Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

Is there something contagious doing the rounds in the south west?

 

Exactly - on the proxy form you can instruct your proxy how you wish your votes to be cast. This is similar to a postal vote in an election or referendum. It is a pity that this is being viewed by some as sinister.

 

I would agree with the basic premise.

Clearly by a certain date the main business for the AGM was already known (Minutes, Reports Accounts etc), as was the fact that 3 Trustees were standing down by rota and standing for re-election. No harm in drafting the bulk of the paperwork in readiness, saves much effort later when timescales are shorter. However...the Trust must then wait until after the date for Trustee nominations has closed before finalising the paperwork, in case any nominations for new Trustee arise (as was the case this year). What is inexplicable is that apparently - if the published timeline is correct - not only was the paperwork confirmed to the printers before that date, but also after the Company Sec had received CG's nomination.

No doubt in due course a full explanation will be forthcoming.

 

That is to be hoped, but full explanations of some events on another nearby railway have never appeared.

 

It also clearly states that 'unless otherwise instructed as shown below, the proxy may vote as he thinks fit or abstain.' the proxy being the chairman of the meeting, in all honesty I believe proxy voting should be removed and members should put their X in a candidates box then any doubt is removed, blank papers should be invalid and to make everything impartial an independent company should issue, collect and count returns, perhaps then, incidences like this may not happen,one has to wonder how this cock-up happened seeing how many times the company secretary has already overseen the process

 

I've never liked proxy votes, since apart from anything else I think they reduce in-person engagement at an AGM (why attend, if the chairman has more proxy votes than are likely to be in the meeting?). However, that said, my understanding is that they are a legal requirement for incorporated companies, so not much you can do to avoid them.

Tom

 

The use of proxy votes is common in professional bodies, Building Societies and the like. These bodies have membership throughout the country and in-person attendance at an AGM is uncommon. However, I attended my first Building Society AGM this year because it was held virtually. Proxy voting gives these organisation a clear mandate from their members.
Don't forget that L and B have two AGMs - the CIC and the Trust and it is only the trust where there is an election. The membership is spread throughout the county so Proxy votes give those who cannot attend an opportunity to participate in the running of the organisations.
One wonders why the nomination for the extra trustee was received only four days before the closing date - it would seem that the trust was unaware of his intention to stand.

 

I have no connection with the L&B whatsoever so no idea of the people involved, but the idea that the existing board recommends their preferred candidates is fairly standard stuff. I’ve seen similar in professional institutions for certain, and I think very probably pension funds and building societies as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Provided that a nomination is received before the advertised closing date, why should it matter how long/short before that date it was received?
Why should/would the Trust be aware of someone's intention to stand before a nomination is received?

 

Having been appointed a governor without the school having known in advance, and experienced the ripples that followed, I can see why the reaction might be adverse if a completely unforeseen nomination arrived.

I’m aware of elections to two charities where potential candidates are being strongly encouraged to approach in advance to discuss what might be involved.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Some people don't seem to understand, or wish to abide by, democratic principles. Whenever I have been Secretary, or similar role, of an organization I have been scrupulous in ensuring that all members were fully informed of the candidates and their views (as presented by them) and were given the fullest opportunity to cast their votes as they wished. There is no excuse for tampering with the candidate's statement of proposed policy/intent, or for attempting to influence the voters in favour of particular candidates. Any officer of the organization attempting to do so should be barred from office immediately.

 

I understand your comment. However, if I was wishing to stand for election to such an organisation I would be speaking to them and letting them know of my intention well in advance of the closing date for nominations.

 

In most cases so would I but if there is a closing date for nominations then any properly run organisation should be prepared and ready to receive 'surprise' nominations, for anyone entitled to stand, on that date if necessary. Then, as in any other election, supporters and opponents can campaign for votes if they wish.

 

The trust and cic AGM 's are held at the same meeting and both have voting for trustees

 

I should have said only the trust have a contested election. In the case of the CIC there are the same number of candidates as vacancies so the directors are elected provided that every one of them has received a vote.

 

Not quite true. The L&BR Trust AGM will elect or re-elect "Trustees" whilst the L&BR CIC AGM elect or re-elect "Directors". Andy, you being a director of Exmoor Associates CIC, I would have thought you would have known about these things!

 

I was wondering about this aspect as well - if you are serious about wanting to win a vote then you need to get as many supporters as possible...which takes time and organisation. To get yourself and your policies known by as many voters as possible.......so why delay until the last minute, when you appear as an unknown. It is a puzzling tactic. However, as I have said before, I hope all the relevant people can get together and sort out an effective solution that enables the Railway to progress without distraction.

 

my apologies Chris,i should have put directors instead of trustees for the CIC,i should have checked my voting slips but i was merely highlighting the fact that two sets of votes will be taking place,but also being a member of the L&BR i would have thought that the company secretary of the L&BR Trust would have known about the opening and closing dates for nominees,he's been doing it for long enough

 

I agree completely. Nevertheless if someone does appear at the last moment the organisation should abide scrupulously by their own constitution (and company/charity law, as applicable). Otherwise it looks grubby.

 

And as ever, it is any perception of impropriety rather than the fact of it that is so corrosive.