Topic: Allotment Committee

[Skywarn]

Hi, I hope someone or anyone can help me and us here.
We have a major problem with our 'top table' of committee.
They seem to be trying to take over everything including Stewards jobs.
I think the allotment has gone to their heads and a quite a lot of people have had enough. Its tricky, but what can we do? It only seems to be the top 3 on the table and we are suffocated.
Sorry to be so short in the reasons but iam not sure if they visit this site.
Its really hard but at least we seem to have some support with the other members of committee around 6 of the 9. Rules state that committee is elected in January. Nothing on the rules re calling an EGM and we could get support from at least 50% of the membership.

Could we force an EGM if at least 50% agree to Dissolve officers of the committee?
I feel are whole association is turnng into a dictatorship by a couple on the committee. I can not give up, I feel members are waiting for someone to make the first move into perhaps an no confidence vote?

We are honestly desperate at what move we can call.  >:(

[Unwashed]

Hi Skywarm

Welcome to A4A.

I'm not sure what your complaint is exactly.  Your committee makes decisions how?  Simple majority?  If you're not happy about the decisions the committee make, then I'm sorry, but that's democracy, and if you're on the committee then your duty is to get behind those decision whatever your personal opinion.

Are you saying that individual members of the committee are acting with executive authority?  That would be different.

If there's no provision in your constitution for holding an EGM then it just means there's no particular formalities to be observed.  If enough of you - like a good dozen - write to the Secretary demanding an EGM then she ought to call one, and if she refuses then you still have options.

If you want an honest neutral opinion on your specifics you're welcome to PM me.

[Skywarn]

Hi Skywarm

Welcome to A4A.

I'm not sure what your complaint is exactly.  Your committee makes decisions how?  Simple majority?  If you're not happy about the decisions the committee make, then I'm sorry, but that's democracy, and if you're on the committee then your duty is to get behind those decision whatever your personal opinion.

Are you saying that individual members of the committee are acting with executive authority?  That would be different.

If there's no provision in your constitution for holding an EGM then it just means there's no particular formalities to be observed.  If enough of you - like a good dozen - write to the Secretary demanding an EGM then she ought to call one, and if she refuses then you still have options.

If you want an honest neutral opinion on your specifics you're welcome to PM me.

Thanks for your advice unwashed.
we have a membership of around 100 would i still need 12 or more to call an EGM?

[davyw1]

I cant exactly recall the corect name of the book " Rules of Good Chairmanship "

The secretary upon written request of 15  members shall call a special general meeting of the association. Such a meeting shall take place within 28 days of receipt by the secretary of written notice of such a request. The meeting shall considder items, which are specified in the request.

This request must be signed by each member. If one of the signed members fail to attend then the meeting can not be opened.

[Unwashed]

Like I say, if your constitution doesn't say anything about an EGM then it's all down to whether the Secretary wants to call it.  She might call it if just one members asks, and she might refuse if fifty ask.  But a reasonable Secretary would want to see a reasonable number of people asking for an EGM, especially an EGM to vote on a motion of no confidence - because let's face it, there isn't a more disruptive thing you could ask for.  She wouldn't be serving the membership very well if she convened an EGM for a handful of disaffected whingers so it's reasonable to expect a significant number of tenants to ask for it.  You could ask her what support she'd expect to see before calling an EGM?

Have you already raised the issues with the Committee.  Can you answer any of the background questions I asked you before?

[Skywarn]

I cant exactly recall the corect name of the book " Rules of Good Chairmanship "

The secretary upon written request of 15  members shall call a special general meeting of the association. Such a meeting shall take place within 28 days of receipt by the secretary of written notice of such a request. The meeting shall considder items, which are specified in the request.

This request must be signed by each member. If one of the signed members fail to attend then the meeting can not be opened.

Unwashed, I have sent you a PM. I have already raised the issues with the Committee and 6 of the 12 agree. I find it strange why they cannot stand up and do a vote of no confidence. But i feel (what they say) they don't know what to do.

I would be interested in reading this book if anyone knows the correct name?

Thanks davyw1.

[PurpleHeather]

Most allotments associations seem to base their rules on those used by other associations or WMC or their works Union. They are under the impression that there is one set of rules and these should be adhered to but in fact the rules of the association and the constitution are entirely up to the membership.

I know that it can be hard because there is often one or more who want to be the 'boss' it is probably their only ever chance in life to be in charge of anything and voluntary does not matter. They would pay for the priviledge.

Without fully knowing what has actually happened or what rules you have in place it is hard to advise.

Most  allotment holders want to do just one thing. Get on with their digging and growing and have no political ambitions. In fact, they just want to be left alone to get on with it.

If your rules do not allow for an EGM then it is something to add next AGM.

[Skywarn]

Most allotments associations seem to base their rules on those used by other associations or WMC or their works Union. They are under the impression that there is one set of rules and these should be adhered to but in fact the rules of the association and the constitution are entirely up to the membership.

