CI AGM 1 November 2014

Beasty

CramCycle wrote: »

As a matter of interest what was the reasoning behind the junior tour level being rejected. 2 as there a flat out refusal or no attempt at alternatives?

Was it beaten by alot or a little.

There was certainly general support for the event coming from all corners. I think it was partly to do with setting a precedent for one event when there are a few more out there that maybe are equally warranting such support. Having seen what has happened during and following the meeting though I have no doubt those voting took the best decision.

Can't remember too much about the vote on that one though. Think after the discussion there was a lot of doubt in many delegates minds

A more general point though. CI had already set a grant level for the event. Having spoken to one or two people though I'm not sure the application process is particularly transparent, with some people being oblivious to amounts awarded to other events until the list was published last week (which did at least improve the transparency compared to prior years). It would appear that this year organisers (or at least some of them) were not asked how much they needed but the grants were largely based on last years awards

Beasty

buffalo wrote: »

I find it amazing that the clubs don't give the list of delegates to CI for validation on the day. As a member of Club X I can show up and take one of the delegate spots without any fuss if I get there early enough.

If I had turned up and discovered someone who had not been delegated by the club had signed in there would have been hell to pay. I do think that there is a general approach amongst most clubs of discussion and prior agreement as to who will attend. I equally suspect that in some cases there is no internal debate and it's the same old faces that turn up perhaps without any specific approval from club committees or membership

Beasty

RobFowl wrote: »

and then 2 delegates will have to attend to propose and second it.

The "proposing" club only need one person to turn up. Anyone attending can second a motion. At least one motion was thrown out as no-one from the club turned up on Saturday

onimpulse

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

What exactly were the "outbursts" and why did they cause tension? Why can't these meetings be held with some level of decorum?

I walked in about 5 minutes late by which time the "outbursts" were well underway. I really wondered what the hell I was after walking into.

I agree that one person in particular totally undermined himself but the whole episode undermined the entire organisation.

I can only think the board might be better off with someone who will stay the course and work with other members to change things they disagree with from the inside.

I've no doubt that the board is immeasurably better off following Siobhan election. She'll be a very positive and constructive influence.

Beasty

RobFowl wrote: »

I for example couldn't attend as a delegate this year

I believe you could have, but not as a delegate of the club you may have felt most affinity to;)

(I presume you have not had a second CI licence issued for 2014)

buffalo

Beasty wrote: »

They mentioned the situation in Ulster where there are a lot more TTs run with perhaps a lot more opportunity to rise up the rankings based on TTs alone. I blame the guy who spoke proposing it though - he clearly could not make a convincing argument (I would contrast him to the one speaking in favour of continuing with the upgrade option - he managed to swing the day by a couple of votes):pac:

I failed to prepare, thinking the motion would stand on its own merits - especially given that we already do it in stage races and for national TT champs. If there are truly concerns that someone would hoover up lots of points and jump from A4 to A1 and ride the Rás without ever doing a road race, they can do it under the current system.

Someone pointed out that it doesn't specify whether points are awarded for the overall event, or per category. I should've included the rest of the article in the proposal, so people can see that categories are not mentioned in any of the other sections - e.g. "(a) In road races up to 50km, points to be awarded 3-2-1;".

There were valid points I failed to consider - as Geoff pointed out, road races award more points for longer distances, but this proposal didn't differentiate between a 10TT and a 100TT. Perhaps we should only award 1 point for a 10TT, and a sliding scale every extra 10k to a max of 6, or something.

I was also rather sleep-deprived and slightly hungover on the day, and perhaps not on my sharpest form. Jack Watson offered to help me make it more palatable for next year if I wished, which was decent of him.

Beasty

Funnily enough I am really warming to Jack. I'm glad we no longer have the McQuaid "political" angle (which I acknowledge I was one of the "architects" of) disrupting things. I have absolutely no doubt though he has the best interests of the sport at heart and his dedication to the cause over the years has been immense

slow

We've got to remember that AGMs of CI have to deal with company law and also technical regulations. Many motions are amended by the time they are voted on. Some (like the proposed €10 non-cycling CI membership) have cost implications that need to be clarified before voting. There is no perfect way to do this. But voting by proxy could lead to uninformed decisions being made which would then require an EGM to reverse. The AGM is a long day. But everybody got to have their say (and was listened to) including the delegates who spoke about the Hall of Fame and the Junior Tour Reliability Trial / Sportive, neither of which was on the agenda.

