My emphasis.Karen Sutton wrote:....As swansonj points out, the Chair did not act illegally. I am perfectly aware of that. I would not attempt to be more authoratitive than CTC's legal team. I was offering my opinion of the situation as I see it. I would however say that the demand for a re-vote is not simply to defeat Council's desire to turn our Club into a Charity. It was also to revisit the issue in order to try to get more members to vote. Unfortunately the need for a more balanced information from both the "yes" and "no" camps campaign has not been met in my opinion.
Then why not revisit all the other motions at the AGM? They all attracted a similar turn-out.
If a lower percentage of the membership vote in the poll of the whole club than the percentage that voted at the AGM, with 51% of the vote no and 49% of the vote yes, will the petition not have achieved it's aim?
Will voters consider such an outcome legitimate?
It is a perfectly valid course of action for Jeff Tollerman to have raised his petition and to call a poll of the whole club simply to ask the membership to reconsider the matter, even if 100% of the membership had voted first time around.
Of course as Si pointed out earlier a vote of "Yes" still doesn't end the matter, AGM Motion 10 was not carried and at this stage even with a further "Yes" vote to Motion 8 we cannot become a Charity.