hear opinions of any lawyers who might.

New Total
For 171 Against 66 - This 72% vote in favour is less than the 75% required and the proposal would not have been carried.

Legally the vote must be declared invalid.

As discussed at the AGM, it is intended that the whole issue of membership will be proposed and voted on at an EGM in the Autumn. Council and Management Committee may include a similar fall back proposal in the EGM.

Why is the vote declared invalid rather than the motion defeated? Does anyone know anything about Company Law who could explain that? The point being that if the motion is defeated, it cannot be voted on again at a potential EGM in the autumn, and hence the membership fees wouldn't increase.

Would a mistake by the teller (Alex Ross) in not counting the proxy votes invalidate the voting (even though BOF are now in physical possession of the proxy votes and the votes cast at the AGM and could recount them at their leisure)?

Obviously the BOF constitution doesn't say anything about 'what to do in case of forgetting proxy votes' because it wasn't expected when drafting it that such a mistake could be made when voting at an AGM!!