I know that it can be hard because there is often one or more who want to be the 'boss' it is probably their only ever chance in life to be in charge of anything and voluntary does not matter. They would pay for the priviledge.

Without fully knowing what has actually happened or what rules you have in place it is hard to advise.

Most  allotment holders want to do just one thing. Get on with their digging and growing and have no political ambitions. In fact, they just want to be left alone to get on with it.

If your rules do not allow for an EGM then it is something to add next AGM.

Thats the problem, We do not have a constitution as such, its mostly mixed in with the rules of the allotment? A proper constitution needs to be drawn up and a vote take place at a EGM and adopted after some discussion.

[Robert_Brenchley]

An alternative if you can't get support for a no confidence vote is to wait till the AGM and put up a rival candidate. It's not so drastic and people might be more willing to support it.

[Skywarn]

Hi Allotment Friends  :)

Do you feel it unreasonable that a few (30) managed to organize a BBQ
for this said evening?

I have to say that  I saw our treasurer slowly driving past the allotment
so I went to invite him.
He said in a arrogant fashion 'who organized the BBQ' I replied the members.
By this time i was quite annoyed as it was planned by quite a few members just to have a 'get together' in a sensible way, to whom there were a wide range of ages. Anyway, A few members went to confront him but by this time he drove away.

I question why we can't have a BBQ if the members want one?
Why should 2 people the Secretary and Treasurer stop us.

My god! They just need to go !! pathetic people!!  >:(


Anyway, I have managed to collect 40 Signatures from members who want a change in Committee. They are history now and they better stand down or we will take this to the council.

[Robert_Brenchley]

That's the sort of appalling attitude you get from people who have been allowed to get away with too much for too long. The only solution is to vote them out and put in a decent committee.

[daxzen]

power corrupts

[Skywarn]

Our rules state that the top table and committee are elected in January at a AGM.
There is nothing in the rules to say that they can 'co-op' other members
onto the committee at anytime.
The only wording i can see is:  'Any matters not provided for in these rules shall be resolved by the Committee'. This rule is already catered for.

Would it be fair to say the committee DO NOT have the say on to who or whom can be co-oped without a EGM or at the AGM?

If so, Is this not a rule break in itself? Because we feel the committee is being 'gelled' without the knowledge of its members.
I also ask if the National would be interested in my findings and could 'back up' my complaint?

[Trevor_D]

Committees always have the right to co-opt others onto the Committee, either until the next AGM, or as a 'one-off' to fill a vacancy, or bring in an extra person to deal with a specific matter. If they had to go to an EGM each time, the whole thing could grind to a stand-still.

That said, it should still be above-board. The members should be told who has been co-opted and why. And it must be ratified at the next AGM by a vote, so that the co-opted members become elected ones. (Or not, as the case may be!)

In practice, the Officers are responsible for the day-to-day running and decision-making of the Society; they report to the Committee at monthly (or whatever) Committee meetings and can be held to account if they have been high-handed, or made the wrong decision; similarly, both Officers and Committee are accountable to the membership annually (or earlier, if enough members request an EGM).

We keep in touch with our members through regular newsletters. We also publish Committee minutes on the notice board, so that decisions are made public. And my mobile number and e-mail address are on the notice board.

[Skywarn]

Committees always have the right to co-opt others onto the Committee, either until the next AGM, or as a 'one-off' to fill a vacancy, or bring in an extra person to deal with a specific matter. If they had to go to an EGM each time, the whole thing could grind to a stand-still.

That said, it should still be above-board. The members should be told who has been co-opted and why. And it must be ratified at the next AGM by a vote, so that the co-opted members become elected ones. (Or not, as the case may be!)

In practice, the Officers are responsible for the day-to-day running and decision-making of the Society; they report to the Committee at monthly (or whatever) Committee meetings and can be held to account if they have been high-handed, or made the wrong decision; similarly, both Officers and Committee are accountable to the membership annually (or earlier, if enough members request an EGM).

We keep in touch with our members through regular newsletters. We also publish Committee minutes on the notice board, so that decisions are made public. And my mobile number and e-mail address are on the notice board.

Hi Trevor, Thanks for you quick reply, How long should the commiittee take before they should inform the members as its been since last May they Co-oped a Chairman on? Because it really IS NOT puplic and I could go on to say they have been told to 'keep quiet' We do not think this is the way to conduct business. So far with a membership of 120 (ish) we have collected 23 Signatures to bring an EGM

[Trevor_D]

If it's someone as senior as Chairman, the next day would have been about right.

Unless, of course, you've got one of those modern committees where a different person chairs the meeting each time....

You've obviously got problems on your site, but as we're not actually involved in the detail it's rather difficult to advise. Confrontation will certainly bring matters out in the open, but isn't necessarily the best policy: you may oust these folk from the committee, but they will still be plot-holders - a lot more difficult to get rid of - and may prove difficult to the new committee.

But 23 out of 120ish sounds like about a fifth of the membership to me, which is about right for demanding an EGM.