Autscape Management Committee Meeting Minutes Meeting date: Thursday 26th August 2010 Meeting time: 1pm Present: Elaine, Kalen, Martijn, Peter, Trish, Yo. 1 Approvals 1.1. Minutes of July meeting - approved (4 in favour, 2 abstentions) 1.2. Minutes of meetings held during Autscape conference (version posted 26/8/10) - approved (5 in favour, 1 abstention) 1.3. Draft minutes of AGM 2010 for approval by the membership at AGM 2011 (draft posted 22/08/10) and subject to adding in missing abstention figures - approved ( 5 in favour, 1 abstention) 2 Proposals 2.1. The committee agreed to reappoint Yo as company secretary (5 in favour, 1 abstention) 2.2. The committee agreed to expand the role of the Childcare SC to include responsibility for issues relating to under 18s at Autscape and rename it the Youth SC (5 in favour, 1 abstention) 2.3. There was a brief discussion in which the difference between Trustee indemnity and public liability insurance was clarified and the level of cover discussed. The Company Secretary made a statement about the purpose of the insurance which contained an error. The committee decided to allocate up to £200 for the purchase of Trustees Indemnity / Directors & Officers Liability insurance up to £100,000 from aQmen. (Unanimous). [The purpose of this insurance was further clarified and the error corrected by the Company Secretary following the meeting and the committee ratified its decision nem con.] 2.4. There was a brief discussion about the difficulties encountered by both Yo and Peter in attempting to find a suitable free umbrella organization for CRB checks. Elaine offered to make a brief attempt by phone. The committee voted to ask Elaine to make further enquires and report back by the end of Tuesday (5 in favour, 1 for using Aspects Care Ltd.) 2.5. The committee agreed to attempt to co-opt 3 further directors from a short list of up to 8 potential candidates. (Unanimous) The list of candidates will be discussed on the committee email list. 3 Roles and responsibilities 3.1. There was a brief discussion of possible unfairness to prospective co-opted committee members if roles are assigned before they have a chance to volunteer. However some committee members expressed the view that such unfairness is inevitable and pointed out that all potential co-optees had the option to run for the committee at the AGM which would have allowed them full choice. The committee agreed to balance the need to make progress and have certainty with the potential unfairness of assigning roles before this year's board is complete by attempting to make permanent appointments to the posts of Treasurer and those subcommittee chairships and connected roles (Programme Coordinator, Venue Coordinator, Webmaster & Youth programme coordinator [if required]) for which there are candidates and interim appointments to other posts until next month's meeting. (4 in favour, 2 for making only Treasurer permanent and interim appts to all other posts). 3.2. Interim Chair - Kalen was appointed (5 in favour, 1 abstention) 3.3. Treasurer (permanent) - Peter was appointed (permanent) (5 in favour, 1 abstention) 3.4. Venue Coordinator (interim, to be reassessed when venue decided) - Peter was appointed (5 in favour, 1 abstention). 3.5. Programme Coordinator. Programme Coordinator. Martijn and Trish initially volunteered for the role. The chair clarified that the committee could choose to vote to decide, or that the committee could discuss options, perhaps for one candidate to assist the other or for both to work together. After an extended discussion the committee took a break. After the meeting resumed, only Trish put herself forwards for the role and she was selected as programme coordinator (4 in favour, 2 abstentions). 3.6. Subcommittee Chairs (Permanent) 3.6.1. Venue. The chair proposed that the venue co-ordinator (Peter) chair venue sc. Yo asked for clarification of the role of venue sc in relation to the split between coordinating with the current venue and finding the following year's venue. Peter suggested that separating them at the SC level would produce too many tiny SCs, but commented that the venue co-ordinator position needs to be split. Peter was appointed as venue sc chair (5 in favour, 1 abstention) (3.6.6 was also dealt with at this point but is minuted below for clarity). 3.6.2. Publications and Publicity. Kalen, Martijn and Elaine volunteered. Kalen and Elaine withdrew. Martijn was appointed as pub sc chair (5 in favour, 1 abstention) 3.6.3. Fundraising. Yo volunteered and was appointed (5 in favour, 1 abstention). Yo asked for committee members with relevant skills to join fundraising sc and help her get it going again. 3.6.4. Constitution. Yo volunteered and was appointed (5 in favour, 1 abstention). Peter asked whether, once Autscape becomes a charitable company this sc would cease to be needed. Yo responded that sc-cons would probably be defunct once all the necessary policies are written but anticipated that task consuming the whole of this Autscape year. 3.6.5. Tech. Peter volunteered and was appointed (5 in favour, 1 abstention). There was a brief discussion about whether sc-tech needs to be an SC at all. Peter commented that it can be useful for people interested in testing systems. Martijn pointed out that it makes some financial decisions (e.g. webhost). Kalen suggested that such decisions could be proposed to the main committee by the webmaster, but decided the issue was insufficiently important to pursue now. 3.6.6. (decided earlier in the same vote as 3.6.1). Programme. Trish was appointed (5 in favour, 1 abstention) 3.6.7. Youth. Yo expressed a willingness to volunteer only if no-one else could be found. Elaine volunteered. Yo withdrew and Elaine was appointed (5 in favour, 1 abstention) 4 Follow ups The Chair asked committee members to keep the following reports brief due to lack of time. 4.1. 