AUK AGM Hustings 2015

[LittleWheelsandBig]

I've thrown my hat into the ring to become an AUK Director without Portfolio, nominated by marcusjb and seconded by Fidgetbuzz, and this is a blatant attempt to gather votes.

If you want to tell me or ask me anything related to AUK, feel free to PM me here or on the AUK forum (to Dave Minter), email me on davidjminter AT gmail DOT com or post on this thread. I'll do my best to answer you.

[postie]

you get my vote

[LittleWheelsandBig]

Your cheque is in the mail...

[Whitedown Man]

Top three things you hope to achieve?

[LittleWheelsandBig]

Top three things you hope to achieve?

I don't think a dot point list is appropriate.

I have proposed a modification to Regulation 12.1 regarding ebikes but that is independent of any position on the AUK Board.

In general, I would like to avoid needlessly-complex 'solutions' and rules, unlike some recent AUK Board creations. Audax is fundamentally a simple concept and the associated rules and organisation should be similarly simple. I think some of the complexity comes from a lack of understanding and a lack of awareness of other approaches.

AUK should reflect its members' views, rather than solely being a top-down structure. What sort of things do you want to change and what do you want to remain the same?

[Aunt Maud]

Oh bugger!

I wish I'd known this a week ago.

[LittleWheelsandBig]

Oh bugger!

I wished I'd known this a week ago.

A week ago, I wished you'd been at least 3 hours slower off the mark...

[HK]

My consept of a director without portfolio is that they have no particular interest to protect and will therefore look at board suggestions / decisions in a balanced way with their input being putting the members interests first.  If you are standing for a director with no portfolio with a particular interest at heart I don't think you're the right person for this role.

[mattc]

Not sure if this is the right place, but:
How many of these Ds-without-P are there?

(And will they be ranked?? )

[LittleWheelsandBig]

There are 2 x D w/o P on the AUK Board and 3 x AUKs nominated this year. I expect there will be a vote and postal votes may decide the result. EDIT: Interestingly, the AUK Memorandum of Association notes "two/three non-executive directors", so there might not be an election after all.


For completeness, each candidate should present a profile and here is mine:
I rode my first Audax in 1992 in Australia, and after moving to Britain, joined AUK in 2002. Completed events include 5 x PBPs and 2 x LELs, and other brevets up to 1600km in 10 countries. I've collected various AUK awards including Ultra Randonneur and Brevet 25000. My riding has included touring, MTBing and (years ago) racing, together with enough UAF brevets to earn the Aigle d'Or (equivalent to ACP's Randonneur 5000).

In Australia, I introduced Audaxing to the state of Queensland (to save locals a 1000km trip to ride with the next nearest group), and organised events from 50 to 1000km, including the local version of the York Easter Arrow. I served on the Audax Australia National Committee for three years and was National Calendar Coordinator for a year. My article for Audax Australia's magazine "A Little Audax History" has been republished by several randonneuring national groups. http://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=1200.0

My work has included time as a bike race team mechanic, before settling into a proper job as a civil engineer, mostly working on transportation projects large and small. This has given me plenty of experience in working with others in a practical and pragmatic manner.

I hope that my enthusiasm for long distance cycling can benefit AUK and its members.

[Cycling Daddy]

Doubt that a postal vote will diecide this since there are only three members who have asked for postal papers.  More likely diecided by those getting their voting papaers virtually.  I believe we are lucky to have three (3) people who are foolish altruistic enough to stand for election to the board.  SO 'good on you all' .   You can find details of these three brave souls here http://forum.audax.uk/index.php?board=53.0

L

[LittleWheelsandBig]

Doubt that a postal vote will diecide this since there are only three members who have asked for postal papers.  More likely diecided by those getting their voting papaers virtually.  I believe we are lucky to have three (3) people who are foolish altruistic enough to stand for election to the board.  SO 'good on you all' .

L

Postal = virtual, in my world. Votes at the AGM itself are unlikely to make a difference. As such, AUKs need to find out about the candidates prior to submitting their votes, hence this thread.

[Fidgetbuzz]

As Dave's seconder I would like to chip in with a little support here. A man of clearly stated opinions -- you may not agree with him -- but they are always worth listening to, and thinking about.

 I see Dave as being potentially a strong voice as a non exec - prepared to ask the awkward questions and to contribute  to debate on such matters as "Why do we do it like this .. is there an alternative " etc.

I do not feel  that I have  seen any worthwhile initiatives or any clear statement of objectives coming from the AUK Board over the last 2 to 3 years , in fact to be honest I have been very disappointed with the Board's performance -- I  live in hope that putting Dave onto the Board would liven Board meetings up, stimulate debate and even develop some new thinking.

Roger

[marcusjb]

Brief +1 to the above as I am about to dash off to meet people.

As Dave's proposer, I do think that he has a strong understanding in what randonneering is and what it is not.

On the whole, his reasoning is sound and will make a very strong addition to the Board (if elected)

I hope that, if elected, his experience will mean he is in a great position to see all sides of any future directions the AUK Board choose to look in.

[jsabine]

As one of the current non-executive directors, I'll chip in here too, and add my profile ...

