Present: -
Doug Alsop STARC (Chair); Jan Sargent
NRR (Treasurer);
CAC
Angela Burrows, Rachael Thomas, Dave Angilley; HR Andy Moore
Moorhaven
Dave & Ruth Hatch; CR Barrie & Denise Cardew
TT;
John Smith, Helen Roper, Diane Sweet, STARC Paul Bullock
LRR
Peter Thorp, Kevin Marshall, Martin & Ann Venning Tri L Ceri Harvey
NRR Kevin Burnett, Graham & Lesley
Dobson. FRR; Jan Watson,
MBH
Ian Mathews, Yvonne Turner, LP Gary Bennet, John Bowden
TRC
Diane Boardman, Nick Jeans. BWRC Amanda Dymond, Hazel Maclaren ECH
Revis Crowle, Amanda Erith
Apologies: -
ECH
Ian Ringer (Min Sec. & CLO); KR Dave Gordon FRR Caroline Hemsworth LRR Stephen Hutchinson TRC
& DAN Rob Cockings CAC Alan Rowling, Neville Witham.
Minutes of the last AGM: Sept 20th 2010 were agreed
Proposed by Jan Sargent, Seconded by Dave Hatch.
Matters Arising: There
were no matters arising
Agenda Items to be voted on
Motion 1 To adopt the proposed weighted voting
system as attached at appendix 1.
CAC had proposed two amendments to
this motion but withdrew amendment 2 before the debate took place.
It was explained that as this was a
change in the method of voting the votes for this motion and amendment will be
counted on the existing voting system. The method of subsequent voting will
depend upon the outcome of motion 1.
The initial Motion 1 to adopt a
weighted voting system was passed by 36 votes to 8.
Amendment 1 was then debated and CAC
explained that the original voting system with the highest club vote of 6
against the lowest vote of 2, gave a 3:1 ratio. By comparison Motion 1 has a
ratio of 8:1. CACs amendment to give all clubs below 8% 2 votes would reduce
this ratio to 4:1.
The vote on the amendment 1 was taken
and was a dead heat with 22 votes in favour and 22 against. There being no direction
in the rules or the constitution as to what action to take in the event of a tie,
the Chairman made the decision that as this was an amendment to the previous
motion and it had not gained a majority then the amendment was not passed.
Motion 2 To increase the ladies scoring team from
4 to 6 (3 to 4 in marathons to be in line with the men).
CAC had proposed an amendment to this
motion for the ratio of the men’s and women’s teams to track the ratio of men
and women in the GP currently 60/40, hence to move to 6/5 when the ratio hits
55/45 and 6/6 when 50/50.
A debate was then held on the motion
and amendment 1.Points in favour of the adoption of 6 in a team were that it
would encourage runners who fill positions 4, 5 & 6 of a team as they would
normally be outside of the other awards. Clubs should encourage their runners
to participate by underlining their value to the team. Points against the
motion were that for the smaller clubs it is difficult for them always to get a
team of 4 let alone 6 ladies to compete and rather than being a measure of
quality it could become a measure of quantity. This could lead to a situation
where good runners are disillusioned if they regularly cannot field a team.
A similar debate had taken place when
the men’s team was raised from 4 to 6 but in retrospect it has not proved
problematical.
The vote was taken on Motion 2 and it
was carried by 29 votes to 26.
With motion 2 being carried then
amendment 1 was no longer relevant.
Motion 3 To alter GP team calculations to take
account of all races in the series rather than just the best of 8 scores.
This was debated and it was explained
that the logic has always followed that of the individual GP, but there is
difference between an individual being able to complete 8 races and a club
being able to field a team in 8 races. Points in favour were that it could make
the GP less predictable whereas currently a team that has 800 points has won
the GP and this can happen after only 8 races rendering the remaining 7 races
less interesting. Points against were that it could again lead to quantity over
quality and the winners could be a club that could field teams in all events
rather than win all events. Andy Moore HR suggested considering that we had already
made one major change to team calculations this motion was a step too far. Doug
Alsop said that it would be his preferred option to trial a major change like
this off-line during the GP next year to see how it works.
