The following is based on John Medway's original constitution but has been reduced in wordage and made more flexible in order to reduce opportunities for nitpicking. If used as a foundation it can be refined / enlarged over time, whereas a fuller and more detailed document is unlikely to be simplified in group work and may prove to be restricting in changed circumstances in the future.

It may well still need improving, but I plead with anyone proposing improvementsl to try to reduce the number of words, rather than increase them.

KISS xxx Draft follows;

CONSTITUTION OF TRANSITION HORSHAM

1. The Constituted Organisation, ‘Transition Horsham’ aims to: “To promote the transition of our community to one fit to meet current and future economic, social and ecological pressures” This aim is intended to reflect the intentions of the broader Transition Towns movement.

2. To pursue this, the Organisation shall be;

1. arranging and supporting meetings, research, exchange and disseminating information, consultation, and planning on matters related to Transition and raising and spending funds to support those activities.

2...co-operating, publicising and otherwise supporting activities by other organisations toward the same ends.
..
3. a not-for-profit organisation capable of holding funds sufficient for those aims in appropriate accounts in the name of the Organisation. Cheques will be signed by any two of the Steering Group designated below.

4. open for membership to any individual whose declared financial and moral support for the aims of Transition Horsham has been recognised in writing by the Steering Group.

5. open to member’s attendance for support, information and scrutiny. In addition, Meetings will by default be fully public unless otherwise decided by the steering group at request of members by majority vote.

6. administered by a Steering Group of a minimum of 3 which is maintained and augmented by nomination, co-option and election as appropriate to the circumstances. The Signatories listed below will be recognised as the responsible Steering Group members for business purposes. This list will be updated annually from the date of inception.

7. controlled by the members by a voting system appropriate to the circumstances, by default a show of hands. Votes carried by a simple majority of the recognised members shall be binding on the Steering Group.

8. governed by this Constitution . Amendments to the Constitution must be agreed by no fewer than three quarters of members attending an EGM which has been advertised to all members no less than 21 days before.

9. dissolved by the steering group when the stated aim and all related practicable ambitions of the group are achieved or if the number of members willing to run the Steering Group falls below three. Any funds in the account of the Organisation will be transferred to a local charitable organisation having similar aims and objectives.

3. This Constitution was adopted on the __________________ by the persons whose signatures appear below, who will act as the Steering Group until the first general meeting.



Signed Name and Address



Signed Name and Address



Signed Name and Address

I don't know what 2.4 means unless "moral" support is defined.


I would suggest adapting 2.4 to include the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Something like...


More wordy I know, but it does reference a listing of moral values (see http://www.universalrights.net/main/declarat.htm) that can be used to keep out 'undesirables', by which I mean people not yet willing to practise inclusion.

Good point. it is more words, but it is also important to recognise the need to avoid the nastier kinds of "social engineering" techniques which tend to erupt under times of stress.

Cutting 4 words from 2.4 to

"4. open for membership to any individual whose manifest support for the aims of Transition Horsham has been recognised in writing by the Steering Group. "

And adding 3 words to the Aims;

"This aim is intended to reflect the humane and reasoned intentions of the Transition Towns movement"

Could be useful for keeping on track in more ways than one, there could be (un)/reasonable arguments from within the TT movement for involuntary population reduction !! or allowing de-recognition of someone whose views are beyond the human.

Any more than that I feel would be over egging it - what do you think?

Alan

My preference would be, as I put before, to be explicit about what behaviour is expected by citing the UN Declaration of Human Rights as a requirement of membership, not a requirement for the Transition Movement.

Would the "has been recognised in writing by the Steering Group" mean the signing of a prescribed form or just a freestyle note? If the former, the list of Articles (actually, the whole content of this page: http://www.universalrights.net/main/declarat.htm) could be reproduced (preceded by "I commit to uphold the provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted and proclaimed by UN General Assembly resolution 217A(III) of 10 Dec 1948") above the signing area and the wording in the Constitution could be reduced to just make mention of it as...


Then if someone starts exhibiting racist, sexist, or whatever kind of "bad" behaviour, their signature is there under the description of the proper behaviour to which they had given their commitment.

Whilst the one-pager seems simpler than the excellent 9 page proposal floated some time ago, the one-pager lacks clarity in a number of respects and could (probably will) cause difficulties of interpretation later on.

