Cycling UK AGM : 13th May 2017 : London

[Barred1]

Our AGM will take place on Saturday 13th May 2017 at 10.00am at the . . . .

Wesley Hotel & Conference venue, 81/103 Euston Road, London NW1 2EZ.

To obtain admission, members must produce a valid membership card or proof of current membership.

To book your place you must notify sue.cherry@cyclinguk.org or ring 01483 238302 as space is limited at the venue.

http://www.cyclinguk.org/agm

The point about booking seems to fly in the face of the law - my understanding is that an AGM is open for attendance in person by anyone and everyone that is eligible? - the comment implies that there will be limited access?

B1

[Graham]

. . . . . . as space is limited at the venue.

Not an unreasonable request ?

[thirdcrank]

FWIW, I think that if it becomes obvious that the venue for a public meeting won't be big enough, then they need a bigger one. I'm pretty confident that that applies to a limited company, not so sure about a charity. I had some free shares in the Bradford and Bingley, acquired by carpetbagging. (I carpetbagged with the cussed intention of voting against demutualisation.) When I was proved right, ie demutualisation failed, I was going to go to the special general meeting in Bingley to tell them what I thought of them. Plenty of other former members, by then shareholders, must have felt the same because the venue was changed for a bigger one and IIRC, an even bigger one. They ended up in some where like Sheffield and I decided it wasn't worth the trip.

I can't imagine that they'll need to hire the O2 for a CTC AGM

[Barred1]

. . . . . . as space is limited at the venue.

Not an unreasonable request ?

That's fine to ask who is coming BUT there should be no limit on numbers which is the implication - everyone has the right to be there.

B1

[Euskadi]

Just as an observation, I have voted by post, but I found the ballot paper quite confusing. It seemed very keen to get you to vote by proxy and wasn't very clear (to me at any rate) what to do if you just wanted to vote in advance (e.g. wasn't at all clear if I should sign the form or whether I only did that if I was assigning a proxy). Also I was disappointed that I couldn't just vote in advance online. I logged on expecting to be able to, but seemingly the only way to vote online is by assigning a proxy. I would have thought online voting would have encouraged more people to vote.
Regards - and keep up the good work

[Euskadi]

Ok, so reading this thread has cleared my confusion up (it does need to be clearer IMO) and have now voted online using Chair as my proxy.

Another point I'd just like to make is that Special Resolution 5 was bundled up and I do not think it should have been. I would have voted for increasing petition numbers to 400 but against petitioning members bearing reasonable costs of recovery (sounds highly litigious to me and unfair). As I could only vote for or against I weighed up the balance and voted against.

[Steady rider]

Two motions have false or misleading statements attached, this will mislead members. I would not vote for the Chair to be a proxy because he/she should have ensured motions were without false or misleading statements. The members sending in the motions asked other members to vote on them, not to delegate, but members have this option.

landsurfer

Motion 15 .... seems like a trap to me.....

How do you mean?

[PH]

Two motions have false or misleading statements attached, this will mislead members.

If you believe that to be the case, you should take it up with ERS
https://www.electoralreform.co.uk/about-us/contact-us

[gaz]

That's fine to ask who is coming BUT there should be no limit on numbers which is the implication - everyone has the right to be there.

Yes, although on the other hand short of booking a venue that can seat 67,000 (or whatever the current number of voting members is) there will always be a limit on numbers.

[gaz]

Edit: Votes cast.

[belgiangoth]

I used the electronic voting system, I would be unimpressed if my proxy had to go hunting for my vote.

[PH]

I used the electronic voting system, I would be unimpressed if my proxy had to go hunting for my vote.

All the voting is handled by ERS, I think they know what they're doing

[RickH]

I used the electronic voting system, I would be unimpressed if my proxy had to go hunting for my vote.

To be honest, I don't know the fine details but it wouldn't surprise me if it was assumed that people knew beforehand that they were being proxies (& had agreed). There may not be any prior communication to that person about it - you only give a name on the form. Unless someone has said in advance that they are willing to be a proxy, personally, I don't think it is a good idea to make assumptions on their willingness.

Does the proxy have to provide some sort of evidence, i.e. name & membership number of those they are being proxy for?

[Steady rider]

This is why the process is easier for voting for the Chair, all other options are more involved. In 60000 members several may have the same name for example.

[gaz]

The voting figures for the 2016 AGM indicate some 40-50 votes cast by those in the room. PH's account was of some 70-100 people present.

It isn't impossible that there might be two persons present with the same name but surely the odds aren't that high.