[Nottingham] AGM - Candidates and How to Vote (email vote deadline 5pm)

[David Aldred]

On Friday 22 Jul 2005 15:59, Martin wrote:
> As events unfolded, the initially well laid plans got a little cramped
> from Monday to roll into the day itself on Wednesday. I'll agree that a
> full clear 24 hours should be allowed for email voting. Then also, those
> interested could turn up on the night or phone someone going there to
> offer a proxy.
>
> Overall, for our first attempt and for those that volunteered in
> whatever way, I feel we made a good effort. For next time, we've learnt
> and perhaps we should be a little more pushy to get things and people in
> place.

I agree....   but....  I think Michael is (broadly) right about his amendments 
to the Constitution - though wrong in that procedures for election should be 
covered in Standing Orders rathr than in the Constitution.

I'vve just read the Constitution again......

Just to make one point first: technically, no email votes should have been 
counted.  The Standing Orders (which I assume have been adopted alongside the 
Constitution: they are in the same .sxw document) say:

(1.1 ) All elections shall be by simple majority vote of those present at the 
meeting under which the election(s) are conducted.

(1.2) Votes shall be cast in secret.

The email voting was thus entirely outside SO 1.1, and not valid under the 
Constitution; it's difficult to see how email votes per se could *ever* 
satisfy SO 1.2.  This has two effects: one, there should really be a recount: 
two, complaints (including mine!) about the lack of time to vote by email 
become void, so we can shut up about that!  

However, for the future, ISTM that email voting needs to be made possible, as 
no-one (other than the formal constitution wording) seems to have thought it 
wouldn't be!  


I would go along with Michael's suggestion that we need an EGM to amend the 
constitution; however, the amendment I would propose would be to Standing 
Orders (which is where procedural matters should go - I can expand on why if 
anyone really wants me to!) and would be as follows, to establish and enable 
email voting procedures and set reasonable timescales:

==============================================================================

DELETE existing SO 1.1 and 1.2 entirely;
RENUMBER SO 1.3 to 1.4;
ADOPT new SOs as follows:

1.1  Elections shall be by simple majority of votes validly cast by members of 
the Group.

TIMESCALES
1.2.1 The date of close of nominations referred to in Article 12 of the 
Constitution shall be not less than ten days prior to the date of the 
election;

1.2.2 Candidates in elections shall provide any commentary for publication 
supporting ther candidature not less than seven days prior to the date of the 
election;

1.2.3 The names and any supporting commentaries shall be published to all 
members of the Group by email not less than five days before the date of the 
election with information on how to cast a vote.

MEANS OF VOTING
1.3.1  Votes may be cast:

 at the meeting at which the election is conducted or 
 by email a reasonable time before the said meeting (such reasonable time to 
be published with the notice given in accordance with SO 1.2.3) 

and both forms of vote shall have equal validity.

1.3.2 Votes cast at meetings will be secret.
1.3.3 Votes cast by email shall originate from the email address registered on 
the Group mailing list for the member concerned, and such origination shall 
be considered evidence of validity.  Votes cast by email shall be secret 
other than for purposes of confirmation of validity.
1.3.4 Any member who has cast a vote by email shall not vote at the meeting. 

==============================================================================

Sorry if this sounds a bit long, but  think it would do what we all want - and 
in many ways this is one of the most important bits of the Group 'paperwork' 
since it establishes the legitimacy of the committee to outside bodies (like 
Banks!).   

Martin mentioned proxy voting: that's a whole different piscine cooking 
implement, and unless we *really* want it I'd say don't go there!

-- 
David Aldred