The remit “To promote the transition of our community to one fit to meet current and future economic, social and ecological pressures” is too wide and too vague. There may be future (currently unknown) economic, social and ecological pressures which Transition Horsham (TH) members feel are appropriate and others feel are inappropriate for our community. There may be economic, social and ecological pressures to which some members may wish to respond and to which other members may positively not wish to respond. Contrary to what is stated in it, the aim of the one-pager is infinitely wider than the relatively narrow (but considerably challenging) aim of Transition Towns (TT) – to respond to the challenges of Peak Oil and Climate Change.

Further, there is a moral and probably a legal restriction on adopting the TT brand without following the TT philosophy and principles. All that is TT appealed to me, and was the reason I joined TH. I am not interested in joining a group which has the nebulous aim of meeting undefined and unknown economic, social and ecological pressures. How many people will become members prepared to get on a mystery tour to ‘Somewhere’? – “groping among cloudy issues towards a feeble conclusion” (to paraphrase T. H Moore).

Why should membership to TH be restricted to individuals who declare financial support for the aims of TH? Some people will be unwilling to make such a declaration, let alone an open-ended one, and others may wish only to provide support in terms of (potentially much more valuable) time and effort. Why (in marked contrast to the general informality of the one-pager) should individual declarations have to be recognised, in writing, by the Steering Group? What are the implications of such recognition?

Stating that important matters of membership and organisation should be “as appropriate to the circumstances” creates fertile ground for future disagreement and dissent.

Having cheques signed by two members of a steering group is a good idea. However, depending upon how many there are, for “any” two steering-group members to be able to sign cheques is a recipe for confusion. In addition: who decides and how is it decided who is nominated or elected or co-opted to being a member of the steering group and, just as important, how are they deselected?

I could go on but, in the interest of re-use, recycle and repair, ask why are we ignoring the beautifully rounded wheel that is the 9 pager - and trying to re-invent what appears to be a wheel with corners?

P.S.
The trouble with the (for me, discredited) Universal Declaration of Human Rights is that it is ignored by governments which are evidently abusing the rights of their citizens and abused by governments which (on the face of it) respect human rights - by applying it to the benefit of criminals, who leave their human rights when they cross the moral threshold, and to the detriment of the human rights of their majority upstanding citizens.

What’s wrong with ‘The Organisation will not discriminate on the grounds of gender, race, colour, ethnic or national origin, sexuality, disability, religious or political belief, marital status or age.’?

Hi Chris, In the real world there is no need for a document at all, but the imaginary world inhabited by Banks, the Charity commisioners, Funding bodies, etc etc etc may be require on e in certain circumstances.

The advantage of brevity is that if anyone asks, it is possible to read and understand the document. The core group can authorise subgroups and so on, with little trouble. The original is far too long and the apparent precision actually invites more trouble than its worth. it would be impossible to operate to that standard and still maintain the required flexibility.

The "Vagueness" you refer to is, in fact, intended to be flexibility, it allows for a much more fluid form of participation and allows for precise organisation WHEN it is required.. Sloppy it is, perhaps, hopefully to the point of fluidity. But I repeat, the answer to this should be fewer and more salient words, not more verbiage. I agree the aim could be put more concisley, to "respond to the challenges of Peak Oil and Climate Change" is much better than what I suggested......but it must stop there. To keep adding will result in losing focus to no purpose, and you certainly are not going to lose room for interpretation by adding detail!


If the original is adopted there will immediately develop a problem of commitment. All very well to praise it, but it didn't work, did it? Nobody signed it....where are the authors now? Too much commitment required, and the circumstances are changing too fast. People do not want or simply cannot alow themselves to be pigeonholed into static roles, nor is it desireable.

Set up a structure that is too formal and people will feel it is not worth the effort, or too difficult to satisfy all those constitutional provisions; after all the declared aim of the "Official" Transition is to dissolve when the job is done. This implies a short and vigorous growth, not digging in for the long term. Peak Oil will be history in 20 years time, and in a sense Transition is already history, the agenda is being taken up elsewhere.

It may be that the UNDHR is discredited, but the sentiments behind it shine through in many aspects of life all over the world. No doubt somebody in the future will "discredit" the "Transition" movement, but that has more to do with spin than substance......it is in the here and now that we have to work and there is a lot to do......looking to other people or organisations may work, but you're likely to end up back in feudalism if you're not careful

This week I've been talking a lot to someone who went ONCE to a Transition meeting in another town and walked away because it seemed to be concerned more with talking about things than doing. They are a skilled person with a lot to offer, we cant afford that soert of thing.