As a result of this discussion the
vote was taken and Motion 3 was rejected by unanimous vote on the proviso that
different methods of team calculations are trialled off-line for review at the
next AGM.
Motion 4 To amend rule 1e “To raise the number of
competitors that a GP race must provide for from 300 to 400”
During this debate it was queried
whether this should also apply to Marathons as the Cornish in its HQ at
Pensilva might struggle to meet the criteria. It was agreed that the situation
regarding marathons had not been properly considered so an amendment to the motion
to leave the minimum at 300 for marathons was proposed by John Smith TT
seconded by Revis Crowle ECH
A vote was taken on Motion 4 with the
amendment and passed unanimously.
Motion
5 To create a Multi
terrain GP to run in parallel with the existing GP
The document “Considerations for the
creation of a Multi Terrain GP was discussed and it was pointed out that in
addition to the last issue both the 5 Tors and Bocconoc have re-considered
their position and have now expressed an interest in taking part.
A concern was raised over the use of
the Term “Grand Prix” or “GP” as our existing GP is well known by that title
and it was felt that some other term should be found for this “Off Road” series
so as to avoid confusion and to protect the image of the existing GP. It was
agreed that the actual name of the series will be determined once the inaugural
meetings take place but the term Grand Prix or GP should be avoided. It was
acknowledged that some existing races in the GP are categorised as multi
terrain due to the amount of non sealed surface on the route. Nick Jeans
provided a sensible definition between these and other multi terrain races. A
multi terrain race in the GP should have a course where irrespective of the
surface it should be possible to overtake another runner at any point of the
course.
A vote was taken on Motion 5 and
passed unanimously.
Motion 6 To
adopt a definition of the GP structure to be filled with suitable races.
Considerable debate took place on how
we can control the structure of the GP and it was generally agreed that it
should be managed by design rather by default. There was a consensus that the
structure having three half Marathons was good but there was a reluctance to
agree on a definitive structure as it was considered to be too prescriptive.
There was no agreement on how we should vet the application from a new race to
enter the GP. There was agreement that races need to be trialled before being
accepted and although this rule had not been enforced for the last three additions
(Marazion, Treggy 7 and Trevornick) it should be enforced in future. This also
applies to races already in the GP that wish to or need to significantly change
their distance or course. Each of these circumstances should be reviewed by the
GP committee to agree if they should remain in the GP before having a trial run
under the new circumstances. The Trevornick race falls into this category as it
wishes to avoid the beach and issues with tide times to change from a 10 mile
to a 10k to. Paul Wright Race Director was not present and the Chairman agreed
to take this up with him.
With there being no agreement on a
motion on which to vote this item was held in abeyance until the next meeting
when discussions have taken place on Trevornick.
Treasurers
Report
Jan tabled a statement of accounts for
the year to date which showed that we were £3,885.88 in credit which is in line
with the budget. The budget was quickly reviewed and the quantity of runners
who are likely to complete the GP is again in line with budget but the purchase
of the Trophies for the presentation will eat up all the working capital leaving
us only just in credit going forwards into next year.
Formal
Agreement of Levy
It was proposed that the levy for a GP
race remains at £0.60 but the levy for a non GP race increases from £0.10 to
£0.20
Proposed by Nick
Jeans Seconded by Ruth Hatch.
Formal
Agreement of Races for 2012
The races currently in the 2011 GP
were accepted for 2012 with the exception of Trevornick which
may change to a 10k and move to the multi terrain series.
Election
of Officers
The existing officers were all
prepared to stand for another year and there were no other applicants hence the
existing officers were proposed and seconded en-block
Chairman Doug Alsop
Treasurer Jan Sargent
Secretary Ian Ringer
Proposed Graham Dobson Seconded Dave
Hatch
That concluded the business of the AGM