[Auugps] AUUGPS and AUUG status

[Greg 'groggy' Lehey]

I'm a little concerned about the sleeping dogs, thus the removeal of
talk@ from the Cc:.  Feel free to copy any other parts (or even those,
I suppose).

On Thursday, 30 October 2008 at 11:08:13 +1100, Lawrie Brown wrote:
> Hi Greg
>
> I'm just going to address a couple of points.
>
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 10:41:51AM +1100, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
>>   If, however, we want a new public officer, I now live in VIC and I'm
>>   quite prepared to do what little work it is.
>
> Changing public officer, if the board requests it, should just be a
> case of submitting the relevant forms. For the existing AUUG, it
> does indeed need to be a Victorian.

And somehow we didn't even get that done.

>>   Christopher mentions finding the existing public officer to lodge
>>   outstanding returns.  I can assure you that Luce will be no help
>
> Well lodging a return for the last FY would be a good start. I'll check
> with PeterW when he surfaces next, to see what his paperwork says.

It could waken sleeping dogs.  I'd warn against it.

>> Committee:
>>   As a number of people have observed: there *is* no board (committee
>>   is the official word).  Consumer Affairs VIC tell me that we should
>>   get some financial members together, anywhere (I'd suggest Canberra
>> :-) and elect a new committee.  No money is involved in this matter.
>
> Actually I dispute this. As I have noted a couple of times ...
>
> Firstly, pedant alert, it **IS** board, the wording was changed in 2005,
> and is now reflected in the updated version of the constitution on the
> AUUG website (thanks David) at:
>     http://auug.org.au/resources/roles/constitution.shtml

Correct.  I was one of the board who decided the name change.  But I
see that the Consumer Affairs still call it a committee, and that's
what I was referring to.

> Next, Peter Wishart nominated for Treasurer for the current board. His
> was the only nomination (for ANY position), urgo he is elected unopposed
> (the fact that there was no secretary extant to announce this doesn't
> in my opinion alter his valid election to the board per the rules).

Nor a returning officer :-(  But yes, OK.

>>   I don't think the new AUUG should have cash on hand.
>
> I pretty much agree with that - however if its the existing AUUG, then
> it WILL need some funds since it IS obligated to regularly file certain
> things with CAV in Vic. They have fees for everything, and this WILL
> eventually catch up with us!!!

Yes, we should consider how best to address this issue.  I don't think
that waking up Consumer Affairs is the way, though.

> Its the fees that form one of the valid arguments in my opinion for
> a new organisation based in the ACT (which allows free filing for
> small orgs, as has been noted).

I'd rather cross that bridge when we come to it, and we're currently a
long way away.

Greg
--
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/auugps/attachments/20081030/ce1a6fdd/attachment.pgp>