As you know I am all in favour of discussion, but in an environment where people feel free to get on with it. Set procedures and rules need to be avoided in general becasue they need to be purpose made to fit the situation in particular.

Alan

New to Transition but would throw in a thought/comment......This reminds me of Monty Python sketch on whether to have a 5 minute or full half hour aurgument!

Is there not space for both. for example I give shortened versions of information with bullet points. If persons are want more detail to the Nth degree then can throw at them alot more information.

Surely to settle this could be that both versions are worthy for adoption. Ie the 1 page short version backed up/supported by the 9 page detailed version. I guess it depends whom is the audience. Having just read one of the comments elsewere from Mr roberts about differences disrupting surely better to focus on meaningful projects, such as the really good effort made by all at the Greening event!

The important thing surely is purpose. What are the reasons for having a constitution?

If the intention is to have a bank account, with cheque book, then presumably that is because either a lot of money will be circulating around the organisation or applications for funding require an account. The former is not the case - and we seem to have managed so far with individuals holding monies that they themselves have collected and others pledging monies to fund events - so the reason for finance being mentioned must, I presume, be because the intention is to apply for funding. If that is the case, then so be it.

But surely the main reason for having a constitution must be so that people know what they are 'joining'. They are joining the Transition Movement, as defined elsewhere. Could we not just make mention of this fact in the constitution and hold a supply of Transition literature (12 Steps, 5 Buts, Primer, etc) that we can hand to (potential) new members?

Other reasons: expected behaviours from members (as per my earlier post about the UN Declaration of Human Rights); appointment and removal of officers.

I, too, didn't understand what "open for membership to any individual whose declared financial ... support for the aims" means. What declared financial support is expected? Does this mean a joining fee, a commitment to underwrite any losses or bankruptcy, or nothing? A nominal one-off joining fee of, say £1 (minimum, 50p for unwaged), would I think be good as people, even at that low cost, have then 'bought into' TH.

The bureaucracy of running an organisation doesn't, I suspect interest any other than those who thrive on bureaucracy and political processes, intrigue and infighting ("Point of order, Madam Chairperson!").

I would like to see a TH constitution that is relevant to the size and turnover of the organisation. At the moment, that would be a short, single-page constitution, but referencing other documentation. The 9-pager can be reintroduced if and when there is a need for more procedures.

There may be a need to be formally incorporated for funding if heavy duty research needs comissioning or for organising larger events.

With a constitution and a membership some kind of formal engagement it is possible for both parties to hold each other to account....and there will be a definitve circulation for information.

A little credit card sized business card signed by the core group would suffice as ""recognition.

The nature of the engagement can be very simple, I see no reason why money needs to change hands, in law a "consideration" is required to form a contract, but this could be one penny, or a service such as making the tea.

The advantage of leaving things defined only as a "commitment" is that we would be able to respond to individual circumstances.

Alan

I don't know why the 9 pager was not adopted (I wasn't around) but it may or may well not have been for reasons Alan outlined.

I like Mark's idea of simply referencing TT and James' idea of a summary of the 9 pager (if necessary that being revised to exclude parts which are not considered relevant).

I understand a formal constitution is considered necessary because we would hope to apply for funding (and hope TH became big enough to need a bank account).

I agree that a constitution should be as short as possible but it also needs to be as long as is necessary to be clear, appropriate, relevant, etc., and acceptable (ideally encouraging) to the majority of current and prospective TH members.

To move this forward can I suggest that Alan considers the points made so far and makes whatever amendments he considers appropriate to his 1 pager and, for the sake of ensuring a full review, identifies any parts of the 9 pager which he feels are unnecessary, and why. Members can then give due consideration and hopefully vote it through at the next meeting. We can then concentrate and continue to get on with doing Transition things - as has been happening in a number of areas but on rather an ad hoc basis.

The forum has just eaten my essay on a constitution! Aaaarrrghhh! I don't think I can face retyping it.

In the posting that got away, I had argued eloquently and at length, but the conclusion was...

The constitution tells people what kind of organisation they're proposing to join.

So...

At the last meeting we voted on and agreed a set of aims and objectives. These should replace paragraph 1 of the short constitution.

We need to define acceptable behaviours for members, Chris's one sentence seems good to me. We need to recognise that membership can be revoked under certain circumstances.

After that, the constitution should be as lightweight as possible; I don't like the idea of referencing other documents since they can be revised independently of the constitution and there are potential problems of inconsistency which we should avoid.