2011 Venue. Peter reported that he has been investigating Stonar School, which is larger than Ammerdown. A venue report will follow shortly, but the basics are that it's quiet, it has large grounds, lots of twin rooms, and it's *much* cheaper than Ammerdown. In many respects, it's like Giggleswick except the school is compact - no 5 minute walks to lectures. The events manager read our web site in detail which is a good sign. They're now finalising their timetable for the summer but they don't have dates for us yet. They have emailed Peter this week so they haven't forgotten us. Peter asked for information about the dates of school summer holidays in order to be able to answer Stonar promptly when they offer a date. Peter also reported that Autscape has a booking at Ammerdown (not finalised) for Mon-Thu 22-25 August, but the cost will be up considerably from this year due to the difficulty in getting a discount. Trish asked about the availability of single rooms at Stonar. Peter reported that it would be possible to use twins as single. Yo expressed concern at any possibility of the dates being finalised with the venue without reference to the committee because this major decision affects everything else. Kalen concurred. Peter agreed that this will be brought back to the committee. Yo also expressed concern that it is getting very late to decide a 2011 venue and asked when the venue report on Stonar was expected to be available. Peter agreed to provide the report within 7 days. 4.2. Covered under 4.1 5 Key position reports 5.1. Venue co-ordinator. Peter reported that the owner of the lost coat has been identified and no other lost property was found. Autscape has not yet received Ammerdown's invoice. Peter reported that a person who had paid for non-residential was able to have a residential place. Once Autscape receives the additional income from that it will enable us to give a small refund to those who cancelled late. Peter also reported that the venue had difficulty coping with the number of requests from us. These were caused by: a) Our desire to fill the venue to capacity. (This led to us having to make a large number of requests for information to satisfy room requirements and sort out camping) Peter commented that, as well as the direct cost, work the venue does just for us makes billing harder for them. b) Changes and cancellations. (Changes made after we had given information to the venue increased the workload for the venue substantially) c) Dietary needs. (Some individual made unnecessary dietary requests without regard for the cost to the venue.) Peter reported that, as a consequence of these issues, there is no possibility of Autscape receiving a discount similar to the level we got this year in the future. 5.2. Treasurer. Peter reported that he hasn't had any time since the last meeting to follow up Yo's alternative accountant suggestion. The taxi invoice came and was paid. As reported above, the venue invoice hasn't arrived yet. Peter reported that he has updated our records with regard to taxi payments and all but one booking payment and is working on doing so for sensory equipment, merchandise and printing. Peter requested expenses receipts from committee members and reminded them to write a separate note when claiming only some items from a receipt. Peter reported some uncleared cheques: 3 for booking refunds (one from 2006, the others from this year), 1 for company secretary training. He commented that we have not yet received an invoice for the second half of the solicitor's fee and told the company secretary that it would be helpful if that could be during this financial year. Kalen asked Peter to contact her about costs of merchandise. 5.3. Company secretary. Yo reported that the new solicitor arrangements are working satisfactorily. She has set up online filing with Companies house, filled change of financial year at Peter's request and filed updated directors forms to reflect the changes at the AGM. She stated her intention to bring up the (minor) conflict of interest issue on the email list due to lack of time in the current meeting. 5.4. Chair. The Chair had no comment in view of the lack of time. 6 Any other business 6.1. Trish asked if anyone picked up the feedback forms and Martijn responded that he has them. Trish asked whether she should combine them with information from the feedback session. The chair asked Trish to write us a summary report and send it to the email list. 6.2. Yo reported that she has received a report from Debbie about merchandise which she will post to the list for the information of whoever does it next year. She reported that Debbie (as last year's registrar) also intends to provide a report about registration/cancellations soon. 6.3. Regarding 3.5 above, Martijn stated that he is prepared to advise Trish in her capacity as the new Programme Coordinator as necessary, but is concerned about the possibility of ending up in a position where he does most of the work while someone else gets to take the credit and look competent. He also stated that it would be inadvisable for him to attempt to do significant work for the same reason that a few people here were concerned about him becoming Programme Coordinator (personal issues raised during the earlier discussion). He wished to clarify that he is prepared to play an advisory role but not an assistant one. Trish stated that she would like to do it on that basis. 6.4. Peter asked whether letters have gone out to the presenters thanking them for their time and effort and queried whether this should be Martijn's last task or Trish's first task. Kalen stated that, in her opinion, it should be Trish's task. Trish asked whether these should be sent by post or email. Peter responded that that decision is up to Trish. (Kalen noted that formal letters should be proofread by at least one other person or the prog sc). Peter commented that his personal preference would be for a formal letter and Yo concurred. Kalen preferred email and mentioned a middle ground of attaching a formatted file to an email.