CTC forum thread on 'Charity' status

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

theclaud

Openly Marxist
Location
Swansea
jonesy said:
Motion 10 not carried according to:
http://twitter.com/ctcpeterborough

I don't know what the significance of that is...?

Can you expand on the fiddling?

Not very usefully, as I don't really understand why it's allowed, but there originally seemed to be one resolution, about converting to a charity, and that was the Special Resolution (hence the 75% requirement). They split it into 3, meaning that 8 was the most important one, even though it was now an Ordinary Resolution requiring only a simple majority. 9 and 10 were then about the practical/procedural steps needed to bring it about, and would have been dropped if we'd beaten 8. I suppose 10 was deemed Special Resolution material because it was specifically about altering the Mem & Arts...
 

jonesy

Guru
Hmm. Guess we'll have to wait till someone who was there can pop up and explain what the implications are. I assume they wouldn't have put no. 10 in if it wasn't needed, so it not being carried must have some consequences...
 

theclaud

Openly Marxist
Location
Swansea
jonesy said:
Hmm. Guess we'll have to wait till someone who was there can pop up and explain what the implications are. I assume they wouldn't have put no. 10 in if it wasn't needed, so it not being carried must have some consequences...

Yes I'm just being grumpy - hopefully it will be a significant obstacle, but as in itself it isn't the sort of thing to fire the passions, I'm guessing they'll just bide their time and sneak it through next time when the fuss has died down. I'm sure Greg and Simon will be able to elaborate. Better not add insult to injury by slipping any FA Cup spoilers into the thread :wahhey:
 

jonesy

Guru
theclaud said:
Yes I'm just being grumpy - hopefully it will be a significant obstacle, but as in itself it isn't the sort of thing to fire the passions, I'm guessing they'll just bide their time and sneak it through next time when the fuss has died down. I'm sure Greg and Simon will be able to elaborate. Better not add insult to injury by slipping any FA Cup spoilers into the thread :wahhey:

This "FA Cup" being...?
 

jonesy

Guru
interesting...

http://79.170.44.128/savethectc.org.uk/
RESULTS - 1900 Saturday 15 May 2010
The key motions :
Motions 8 & 9 (to "prepare for charity status") required a simple majority and were narrowly carried by just 4%
Motion 10 (to "make Constitutional changes to the Memorandum & Articles required by the Charity Commission") required 75% of those voting to vote Yes and was resoundingly defeated (just 60.9% voting Yes)
OUTCOME : The process of preparation could be started but cannot be implemented without a 75% in favour vote to amend the Memorandum & Articles - that requires a membership-wide vote at an AGM or EGM.
 

GrumpyGregry

Here for rides.
was so pissed off I had to go for a ride to calm down. (not really but it makes for a better story - I went for a ride, that bit IS true)

My guess, a propaganda campaign and an EGM will follow, or team yes will wait until next years AGM to have a go at 10 again. Can't recall from my reading of 'the rules' of changes to 'm of a' always need 75% or just special resolutions. If the later then they just need a simple majority at an EGM or AGM.

Any sensible organisation would look at the numbers and its leadership would dust off their plus two's and say "Well chaps, not quite the ringing endorsement we were looking for, what? Rum lot the members. Probably best we let the dust settle for bit eh? Who's for another brandy?"

The CTC does not fulfil my criteria for a sensible organisation.
 

toekneep

Senior Member
Location
Lancashire
At last I understand. So it seems that the fudging of items 8 and 9 didn't work and the rejection of 10 means that we live to fight another day as it were.
 

jonesy

Guru
GregCollins said:
... Can't recall from my reading of 'the rules' of changes to 'm of a' always need 75% or just special resolutions. If the later then they just need a simple majority at an EGM or AGM.
...

I've no idea about 'the rules', but it would seem strange if a change that required a 75% majority in this AGM could be held again with the bar set lower at another AGM...?
 

MacB

Lover of things that come in 3's
jonesy said:
I've no idea about 'the rules', but it would seem strange if a change that required a 75% majority in this AGM could be held again with the bar set lower at another AGM...?

yep, but so does the idea of voting on 8 & 9 first if 10 could be a showstopper
 

GrumpyGregry

Here for rides.
jonesy said:
I've no idea about 'the rules', but it would seem strange if a change that required a 75% majority in this AGM could be held again with the bar set lower at another AGM...?

clearly you weren't in NALGO or the TGWU in the 80's;)
 
OP
OP
dellzeqq

dellzeqq

pre-talced and mighty
Location
SW2
So, it all went as Council would wish it, with the exception of resolution 10. Chantrey Vellacourt were re-appointed as auditors, and resolutions 8 and 9 passed with about 54% of the vote, courtesy of the 770 people who placed their faith in the Chair.

Resolution 10 , the amendments to the Memorandum and Articles of Association, only gathered about 59% of the vote, and, requiring 75%, failed. We have a stay of execution.

I’m gutted. It means that I’ll have to stay on and help to sort this mess out, knowing that there are shortfalls in the character of the CTC that are far beyond my abilities to remedy. I’d hoped fervently for one of two outcomes – a solid vote against, or a vote in favour, however narrow. The former would have kicked the conversion to charity in to the long grass for years to come, and the latter would have allowed me to walk away from the CTC and worry about something else. Now I’m hooked.

The good news is that the reforming spirit on CTC Council can now use the ‘nay’ campaign for its own ends. We’ll meet, and, hopefully, agree a way forward. There needs to be safeguards for the members' funds and there needs to be transparency in the way things are costed. There needs to be a means of demonstrating value to the members. I doubt that those things that I hold dear (respect for the bike trade, and a more ethical way of trading) will transpire, but it is incumbent on the ‘nay’ campaign to effect as great an improvement as is humanly possible.

The bad news is that, while we did well against considerable odds. I’m doubtful that lessons, on openness, on fairness and on the value of volunteers will be learnt. Campaigns will still be a lobbyists ghetto. Member groups may get more dough, but the service may not improve. The CTC’s relationship with independent providers of cycle training may well be as toxic as ever (I’ve spared you this – it’s not nice). Still, and all, we may be a force for the better. I’ll be guided in my future actions by my DA committee, but my thought now is that if there is good to be done, we should do it.

Now, on to far more pressing matters. East Midland sends out trains with only six little bottles of gin. That's not right. We exhausted this meagre ration by the time the train arrived in Bedford, and, by Luton, we were on to the vodka. Honestly, you lot, the sacrifices I make on your behalf..........
 
Top Bottom