So, we've agreed the aims and objectives, we need to work on membership, apart from that the short version is enough to get started with and can be changed later if it's found to not be working.

Let's sort out the membership terms and get the short constitution agreed at the next meeting and then get on with being a Transition Town.

Good. I suppose I'd better do that. In practice, i suggest the following notional heirarchy.

1. "Core" members ie "Steering group" ( Minimum 3 nr. with capacity to sign on behalf of group, selected and answerable to members by vote.)

2. "Membership" whose commitment recognised in writing by "Core" (ie "signed in to the network" , have voting rights and on members only mailing list)

3. Individual and group "Associates" (have expressed interest and or support and prepared to accept mailing, participate in Forum. recieve publicity emails and attend meetings but no constitutional voting rights though can have a a say with members assent)

Only layers 1 and 2 are mentioned in the proposed constitution, but it may be an idea to mention 3 as well in relation to possible Data Protection issues in the future.

Ability to add small print to constitution if required is extant, so further discussion can happen at its own pace.

Alan

Off-topic, or at least tangential: a note on the "Forum" - this online forum.

The TH forum is paid for by TH (actually by John as part of the website hosting package), maintained by TH (actually just by myself at the moment) and for TH - and fellow travellers in the Horsham area.

The 'Transition Horsham activities' forum, where this thread is, is obviously for and about TH, but any forum member can contribute.

Separate forums within the 'Activity Centre' could be created and used by other groups - allotments, gardening societies, bee-keepers, conservation groups, local food producers, TH specialist groups, etc - making the TH forum a hub, or umbrella, for Transition activities in the area.

Now the main point for raising all this here in this thread is the 'TH member' designation which appears under some forum members' name in the LH area against their posts. 'TH member' is the name of a group within the TH forum and that allows certain, or at least different, privileges to be assigned to members of the group from what the access and use rights that default forum members have.

Amongst those privileges (and I can't remember off-hand all the privileges) is the ability to post and read attachments - Word documents, Excel spreadsheets, PowerPoint presentations, etc. Images can also be posted by 'TH members' but the ability to do that should be disabled (and will be if/when I get round to it) because it not only takes up enormous amount of storage space that could be being taken up on the Flickr, imageshack, etc servers but, as importantly, the default members (I believe) and certainly the forum guests can't even see the images. The same is true for the documents that can be attached to posts, which is of course how it should be for working or sensitive documents that are not for general viewing.

Having a formal 'membership' of TH will allow a much easier and better definition of who should be in the 'TH member' group of the TH forum.

Another advantage of having a formal membership list is that with a card we could negotiate discount with the Food Coop!

This is the text of the document that SHOULD have been circulated before tonight's meeting. Anyone wishing to comment is welcome, bearing in mind it has to be finalised 7 to 10 days before the next meeting.


CONSTITUTION OF TRANSITION HORSHAM

1. The Constituted Organisation, ‘Transition Horsham’, reflect the aims of the Transition Towns movement: Namely to:
   
   
   1. publicise, within the community of Horsham and surrounding villages, the issues around climate change, peak oil, and sustainability;
      
      
   2. promote the transition of our community to one that is less reliant on oil; has a smaller carbon footprint; reduces climate change; and is more resilient to increasing energy prices;
      
      
   3. encourage, support and collaborate with related initiatives throughout the District of Horsham.
   
   
   
   
2. To pursue this, the Organisation shall be:
   
   
   1. arranging meetings, research, groups, dissemination of information, consultation, and planning;
      
      
   2. supporting and furthering activities by other organisations wih similar aims;
      
      
   3. a not-for-profit organisation holding funds in appropriate accounts in the name of Transition Horsham. Cheques will be signed by any two of the Steering Group designated below;
      
      
   4. open for Membership to any individual, group or organisation whose commitment to the aims has been recognised in writing by the Steering Group. Recognition should be refreshed annually and may be withdrawn by the Steering Group in extremis;
      
      
   5. administered and represented by a Steering Group of at least 3 Members, which group is maintained and augmented by nomination, co-option and election as appropriate to the circumstances. Those members who have signed below are the responsible Steering Group at the date of inception;
      
      
   6. recognising the duty of the Steering Group to administer and represent the group properly, and the responsibility of the Membership of holding the Steering group to account;
      
      
   7. holding meetings which are normally open to all comers. The formal business of the Steering Group will be open to Member’s scrutiny. Closed meetings may be organised at request of Members by simple majority vote.
      