_____

Although I joined the Board in December last year, I’m conscious that I’m still relatively new to audax and to AUK: I joined at the beginning of 2013 and rode perhaps half a dozen events before LEL, which I finished out of time. Since then I’ve ridden more, including PBP, and SRs last year and this.

I have strong memories of what it’s like to be very new to audax, both what I’ve found difficult and helpful as a relatively inexperienced rider, and what has sparked my enthusiasm for it: I believe I’ve brought a reasonably fresh perspective as a non-executive director.

I see the role as being a critical friend to the Board, helping to reach decisions rather than simply discussing endlessly: I’m not afraid of challenging the status quo or other people’s assumptions, though I try to do that constructively.

Professionally, I’ve worked as a journalist, in local government and for a couple of charities. I’m able to express ideas and proposals clearly, and enjoy working with others to make them happen.

I believe in setting a strategic direction for AUK that respects existing members and traditions, but also looks to a future where we’re able to expand without diluting our uncommercialised ethos, and without an increasingly complex rulebook.

I want to increase the numbers of people enjoying audaxes, not simply to see AUK get bigger.
_____


I'll also hijack Dave's offer of answering questions (publicly or privately, here or on the AUK forum (John Sabine) or by email (john AT sabine DOT org DOT uk)), with the addition that the next board meeting (and last before the AGM) is on Wednesday if you have any burning issues to raise ...

[jsabine]

How many of these Ds-without-P are there?

There are 2 x D w/o P on the AUK Board and 3 x AUKs nominated this year. I expect there will be a vote and postal votes may decide the result. EDIT: Interestingly, the AUK Memorandum of Association notes "two/three non-executive directors", so there might not be an election after all.

Following a distinct lack of nominations at last year's AGM, the board appointed Lucy McTaggart, Chris Boulton and me as non-execs in December, representing a range of experiences and perspectives. Lucy brought a depth of audax experience; Chris brought a wealth of strategic input from his experience in other organisations; I, frankly, brought a wealth of inexperience and a willingness to ask daft laddie questions.

Although the constitution allows 2/3 non-execs, and three were appointed last year, only two posts are currently up for election. This is intended to allow the new board leeway to appoint a third if appropriate, to bring in additional skills, experience or perspectives that are under-represented.

Chris (who is also standing for re-election) has been taking a lead on strategy development which will hopefully answer some of Fidgetbuzz's desire for a clearer statement of objectives.

I think it's fair to say that the governance changes from the 2013 AGM, coupled with the AGM cycle (and the fact that all the board members are volunteers, so AUK business sometimes goes on the back burner) have meant that new initiatives have not been particularly prominent. There's been a focus on bedding in the changed makeup of the board and director roles, on improved financial governance, on backend IT and website stuff, and on the strategy development: this is all pretty much invisible to the outside, and even if you have the desire to plough through board minutes, they're necessarily an edited version of the meetings, not of the work that's being done between them. (Obviously website changes and the strategy paper will be very much more public - but only once they are finished and, um, published.)

My consept of a director without portfolio is that they have no particular interest to protect and will therefore look at board suggestions / decisions in a balanced way with their input being putting the members interests first.

Absolutely. AUK is and should be for its members.

[Veloman]

Should we have a 'Hustings' thread for each candidate.  It would appear appropriate to split off the various posts into each candidate rather than have a rambling thread (although I know how popular this can be and guilty as charged for contributing to it!)

The original post was for LWB and rather than hijack the thread, could jsabine start a new one just for jsabine hustings?

[LittleWheelsandBig]

If it doesn't get too large, I don't mind if the AUK political bumpf stays quarantined to just this thread. If the thread sprawls excessively, then splitting it into individual candidates seems sensible.

[LittleWheelsandBig]

This is exactly the sort of discussion that should be on the official forum.

I figured that there are a lot of AUKs on YACF who vote without looking at the AUK forum, hence this thread. I keep checking over there and nobody has replied to any of the candidates.

[mattc]

This is exactly the sort of discussion that should be on the official forum.

I figured that there are a lot of AUKs on YACF who vote without looking at the AUK forum, hence this thread. I keep checking over there and nobody has replied to any of the candidates.

I'm sure you're right. No harm in putting an announcement on here.

But if folks can be bothered to e-Vote, they should take the trouble to visit the official forum to have their say.

Just MHO etc etc ...

[Tewdric]

You'll get my vote Dave, I'm all for a bit of common sense.

[Whitedown Man]

Any words of wisdom re. how we go about claiming our e-vote? Or will we (ie AUKs) be getting something in the real or virtual post?

[hellymedic]

Log in to AUK forum. (Memb no + password)
http://forum.audax.uk/index.php?topic=665.msg6020;topicseen#msg6020

[Whitedown Man]

Thx hellymedic - will do

[jsabine]

My experience with dealing with the current board of directors has not been a particularly pleasant one ever since I rode The HBKH in 2014, and recently, as a result of both their unnecessary over regulatory style and Stasi-esque moderation of their forum, I decided to part company with them.

Not particularly fair to pick on your post as a prompt, but I'd see non-execs as a route to raising issues with (i) the organisation as a whole, and (ii) executive directors (who are the ones actually doing or managing the work on a day-to-day basis).

I guess we haven't tried to make ourselves particularly visible - it's been the first year of non-exec members of the board - and perhaps that's been a mistake.