Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

Ok Martyn, you'll have to forgive me, because this all feels like taking some mad hallucinogenic.
If someone nominates a proxy, why would they then send their uncompleted voting papers to the meeting venue, rather than to their choice of proxy to complete for them?
I have 3 proxies for this meeting. The papers are all with me, complete and printed off. That to me makes sense. But the other?

 

Ah, now I get it!

 

...but with the counts redacted on the basis of (not)' need to know'

@ikcdab may recall one WSRA EGM where the room was divided into half and two tellers appointed. Unfortunately it would appear that they were neither instructed on how to conduct the count, nor agreed between themselves how to do it. Consequently one teller counted only their own half of the room, the other teller counted both halves of the room! I think it took three attempts to get it right(ish) and that was just for the first of 6 votes....

 

You really should have got the hang of quotes by now John, it’s not that hard!!

I assume in your scenario that the proxies held by the chairman would also not be counted? Can we be sure that this is what is happening at L&B agms?

 

Ah. Which is exactly what I will be doing. Yours included!
My brain hurts.

 

[QUOTE="Mark Thompson, post: 2930518, member: 27829"....
If someone nominates a proxy, why would they then send their uncompleted voting papers to the meeting venue, rather than to their choice of proxy to complete for them?......[/QUOTE]
AIUI (at least from practice elsewhere):-

1. If a member votes by post, they send their completed forms to WB to be counted.

2. If they appoint a Proxy, then the form goes to WB to be validated so that WB knows who the proxy will be. It also tells WB what, if any, votes have been pre-determined (and so can be pre-counted) and which ones have been left for the proxy to decide on the day. The proxy then votes accordingly at each item vote. The tellers have to take account of the fact that the proxy, when raising his hand, is not only registering his own vote, but also has X other votes to register as well.

As I see it, the form is NOT for the proxy to complete and hand in, but as a reference/reminder of the member's instructions to him/her.

 

Ah, I knew that my Degree in Quantum Physics and Rocketry Projection would come in useful one day

 

If a vote is on a show of hands the number of proxies held by the Chairman ( which may be both for and against) is irrelevant. What can sometimes happen after a vote on a show of hands when a poll is called for is that a chairman may announce that he or she holds proxies which would ensure the outcome of the poll went one way so there’s little point in the time and effort involved in holding one.

 

Deleted for clarity

 

Right, and what if I have conflicting votes on several issues, as I do? Do I then resort to semaphore? I've got 4 different sets if votes to register, myself included.
Ffs, this is virtually primeval.

 

7

On a show of hands vote you have one vote regardless of the number of proxy votes you hold. On a poll you cast one vote for yourself and one for each of the proxies you hold. Those can be for or against depending on the proxies’ instructions.

 

That is a common way of proceeding. That is not how recent L&BRT/CIC meetings have always proceeded, and there does seem to be almost annual variations in the instructions offered to members, sometimes these instructions were not in accord with the M&As, hence adding to the confusing nature of the proceedings.

 

Why, this is hell, nor am I out of it.

 

It doesn't need to be if the conduct of the meeting has been properly planned. First of appointmtents of proxies have to be received by the company at the address specified in the Notice of Meeting by the cut off date and time ( normally 48 hours before the meeting). A completed proxy sent direct to an intended attendee at the meeting is invalid if it has not been duly registered beforehand. There needs to be a workable method of judging how proxy votes are cast. A show of hands doesn't work as one person may be casting multiple proxy votes (possibly some for and some against). One method is to issue each registered proxy with voting cards/slips corresponding to the number of proxy votes registered to that attendee. These can either he held up on a poll and counted by tellers or posted in voting box

 

One thing I've never been sure about is if you are attending the AGM do you have to fill out the voting forms with name, number and address plus sign and date

 

If a member is attending an AGM the normal requirement would be only that their entitlement to vote is checked. That could be by producing a current membership card or having name and address cross checked against the register of members. It's another area where planning is key i.e. having the people and system ready to quickly validate membership and registered proxies without causing undue delay.

 

My experience of the mechanisms is that they are a kludge, and would benefit from rationalisation and simplification.

I cannot be in Lynton on Saturday, and have registered a proxy. In practice, this means that I have completed a voting form for L&BRT, and another for CIC, and recorded who my proxy is. This has been delivered to Woody Bay, and my proxy has an electronic copy of these forms so that a) he knows what my intentions are and b) has the information to act if there is any concern over procedure. As my votes will not, in general, be supportive of the Chair, I prefer to entrust my proxy to someone more in sympathy with my thinking to avoid any possibility of suspicion as to motive.

In practice, I fully expect the votes to be conducted as polls, where the paper ballots are gathered and counted for each of the 10(?) votes involved. Proxy votes will in effect be postal votes, combined with the votes in the room on the evening.

This is inelegant and, as others have highlighted, creates inevitable delay to proceedings. However, given the intent to empower those who cannot be in Lynton, and the need for those present to be able to cast their votes in response to what happens in the room, it is hard to see how far that messiness can be got rid of.

My own view, and I acknowledge the concerns of others over the reasons behind votes becoming "confused", is that the counting process is clean. That confidence does not extend to the wider conduct of the board, where events of the last few years (and especially early 2024) suggest a determination by the board majority to operate a "my way or the highway" approach.

At that level, I see green shoots in some of the official communications, and look forward to those being maintained.

 

I was asked yesterday to distribute the following on social media regarding the Chelfham Viaduct open days:

Dear attendees,

We're looking forward to welcoming you to the Chelfham Viaduct Open Day this weekend. This event has proved to be incredibly popular, with a huge amount of interest. As previously advised, we have limited car parking available on the day, so we strongly advise that you use public transport and car share to avoid the potential disappointment of being turned away if the car park is full. We anticipate that the busiest time will be between 12pm and 3pm on Saturday.

For those using the car park, we encourage you to enjoy the viaduct and the experience that this weekend offers, but would be grateful if you could limit your visiting time to make space for others to experience the event.

We thank you in advance for your cooperation and understanding.

Kind regards, National Highways and Lynton & Barnstaple Railway



Web: www.nationalhighways.co.uk

 

Regrettably, I shall assist the process by being unable to attend.

 

Dang, so the busiest time is going to be right after the EA meeting ends....