WSRA Trustee Election Hustings

Well, for good or ill ,its under way. All proxies have be with WSRA in the next four hours. We have had no reassurance on how or when they will be counted,and who will be present.

 

I have been asked to confirm, and can confirm, that I have neither had an an acknowledgement , let alone a reply, to my e-mail to David Williams and Susan Kaufman asking for details of the voting arrangements for Saturday to be made known to the candidates.

Kind regards

Robin White

 

Some of you may have noticed that the Articles of Association have been amended recently and the v3 was published on the association web site on 13th July last. As far as I can see it's section 15 that has been amended.

 

It was article 13, reduction in trustee numbers that was approved,according to the minutes. have you found another alteration ? The separate minutes for the post AGM meeting have not been made available- yet.

 

Those of you who were at the last AGM will remember the Resolution that was passed on the proxy votes, very much against the will of the meeting, but it was then subsequently decided that it had failed after someone pointed out that it actually needed 75% but didn't get it. In the middle of all this chaos, a fourth resolution was passed, but, when the minutes were finally published, this resolution was missing and, upon checking, the update to the Articles that had been done as a result of the meeting didn't reflect this resolution either.

I emailed the secretary about this last week and she has sorted the issue out. Despite comments on here about lack of communication, she acknowledged my email and subsequently came back to say that she agreed, thanked me for pointing it out and told me that both the draft minutes and the Articles had been updated.

The missing resolution is item 11 in the revised minutes.

Dave

 

Thank you Dave. All is now clear.

 

How could this be accidental I wonder?

 

Do you mean getting a reply ? The missing "new"clause relates in brief to the the removal after of certification of longterm disabling health or sanity of a trustee as required by law.I don't think this will affect any outcome of the vote or give us non medics chance to use the clause,no matter,in jest, how we may dream to use the latter ! Just as well its been spotted,error admitted and changed without providing a distraction to the main purpose of the meeting.

 

Though judging by recent events, the sanity of the current trustees is surely in doubt

 

It is alledged by contacts on the railway that Mr Holland and the new co opted trustee Chris walters along with John Wood are not going to be at the AGM.
IF and I Say IF this turns out to be true then it shows an utter contempt for the members. I disagree with some nominations but they do have the good grace to be at the meeting

Should anyone have more information please post.

Rodders

 

Dick Holland has a long planned special holiday which he told me about. It seems he could possibly find himself under threat from polar bears. We were told at our meeting with trustees that neither Mr Walters nor John Wood would be present, though I don't know the reason.

Frank

 

I thought the AGM date was published 12 months ago maybe they need diarys for Christmas. Its a shame though we wanted to listen to the candidates before we voted oh well for us the list has just got shorter.


Know all

 

Mrs Holland, a friend, told me that they booked their special holiday long before the date for the AGM was set, so I think we should be careful about using phrases like 'utter contempt' where the facts are not known.

Unless you know better Rodders?

If you don't know why John Wood and Chris Walters are not there, then I think a little more discretion would be advisable.

I was not at last year's AGM because I was at a childhood friend's wedding in Kent. Had that been this year, would I have been showing 'utter contempt' ?

We have important points to make at Saturday's meeting. This will not be assisted by unfocused or unsubstantiated criticism.

Kind regards

Robin White

 

What I was alluding to was that the Company Secretary made a complete hash of dealing with the ballot at last years AGM. It was quite obvious that she did not understand the law on ballots. Now the minutes have failed to record what actually happened. Since the it is her responsibility for those being an accurate record one has to ask if she is really up to the job. Cynics might say it was a clumsy attempt to cover up her own incompetence. I could not possibly comment.

 

[Mrs Holland, a friend, told me that they booked their special holiday long before the date for the AGM was set, so I think we should be careful about using phrases like 'utter contempt' where the facts are not known.

Unless you know better Rodders?

If you don't know why John Wood and Chris Walters are not there, then I think a little more discretion would be advisable.

I was not at last year's AGM because I was at a childhood friend's wedding in Kent. Had that been this year, would I have been showing 'utter contempt' ?

We have important points to make at Saturday's meeting. This will not be assisted by unfocused or unsubstantiated criticism.

Kind regards

Robin White]

 

Long term readers of this thread will know that I and other WSRMAG members are not enthusiasts for many of the management actions of the WSRA, but I don't think it's appropriate to make public personal criticisms of individual members of staff like this. Any blame for mis-management must lie with the Chairman and Trustees.
Frank

 

Frank is right. The responsibility lies with the Trustees and the focus must be on them on Saturday.

Kind regards

Robin

 

Yes Rodders comments maybe a little harsh but aren't the AGMs a similar time every year? While one may be absent for that special occasion I accept but 30% of the trustees will be missing the charity chappies ands chapesses recommend that best practice is that all Charity Trustees attend see below clipped from the charity Commision website. I trust Robin should we vote for you will follow best practice and hopefully all your friends are now married!

During the AGM 97.
To help the AGM run smoothly we recommend that charity trustees adopt the following points of good practice: all charity trustees and members of senior management attend the AGM; charity trustees are seated facing the members; the Chair does not propose his or her own (re)election; any individual charity trustee does not propose, second or advocate a resolution in which she or he has an interest; the Chair allows sufficient time for members' questions during the meeting; the Chair explains the effect and purpose of each proposed resolution before putting it to a vote and whether the decision of the AGM is binding on the charity trustees; members who have put forward proposed resolutions are entitled to draft and have circulated with the notice of the meeting an explanation of their resolution (subject to it being a reasonable length) and any other supporting documents; and the Chair allows an opportunity for the proposer of any resolution to address the meeting.

the link is here http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/Publications/cc48.aspx#33

Know all

 

I accept that is good practice, and I'm sure all would try to follow it, as I would.

Regrettably, as is the present fashion, a number of my friends , including the friend in Kent, have been married more than once.

I am also beginning to approach that time in life when the number of funerals starts to approach the number of weddings !

Kind regards

Robin

 

It is my understanding that Chris Walters is in France and has been for some time. When was he co-opted again?