Please log in to use all the site's facilities
|Pooling Trust member proxies in advance of AGM...?|
at 14:08 23 Dec 2017
I’ve been a lurker for a while on this forum, but after events of the last few weeks I thought I’d take the plunge and sign up.
Tin hat on (probably going to need a steel one, and some kevlar) in advance of any potential responses.
This is a cheeky post I appreciate, but combining somewhat E20’s recent 'Vote of No Confidence thread' and MattG's 'SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale' thread, and also echoing the comments made principally by wobbly in the former and Shaky in both (and apologies if there are already developing plans in place), isn't there merit in trying to see if proxy votes from Trust members can be coordinated and collected in advance of the forthcoming Trust AGM to effect the necessary changes to the Trust Board to either stop the sale of shares entirely (if it doesn't take place in advance of this) or as a minimum return to members for another vote?
I don't have a corporate or legal background, so peeps with these particular skill sets will be able to gainsay me, but I understand it's been established there is a lower voting threshold (out of approx. 1100 - 1200 members) at an AGM rather than EGM, and given the recent creation of the SCSA combined with what seems to be growing coordination between it, the Supporters' Union and forums like (obviously) Planet Swans and The Jack Army etc etc, would it be that difficult to gather the required numbers across them all (time being the biggest threat)?
I understand there's plenty of devil in the detail, but assuming (rightly or wrongly, again please clarify) someone with a legal background can advise on the written form the proxies have to take, some kind volunteer (or three) to act as a point of collation, I'm supposing emails and letters re the above so hopefully not too onerous, and the brass from the aforementioned organisations can encourage submissions as well as gathering in advance to decide strategy at the AGM and who will act as representatives etc, with input and guidance (rising to being there on the night itself) from those with the requisite experience in this sort of meeting / action.
I'm not going to discuss the reasons why here as they've already been well-documented.
Briefly in terms of pottery barn rules / replacements, I don’t think this would be a significant issue - for example 15 applied for the four recent vacancies - and could be planned for in advance.
And past this there's the benefits of a Trust Board with a different membership (depending on who the new members were!).
|Forum Votes: ||26|
|Comment Votes: ||0|
|Prediction League: ||0|