2009 -july mins-non-quorate

Minutes of Competitions Committee Meeting held at Ager July 2009 Present: Steve Penfold Nigel Bray Graham Phipps Craig Dolwin Bruce Kavanagh Carl Wallbank Gordon Rigg BK was unanimously elected to chair the meeting as GW was absent. 1 - Size of the panel There is a general feeling that the panel is too large at present as it currently has some extra persons pending, others leaving at the end of the season. It was proposed to limit the size of the competitions panel with 7 or 9 discussed. 7 was considered to be too small considering likely absences from meetings. The figure of 9 is likely to be reached by natural wastage. (since this meeting Grant C has tendered his resignation). Secretary adds :I suggest Gary as chairman contacts panel members individually to establish their future intentions. The following points were also raised regarding the make up of the panel: The panel may co-opt expertise as required from the competition pilot community. With the panel potentially containing a number of high ranked pilots the panel may delegate team selection to a separate sub committee. Chairman adds: The meeting was not quorate and therefore no change has been effected. 2 - Meet director and scorer It was agreed that Pete Coad and Tim Hudson had been very successful in their roles as new meet directors. The possibility of having more than one meet director and more than one scorer available had advantages. In order to facilitate this, the roles of meet director and scorer are to be defined and a guide for each role to be produced. A draft guide for the meet director’s role to be produced Action: Craig D It was noted that the scoring at Ager was done quickly and accurately and used some extra software tools particularly for the download of multiple GPSs at the same time. Info to be gathered from Mark Graham and collected into a scorers guide. A draft guide for the scorers role to be produced Action: Steve P. 3 – Future team selections The panel is required to publish a clear criteria for team selections. The possibility of a “mechanical” results based selection for part of the team was discussed with no clear conclusion. Criteria for discretionary/points based team selection to be produced by discussion with panel members and circulated for comment. Draft criteria for team selection as a starting point for discussion by the panel Action: Gordon Consider and circulate options for a “mechanical” selection criteria to select part of the team Action : All Other items discussed in the meeting were specific to the running of the Ager competition and particularly the awards and mentions for the final prize giving and as these were successfully carried out detail record here is not necessary. 4 -GR was actioned to check if the meeting was quorate. The constitution requires 60% of the panel to be present to attain quorum. The meeting was not quorate.