By the end of the day, Alice Sherratt had a sheet of paper with the contact details of 20 volunteers who have offered to help her save the Junior Tour. All good people well experienced in running cycling events. There was tremendous goodwill towards the JT, even from those who opposed the €2 levy. Hopefully, the funds raised will far exceed what the €2 levy would have brought in. If there was voting by proxy, those delegates wouldn't have even been in the room...

wav1

Well it all makes interesting reading and it appears I wasn't missed at all[except maybe for the noise levels]Seriously though I was aware of the situation re POS pre AGM and its a pity it couldn't have been sorted before the admin showpiece of the year.Always thought the JT levy was going to be tough to get through,but I am hugely heartened by the response of the delegates whether pro or anti levy,to help put together the proposed sportive to help the kitty.
Probably nothing to do with the board or CI in general but I think the time has come to create a Dave Raynor type of foundation here in Ireland,governed by a cross section of trustees to help out with various requirements from time to time,including helping out riders who are trying their best to give it a shot at a higher level.
I suppose what im saying really is that we should try and take control of these types of funding initiatives ourselves and try to leave less people out on a limb.

Beasty

wav1 wrote: »

[except maybe for the noise levels]

Don't worry - Gaybo realised you were not there and stepped into the breach once again....

RobFowl

wav1 wrote: »

Probably nothing to do with the board or CI in general but I think the time has come to create a Dave Raynor type of foundation here in Ireland,governed by a cross section of trustees to help out with various requirements from time to time,including helping out riders who are trying their best to give it a shot at a higher level.
I suppose what im saying really is that we should try and take control of these types of funding initiatives ourselves and try to leave less people out on a limb.

Thats a great idea, would you be prepared to front it?
Well worth having a chat about it sometime!

Beasty

wav1 wrote: »

Probably nothing to do with the board or CI in general but I think the time has come to create a Dave Raynor type of foundation here in Ireland,governed by a cross section of trustees to help out with various requirements from time to time,including helping out riders who are trying their best to give it a shot at a higher level.

I think there was certainly support for something like this. There was a suggestion that if there was sufficient support for the Junior Tour with perhaps some funding left over perhaps that could be diverted to anoither equally worthy cause

I would definitely support such a move, and think there is a lot of scope to build on ideas such as the Sportive. If we can create something only half as successful of the WW200 there would probably be enough cash to support the Junior Tour, the Ras na mBan and the Ras na Og

And Rob, I would certainly be prepared to step forward on something like this. With the likes of you, wav1 and some of those currently working on the Junior Tour initiatives I really think we can come up with a workable idea

QueensGael

Draft minutes from this year's AGM are on the website now

http://www.cyclingireland.ie/downloads/final_draft_minutes_agm_2014.pdf

Beasty

That's pretty impressive - I don't think these usually see the light of day until just before the next AGM

jinkypolly

Is the 'Congress Manual' available online?

Beasty

jinkypolly wrote: »

Is the 'Congress Manual' available online?

You mean this one?

GMCI wrote: »

The AGM handbook available online for viewing.

http://www.cyclingireland.ie/downloads/agm_booklet_2014.pdf

buffalo

jinkypolly wrote: »

Is the 'Congress Manual' available online?

jinkypolly

Beasty wrote: »

You mean this one?

That's the one, thanks.

Jack Joll

First of the Provisional Calendars coming through, Cycling Ulster are always on the ball!

http://cyclingulster.com/?p=18756

buffalo

Jack Joll wrote: »

First of the Provisional Calendars coming through, Cycling Ulster are always on the ball!

http://cyclingulster.com/?p=18756

They've all been on CI's site for some time now: http://www.cyclingireland.ie/page/events/competitive-events-calendar1

Jack Joll

Didn't spot that, funny I never thought to check, I take back my "on the ball" statement so.

buffalo

Jack Joll wrote: »

Didn't spot that, funny I never thought to check, I take back my "on the ball" statement so.

I wouldn't go that far, they do great work!

wav1

buffalo wrote: »

I wouldn't go that far, they do great work!

Leinster calendar finished and submitted on Oct 30th