Printable View
Does anybody know what status the ballot result will have?
The only information I can find about this is that the committee will not be bound by the result if less than 10% of the membership vote.
Does this mean that the committee is bound by the result if more than 10% vote?
Is a simple majority all that is required?
Brita, thanks for posting your concerns. This is a tough time for people close to the centre of the organisation who are devoting a lot of time to trying to do things the right way. The way I see it, as an open 'nay sayer', is that everyone is genuinely grateful to the sub-committee for taking the time and effort to make the report. And the report is very thorough and helpful for summarising the issues. And it certainly does not lean hard one way or the other...in fact it acknowledges that 'a split between domestic and international competition may be a successful compromise if the FRA were to instigate the change and yet still inspire potential international runners'...an open invitation to disaffiliate if ever there was one. Unfortunately, I think all the hard work of the sub-committee has been let down by the ill-advised tone of the ballot paper which is what the objectors in this thread are pointing out. The sub-committee has done a great job.
The FRA Constitution states that "The Fell Running Association" ....is recognised by UK Athletics as the managing body of Fell-Running in England. There are various other clauses relating to the links between the FRA and UKA.
The Member Ballot makes no mention of the method of determining how changes to the FRA Constitution would be handled with the exception that the FRA Committee reserves the right to discount the ballot if less than 10% of the FRA members return ballot papers.
Can we presume that a simple majority in the Member Ballot will suffice?
Using the above figures a minimum of 316 members would have to vote NO and only 630 people would need to complete the ballot paper.Quote:
Originally Posted by Britta
What happens if this situation is realised is not clear. How will the Executive Committee handle a possible change to the constitution? Rule 7.h) states that any amendment to the constitution will be in accordance with Rule 9.b).
Will the FRA call an Extraordinary General Meeting and, if twenty people are present, then it will take only eleven votes to take the FRA out of UKA!
some intresting points on this thread! i agree with some, but not others. so i shall just say voted and posted and yep i put a stamp on otherwise it would have a surcharge on it at the other end £1 handling charge and 24p for a second class stamp.
so return em with a stamp please.
thank you.
That's the nature of democracy. Only those that vote have a say, but since everyone has the opportunity to vote that seems fair enough to me.
6054 members exactly actually.
The committee already has a mandate from a previous AGM to leave UKA if they want, so if the ballot proved that this is what the membership want, i don't think it would cause too many constitutional problems, but maybe i'm being naive there...
LOL, if you're looking for 'hidden clues' the unanimous vote of the sub-comittee in favour of staying with UKA (for the time being!) should be mentioned too ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Wheeze
Britta
My assertion was neither wild nor erroneous. I will only modify it by saying the majority of material put out by the committee has had a strong anti-disaffiliation spin (and the ballot paper is just the latest example). The stating of the pro-disaffiliation argument has been left up to others (and notably an EX-member of the committee).Quote:
Originally Posted by GrahamB
Based on this evidence I don't think the committee should be at all surprised that they face accusations of bias.
I think there may be a weight of opinion within the committee for disaffiliation but the "party line" (thanks for your wisdom, end - so enlightening) has always been 'let's stay in for now'. Perhaps those on the committee who lean towards disaffiliation are just reluctant to actually make the jump. Perhaps the membership won't be.
did you read the bumph that UK:athletics sent out??Quote:
Originally Posted by Trundler
which commitee have you been on of late?
and where is Yorkshire thug 'IT' normally has a thing or 20to say on these issues??
Yes, I was wondering that too! No matter what you think of their postings, it sort of feels odd not having YT around for this discussion doesn't it...:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Penguin
XRunner, how many votes did it take us to become affiliated with NoEAA/BAF or whatever it was?