Below is the Draft Agenda for the forthcoming AGM and it includes some proposed changes to the constition following the discussion on the forum. Most of the changes may seem quite minor but help to clarify things. It was felt that on balance 'less is more' and that nothing radical was wanted. Strictly speaking I, as secretary, must receive proposals before 28 days prior to the AGM and then publicize them two weeks in advance. So there is a time frame here. Feel free to ask questions.
Chris Barlow Hon. Sec.
Classic and Vintage Racing Dinghy Association
Agenda
for the
9th Annual General Meeting August 2009
To be held at Roadford Sailing Club weekend of August Nationals
Hon Life President Ed. I Bremner
1 Apologies for absence
2 Minutes of the 2008 AGM
3 Present Committee
Commodore-Roger Devereux Ok to stand again.
Secretary - Chris Barlow ok to stand again.
Treasurer - Lois Barlow ditto
Webmaster - Pat Jones ditto
Fixtures Secretary - Neil Witt. Retiring
Social Secretary - position vacant
Membership sec - Stu Budden Retiring
Catamarans and Lost Classes - Alan Williams ok to stand again
Nominations so far: Garry Rucklidge for Membership sec.
Rupert Whelan Publicity
Vote to approve committee; to take effect from end of this meeting
4 Changes to the constitution.
Please note that all discussion has already taken place on the web so only a few questions may be put to the Commodore/chairman before voting takes place.
Voting is by eligible members i.e. those with voting rights.
Change no 1.
In section 10 Association’s year
Replace
The Association’s year shall be the 1st January to 31st DecemberWith the following words
The Association’s year shall be 1st August to July 31st
Proposed by Pat Jones, seconded by Lois Barlow.
**Voting**
Change no2
Insert the following in section 3 immediately following the heading Boat Classifications (wings)
(1) Handicapping will be used to promote good racing between boats of all ages and to reflect their degree of originality or modernization.
(2) Owners may make representation to the committee who may, at their discretion, place a particular boat in any of the three wings where it is clearly more suited to the spirit of that wing even if it does not fit the exact criteria of that wing.
Proposed by Roger Devereux, seconded by Ed Bremner
**Voting**
Change no.3
In section 3(a) Vintage Racing Dinghies
In the first sentence to replace the word …before (ww2)… with the word … around..
Proposed by Ed Bremner, seconded by Chris Barlow
Voting
Change no 4
In section 3 c Old Racing Dinghies
Replace the words … and built over 25 years ago.. with the words… built before 1985.
[please note: it is understood that this date may be changed by any future AGM from time to time]
Proposed by Chris Barlow, seconded by Roger Devereux
**Voting**
Change no 5
In section 3 c Old Racing Dinghies
Add the following paragraph after the first paragraph
Lost Classes. Certain interesting examples of dinghies from classes designed between 1965 and 1985 and where that class is no longer in production and its association has ceased to exist, may be permitted to join the ‘Old Racing Dinghies Wing’ after application to the committee if it is felt that the dinghy embodies the spirit of the CVRDA. See 3 (2) above. No post 1985 dinghy will be considered.
Proposed by Rupert Whelan, seconded by Ed Bremner
*voting**
Change no 6
In section 3 following para. (c)
to add the following paragraph
(d) Catamarans
The CVRDA define qualifying catamarans as having been designed before 1965 and built before 1985. Typical examples would include the designs of Rod MacAlpine Downie and Prout Brothers in plywood and in GRP.
Proposed by Alan Williams, Seconded by Rupert Whelan
**voting**
5 Commodore’s Report
6 Treasurer's report
7 Fixtures and racing report.
8 Membership secretary's report.
9 Webmaster's report
10 Request re. Vintage Larks (Pat)
11 Any other business 12date, place, of next meeting: the 2009 AGM
2009 draft AGM agenda with proposed constitutional changes
Re: 2009 draft AGM agenda with proposed constitutional changes
For clarity, does the last sentence "No post 1985 dinghy will be considered" mean built or designed post 1985?chris wrote:In section 3 c Old Racing Dinghies
Add the following paragraph after the first paragraph
Lost Classes. Certain interesting examples of dinghies from classes designed between 1965 and 1985 and where that class is no longer in production and its association has ceased to exist, may be permitted to join the ‘Old Racing Dinghies Wing’ after application to the committee if it is felt that the dinghy embodies the spirit of the CVRDA. See 3 (2) above. No post 1985 dinghy will be considered.
Nigel
Re: 2009 draft AGM agenda with proposed constitutional changes
Nigel,
Post 1985 means just that. It is the cut off point for the Old wing and so would look very strange to accept post 85 dinghies from lost classes but not those from a qualifying class.
Roger.
Post 1985 means just that. It is the cut off point for the Old wing and so would look very strange to accept post 85 dinghies from lost classes but not those from a qualifying class.
Roger.
Hornet 191 Shoestring,
Hornet 595 Demon awaiting restoration
Hornet 610 Final Fling
Hornet 353
Hornet 595 Demon awaiting restoration
Hornet 610 Final Fling
Hornet 353
Re: 2009 draft AGM agenda with proposed constitutional changes
First line specifies classes designed before 1985. the post 1985 does mean built before 1985.
In other words this category extends the definition of the Old Wing just a bit to allow for certain lost classes but the intention is not to open the floodgates. The age of the boat is therefore still within the same parameters of the CVRDA.
In other words this category extends the definition of the Old Wing just a bit to allow for certain lost classes but the intention is not to open the floodgates. The age of the boat is therefore still within the same parameters of the CVRDA.
Re: 2009 draft AGM agenda with proposed constitutional changes
Thanks,
no quibble with the intent but it may be worth adding the word "built" to clarify the wording.
Years of reviewing contracts & proposals has left me loophole averse
.
no quibble with the intent but it may be worth adding the word "built" to clarify the wording.
Years of reviewing contracts & proposals has left me loophole averse
![Confused :?](./images/smilies/icon_confused.gif)
Re: 2009 draft AGM agenda with proposed constitutional changes
yes, I think that is a good point and have changed my copy to include the word built.
Re: 2009 draft AGM agenda with proposed constitutional changes
DESIGNED and built - otherwise it qualifies for the old fleet, if designed before 65. The idea of the lost classes is that they are boats which otherwise would be outside our parameters, but as classes with no viable means of support, get taken under our wing. Up to now, there has been no cut off point for design, but this way we avoid failed 90's bowsprits, and it makes sense to keep things in line with the old wing.
Reading it again, that is exactly what it already says in the 1st line. No loophole there, Nigel!
Reading it again, that is exactly what it already says in the 1st line. No loophole there, Nigel!
Rupert
Re: 2009 draft AGM agenda with proposed constitutional changes
Hi Rupert,
my working assumption was that nothing was built before it was designed ( a good job British Leyland did not do boats
) but something could be designed before the 85 cut off & built after. The clarification makes it clear that that would not be eligible by removing any confusion that the final 85 refers to build rather than just restating the pre 85 design rule.
Not really an issue for me though as I now seem to have a pre 65 boat in the Man o'war.
Nigel
my working assumption was that nothing was built before it was designed ( a good job British Leyland did not do boats
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
Not really an issue for me though as I now seem to have a pre 65 boat in the Man o'war.
Nigel