Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

You are quite right, but....my suspicion is that it is one of those myriad of tasks which needs 'someone' with the initiative and authority to allocate the resources and a time-slot in which to do the work. But with so much else going on, or not, people get distracted/diverted and the cycle continues....

 

There does seem to have been a lot of complexity introduced, and much of it does not appear to have a purpose. It is often a question from people as to how governance has an effect on the rest of the organisation. This is how. Lack of clarity can become cultural.

RM3 was mentioned earlier. It’s not a bad framework for how to run a business, providing that in applying it you remember that simplicity pays. Just because it is a significant document, it does not follow that you need or want reams and reams of documents as a response.

 

I was discussing risk assessments with a retired solicitor I do work for and she basically said less is best, the more you put in the more there is to pick up on

 

This is the problem with people having half the story

It was also explained that this figure needs to be looked at because of members passing on and joint membership not getting renewed because of one members passing etc and family memberships etc

Its a figure that needs to be researched more as stated in the meeting.

It was also in the meeting that audio would be recorded so the trustees can listern back after at a later date so nothing is missed but it was then decided at the meeting that it would be published to the membership with a vote of hands to anyone with concerns and no one showed a hand so it will come eventually.

 

So, a good example therefore IMHO where the caveats that you mention should have been annotated to the published slides, thus avoiding exactly the issue to which you refer.

 

You are, of course, correct. And if a business follows the principle you describe, then it could be a sound proposal.
However, if one significantly overpays for an asset such that the asset is then not capable of paying a dividend, or if the asset is so overpaid that if the business fails then there is a major capital loss, the investor has deviated from such sound principles.
If someone buys a country pub within ten miles of a reasonable town- its really not a wise investment. Someone must work hard to get a living from the asset-either the owner or a tenant. If that pub should fail though, it could become a private house. Once some of the pubness has been decorated away the owner can sell it and likely not lose money- provided they were not so enamoured of the notion of being a publican that they overpaid by 200%.

As it is, if the OSI fails - I hope it won't, but it could- if it fails and closes down, anyone opposing the re-instatement of the railway will claim that the society did not care enough about the community asset, did not bother to try, bought 'our' beloved pub and closed it down to get people out of the way..... None of these claims would be true, but the opposers don't seem to care very much about truth. But it seems that now, somehow, the OSI cannot be allowed to fail.
Whereas if the pub business had failed in someone else's care the premises could have been purchased at a much lower price and without any social-moral responsibilies

 

Membership matters are not so easy when you have to do them, as some families don't always let groups like the L&BR know when someone is no longer a member, So you learn the hard way.

I know from personal experience that when I was part of the Membership team, we had too many classes of membership. However since I am a life member, I haven't taken a great deal of notice of what we currently have in place. But maybe it would be worth having a review of what classes we have. I notice that a couple of railway societies are now charging £50.00 plus for one year's membership, so all I can say is that my life membership has been a worthwhile investment in this project.

 

Seven 'ifs'.

 

So? This is a discussion not O level English composition

 

There is no half story, quite simply on the old website it clearly states that there will be no further updates after February 2023 which was approximately when the new website was being launched, now giving the benefit of doubt due to technical hitches ect we could say the new site was up and running by May 23 AGM. on the new site under 'ABOUT' and dropdown choice 'L&B Railway Trust' the opening sentence states 'with over 3000 members worldwide'. on the slides at this years AGM it clearly states 2163 members ( individual, couples, family ) as of 1st April 2025 ( down 140 ) so we have to guess that this 140 figure is from the last 12 months as no other information was given so that would mean year 2023-2024 697 members did not renew so in total since 2023 837 members have not renewed, the make up of that figure is immaterial as the current figure covers the same data base, the only figure that would affect this is the deaths and being generous with a figure of 100 deaths that still means 737 members have not renewed. All of this based on figures published by the Trust and posted on its website.
As for the recording, i think you will find the asking for the show of hands was actually to gain permission to record that section of the meeting, whether it will be published or not remains to be seen but in the Trust slides recently posted it clearly states 'We would like to record the discussion so we capture all views, this will NOT be published anywhere. Any objections

 

The more you write, the more likely you are to fail. Not my words but those of a well respected person in the heritage railway movement who has written SMS’s for several railways.

 

20 years ago, when I was part of the membership team, I recall we had 2800-odd members, so most definitely a decline since then.

Bear in mind that the slides for the AGM were prepared in advance, so despite what they may say, they are not the minutes of the meeting and do not necessarily reflect the actual proceedings acurately. I do recall that there was unanimous approval from the floor to record the session, and I think I recall a comment from Giles that, because of the uninamity of the decision, that it might be released. That is the problem with not having a recording - I can't be sure of that last point!

 

To be fair, probably not all of the 2800 members were odd, admittedly most were, but not all.

 

And guarantee that it will be sold on the open market and that the society will have the money to buy it at the time it becomes available is what?

BTW, any assumption that the return on a country pub will beat inflation is IMO, one that requires justification.

 

And it's that last word, "justification", that is key. The L&BRT appears to have taken on significant financial and commercial risks in the way that the LBBC business has been set up, and it's far from clear how those risks have been balanced against the charity's purposes.

 

Absolutely agree with that, but the idea that it is other than a risk/reward judgement is the bit that I think is wrong.

What would be the cost to the L&B project of it being knocked down and replaced with a block of flats over the formation?

Buying it outright would remove that risk. Buying it with a mortgage/financial instruments/etc does not remove the risk, but tips it to one that the society has control over. In site assembly terms, that is worth a premium,

 

Which takes us back round to how the purchase was structured and enabled, and where that left LBBC, CIC, and L&BRT respectively. My tolerance for risk is relatively high, but only where I can see and understand that risk.

 

Can you not advise the trust on a better structure?

I can imagine that when they started with the initial price proposal, they did not think that they would end up with the structure as it is now.

EA started off with one structure, and have had to adapt to something more efficient.

 

Sadly, one gets the impression that the Trust under its current management is not particularly open to such suggestions from anyone really. Not invented here....