AGM Proposal 10

[distracted]

So the supporting statements have been released, but the full arguments from both sides, and responses to issues with the changed structure, are only available online due to them being quite lengthy:

http://www.britishorienteering.org.uk/news/news.php

It's clear that the proposal is trying to differentiate types of competition. With that in mind, there's quite an interesting statement from the board in their response:

The Board does not rule out a 4-level structure in the medium term if it is the best approach, but believes that the review of the competition structure (due to report December 2010) with its wide consultation should be concluded first to inform any decision to change.

This is perhaps the most sensible thing I've read so far on this "debate" as we'll actually have some decent information/evidence to base any decisions on...

[Clive Coles]

We have now had 15 months since BOF slimmed down our event structure from 5 to 3 levels. Not 3 months as suggested by this news brief.

BOF decided back in 2008 that our old style District events for both 2009 & 2010 should be set up on the Fixtures registration system as Level 3 local events. An A1 decision ~ clubs were not consulted.

There is currently no consistency in approach between regions and by clubs within regions as to where Sunday morning fixtures are best placed . Some clubs are listening to what BOF are suggesting; others are just getting on with running events. It's a hotchpotch ~ we have not achieved the clarity we were seeking.

We are getting by with 3 levels though it has thrown up a number of anomolies. These have been debated on the other 4-tier thread so I will not repeat myself.

The vote provides a chance for the membership to take stock and reflect if what they now have is what they want. We know from the other thread what we now have is not what some members of review group expected. The implementation has been flawed and the good ideas have become compromised.

The choice therefore is:

Do we let matters bed down for a further 12 months ?

Do we address the problems, resolve them and accept the fact that this will delay some of the other things BOF are working on ?

I think there is a cost involved what ever the outcome. Doing nothing is not the correct option.

[Spookster]

The choice therefore is:

Do we let matters bed down for a further 12 months ?

Do we address the problems, resolve them and accept the fact that this will delay some of the other things BOF are working on ?

But do you think a change to a 4-tier structure does "address the problems"? I don't think so. I think there are other important things to address, some of which are already being done, and some of which can be done, without a change of event levels.

Doing nothing is not a solution, and nor is it a proposal!

[distracted]

(The table of "issues" that forms part of the Board's response is difficult to read online, so I've put the same table here in downloadable pdf format).

Any chance that this - in fact the overall proposal/supporting statements etc - could go up as a pdf download on the British Orienteering website?

[Clive Coles]

Useful to see the table of issues. I agree some can be resolved without moving back from 3 to 4 levels of events.

I would however like two other matters to be addressed:

It was, IMO, daft for the Board to resolve that level 3 events had to allow BOF senior member discounts. BOF attempted to inforce this through the Fixtures registration displays. Fair enough for the old District events but many of the old C5 events are run with low fixed rate fees.

The more clubs move their Sunday events back into the regional event band the sillier this level 3 position becomes.

Clubs are circumventing this by adding an additional statement to the smaller event records drawing attention to the fact that BOF member discounts do not apply. Other clubs are just not setting up entry fee information at all !

Secondly I would like the need for Fixtures group scrutiny to be cut back to just those events which are likely to attract significant numbers of competitors from outside the region. As more and more old C4 events get up graded this committees role gets compromised ~ they willl be doing unnecessary work with no added value. A waste of volunteers time. BOF are now claiming Clubs ( and Associations ) should determine programmes and authorise regional events. Please deliver the tools and processes to make this happen.

Both these objectives can be accommodated within the 4 tier proposal. Is there a commitment from BOF that anything will be done to address these points in the near future should the motion fail ?

[Scott]

It was, IMO, daft for the Board to resolve that level 3 events had to allow BOF senior member discounts.

The Board are bringing an AGM motion on this issue.

[Clive Coles]

Yes ~ I got a whif of this possibility as well. Does anyone want to suggest what the proposal might be.

3 weeks to go until the AGM ~ it's high time the AGM papers were mailed. This barely gives time for clubs to consult with their members.

[Spookster]

Yes ~ I got a whif of this possibility as well. Does anyone want to suggest what the proposal might be.

3 weeks to go until the AGM ~ it's high time the AGM papers were mailed. This barely gives time for clubs to consult with their members.

They have already been mailed, but as we know, Focus seems to take different amounts of time to reach different parts of the country. You will see the discounted entry fee proposal, and all the others, very soon.

[awk]

3 weeks to go until the AGM ~ it's high time the AGM papers were mailed. This barely gives time for clubs to consult with their members.

Why should clubs need to consult with their members? The voters are the members themselves. As a club chair, I see no need or desirability in consulting with club members - leave them to get on with voting whichever way they will.

[Clive Coles]

AWK. It just helps folk who are not up to speed with the arguments to gain an understanding for the issue involved.

Not in anyway suggesting it's the Chairs job to instruct how people should vote.

My own Regional Association is meeting tonight and there will be a discussion regarding the pro's and cons regarding Proposal 10.

It would have also been nice to know what was being suggested in regard to the BOF Member discount issue. It could have a bearing on how people finally make up their minds.

But, the late arrival of the AGM papers, means an opportunity for discussion amongst colleagues has been lost.

I don't like last minute AGM surprises. It forces attendees to vote on an issue that has not been fully aired. That's how you can get bad decisions.

[Scott]

Email the National Office? If the AGM booklet has already gone to the printers, it should be possible for them to stick it on the website as a PDF...

[DavidJ]

I don't like last minute AGM surprises. It forces attendees to vote on an issue that has not been fully aired. That's how you can get bad decisions.

Tell them to join Nopesport - the issues are being fully aired here and I guess they will continue right up to the AGM

[awk]

My own Regional Association is meeting tonight and there will be a discussion regarding the pro's and cons regarding Proposal 10.

I don't think a couple of weeks either way makes the slightest bit of difference. My own experience is that a one-off meeting like this achieves little in the way of informing, unless there is proper presentation of arguments from both sides of the fence. That's why I like Nopesport - the debate continues over a period of time and issues are properly examined. Some people may comment on the length of threads etc., but to my mind that can be an advantage.

[Clive Coles]

Agree with you about Nopesport ~ long-winded at times and we might go on for too long but ideas and concerned do get aired.

The frustration for me was there was a missing component to the overall picture. BOF, we are informed, are now about to propose a change in regard to BOF member discounts ~ but we don't know what that is as the AGM papers have not yet hit the doormat.

It doesn't have to be like this. We should have a process where proposals have to be publicly tabled by a deadline so that the members can discuss the pro's and con's for the change before making up their mind how they might vote. Don't particularly care if this is achieved through Focus or their web site but to be in the dark on these proposals this close to the AGM is not good enough.

The proposers of resolution 10 achieved visability by going public themselves earlier this year ~ CompassSport followed this up in their recent publication. So we have had plenty of opportunities to exchange views on proposal no.10.

I guess, given "4-tiers" is no. 10, there are 9 other proposals. Some may require a vote, some will doubtless be passed with acclamation.

If BOF are serious however about envoking "best practice" they could do better.