      
   8. controlled by the Members by vote, by default a show of hands or other method at Members' request. Votes carried by a simple majority of the recognised members shall be binding on the Steering Group;
      
      
   9. governed by this Constitution, which can be amended by agreement of more than three quarters of Members;
      
      
   10. dissolved by the Steering Group when the aims of the group are achieved, or if the number of members willing to run the Steering Group falls below three, or when associated groups are sufficient to carry forward the aims. Residual funds will be transferred to a local charitable organisation having similar aims.
   
   
3. This Constitution was adopted on the ________________ by the signatories below, as the initial Steering Group.

Signed ............. Date........ Name and Address, & contact details
Role..................................Resigned............Date..........

Signed ............. Date........ Name and Address, & contact details
Role..................................Resigned............Date..........

Signed ............. Date........ Name and Address, & contact details
Role..................................Resigned............Date..........

Signed ............. Date........ Name and Address, & contact details
Role..................................Resigned............Date..........

Signed ............. Date........ Name and Address, & contact details
Role..................................Resigned............Date..........

Signed ............. Date........ Name and Address, & contact details
Role..................................Resigned............Date..........

Signed ............. Date........ Name and Address, & contact details
Role..................................Resigned............Date..........

Alan, I have reformatted the draft constitution for the forum - put in sub-paras and standardised the punctuation. You can make changes yourself at any time by going back and editing it (hit the 'edit' button at the bottom of the post.)

- - -

Others will have to add their comments as new posts in the thread. As the latest version of the constitution will be in the thread, rather than at the top of the thread, I have added colour so that it can be easily found.

- - -

One thing that is immediately clear is that the sentence "These aims reflect the intentions of the broader Transition Towns movement." at the end of para 1 is just hanging there.

I suggest that it be removed from there and that para 1 be rewritten as:

1. The aims of the Constituted Organisation, ‘Transition Horsham’, reflect the intentions of the broader Transition Towns movement, to:

(or "...of the broader Transition Towns movement. Namely, to:")

Another point about formatting: I suggest that the final Word/printed version have the three "Signed Name and contact details" texts in a line so that the Constitution may fit on a single side of paper. Should the signatures be dated as well?

And one point occurs to me about that. How will changes of Steering Group members be recorded? Will there be a new Constitution signed, or will the details be recorded elsewhere, e.g. associated with the bank account? (This may be easily answered by someone with experience of constitutions of voluntary organisations.)

Mark;

Agreed, we'll amend the text accordingly regarding he Aims.

As the leadership of the group seems to fluctuate quite regularly, perhaps we should have several spaces for signatures, with date of appointment and date of resignation. So long as there is a minimum of three in post the group is ok, but we'd be able to accommodate extras as and when needed on the same document.

While the constitution will fit on one page, any signatures would have to fit on the back and eventually on attatched sheets. therefore sides will have to be numbered.

Chris, you and others have drawn attention elsewhere to local currency. I am interested in the idea of generating bulk buying power through TH membership - say a card which traders may recognise for a discount.

Alan

Have now edited according to the above commentsd.
Alan

Alan,

Your modification of para 1 has given it a different meaning from the original and my suggested rewording.

The original links the aims of TH with the intentions of the broader Transition Towns movement.

Your modification links TH with the intentions of the Transition Towns movement. That is OK for the general stuff but doesn't work in the context of the Horsham-specific activities.

Mark, Alan,

As I'm sure you both remember, the "Aims and Objectives" of Transition Horsham were voted on and agreed at the January meeting as being



Since that was what was agreed then surely that should be what goes in the constitution?

Trevor,

We agreed the aims and that is what is in the text in blue, above. if it looks different that is because it has been nicely formatted.

If you read through the whole thing and find anything you wish to improve, then by all means post it up.

There is a lot of room for improvement and clarification but no room at all for expansion, being far too long even in the short version.

The smaller it is the more people will be able to read it and buy into it, its as simple as that. The clearer it is the more legally sustainable it is, and that will enable funding applications etc

Pause for thought. Transition's aim a la Rob Hopkins et al is not to create a permanent Institution, but to enable and build capacity in individuals and communities.

My intention was to establish a constitution that is enabling, functional but non-prescriptive. Please help.

Alan

Trevor, I agree that these should appear in the Constitution verbatim.

I was at the January meeting but this was not discussed or voted on then. I think you must mean the February meeting, which I was not at.

