Constitution Amendments SRs 9, 10 &12

[DonRamsay]

SR9 - Holding of Board Meetings

 

The Constitution currently requires at least two face-to-face meetings of the Board. This amendment aligns the two Board Meetings with the two General Meetings. This does not limit the Board from holding other face-to-face meetings or from meeting on-line.

 

This Special Resolution proposes to replace sub-paragraph (i) of Rule 18.

 

SR10 - Ratification of Board Resolutions at Online Meetings

 

The Constitution currently requires that a Board Resolution passed at other than a face-to-face meeting is valid only until and if it is ratified at a face-to-face Board Meeting. This creates a period of uncertainty for a period of up to 6 months when a Board Resolution has been passed at an electronic meeting of the Board. There is no need for this requirement as a motion can be fully discussed online before a vote is taken. If a Board member subsequently changes his/her mind then they can always move a rescission motion.

 

This Special Resolution proposes to replace sub-paragraph (i) of Rule 20.

 

SR12 - Conflict of Interest

 

This proposed amendment is intended to emphasise the need for the Chair of a Meeting to be acutely conscious of a Conflict of Interest. If in doubt as to the seriousness of the conflict of interest, the meeting may decide the issue as it would be a conflict of interest for the Chair to attempt to decide such an issue.

 

Our new Board in September could have 8 or 10 out of 13 members who are CFIs. Each will need to be conscious of their potential for perceived conflicts of interest. On the one hand, being CFIs gives them a vested interest in the success of RA-Aus on the other . . .

 

This Special Resolution proposes to replace all of Rule 26.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Sounds ok to me.................Maj...