I don't have the February meeting minutes. I must have deleted the email. I don't remember the Aims and Objectives being reproduced in the minutes but accept that they might have been. (Edited to add: I've just had a quick look on my hard drive to see whether I had saved the minutes. I didn't find them. And, frankly, only the dedicated will save and refer back to minutes.)

I haven't seen the Aims and Objectives reproduced on the forum, either as a standalone notice or as part of the minutes. Indeed, the minutes don't seem to have been posted on the forum since last summer.

You may remember that 'internal communications' was one of the issues I raised for the January meeting. I think we need to work on this aspect if Transition Horsham is to be anything other than an obscure clique. In fact, I think all my points for that January meeting are still very valid if we are to become an open and effective organisation.

We voted through the aims at the meeting before last, and as agreed they have been put into the current blue draft verbatim.

Objectives are covered by the list of things TH will do, I see no reason to take that much further though the list may need tweaking.

Internal communications will be vastly improved if we have membership, because it will be clear who is who. Typical problem is that last month I assumed that Paul would be aware of Trevors suggestion that i emailed the draft constittion to him FOR CIRCULATION ...... he had a ssumed that I had circulated it to all, and he was an individual recipient!

Apart from that hiccup, Pauls & Beryl's role as communciactions & records seems to work well, so why not just carry on - I've learnt my lesson and will warn others if I see it may happen again.

NOW THE IMPORTANT BIT; We DO need to define levels of membership. The proposed (blue) constitution is start, but does not discriminate between individuals, groups and associates/fellow travellers and who is endorsed by the group as a spokesman on this or that topic, etc etc.

Do all "official" Transition statements have to come from the core group? Or does the core group have to authorise any individual / group letters etc? What do we want to do?

Alan

Good day all.

I have given more and considerable thought to this subject and have still been unable to discount, to any significant degree, any part of the excellent 9 page draft constitution. Attempts to re-invent a smaller version of that wheel seem inevitably to produce a wheel which has flat edges and missing spokes.

I understand we are trying to achieve a 'summary' document which is short, simple and appealing to prospective members; yet maintain a Constitution which is professional, comprehensive and sustainable - and which can be used for all 'formal' purposes (including applying for funding).

A summary needs to explain what TH is about, how it operates and how people can participate - and in a way which is enabling, functional and not unnecessarily prescriptive.

Following input from others, my suggestion is that we use the following three-quarter-A4 Summary for prospective members:

TRANSITION HORSHAM

1. Transition Horsham (TH) is a not-for-profit non-sectoral non-discriminating democratic organisation which aims to encourage and help people in the district respond to the challenges and opportunities of 'peak oil' and 'climate change' and make a transition to a viable attractive sustainable and resilient community.
1.2. This includes maintaining an organisational structure and establishing targets plans and operating practices that meet the registration requirements of the Transition Network (www.transitionnetwork.org).

2. TH comprises:
2.1. Executives – A Coordinator, Treasurer, Communicator and Secretary.
2.2. A Steering Group – The Executives and not less than 2 or more than 12 non-Executives.
2.3. Working Groups – For specific projects, activities or special interests. Each Working Group is coordinated by a Steering Group member and may comprise any number of members.

3. Membership is open to anyone who agrees with and abides by the TH Constitution and who pays any subscription due.
3.1. The Constitution is posted on the TH website (www.transitionhorsham.org.uk) and is available on request from any Executive member.

4. Any member may stand for any Executive or Steering Group position and may apply to join any Working Group.

5. Each member has one vote. Except in special circumstances of an AGM or EGM, decisions at Executive, Steering Group and Working Group meetings are made by a simple majority vote of members in attendance.

What more do prospective members need to be told? What more do members need to know in order to participate day-to-day?

Well, I and others want to move on so I hope this suggestion will receive at least a majority agreement.

---------------------

I know I voted for the TH Aims & Objectives but, on reflection, I must not have been fully awake.

1.1.2 states 'To promote the transition of our community to one that is ... more resilient to increasing energy prices'. That is not wide enough and not as wide as the Transition Town aim. I submit the clause should say 'To promote the transition of our community to one that [which?] is ... more resilient to climate change and diminishing supplies of oil and gas.'. I would like to table that amendment at the next meeting.

----------------------

I agree with Mark's reminder of the points he raised at the January meeting. The points should be added to the Agenda/an 'Actions Outstanding' list; otherwise there's a danger they'll get forgotten. Also, that meeting Minutes should be posted on the Forum (and or the website?)