Hi Suzanne,

Scheduling of the AGM has been a perennial problem. I recall a few years ago
that the achievement of quorum was dubious, and we were delayed until we
could ascertain that yes, indeed, we had a sufficient number of members at
the conference present at the AGM in order to conduct business.

In an organization such as ours, the AGM is a crucial component of the
governance process. Through the AGM the Board is held accountable for its
actions from the previous year, a new Board is selected, the financial audit
is presented, and other business of import to the association, usually
constitutional, is conducted. This year we had a membership fee increase.
Being not only part of the Board, but a member as well, I was there wearing
three hats (personal, institutional, and Board) -- the AGM (to me at least)
is the voice of the AAO to its Board. Yet over the last six months I have
had members -- who were present at the conference -- ask when the membership
fee increase was discussed, because they had never heard of it.

There have been a number of comments made by members who were able to attend
the ACA Conference, that it might be helpful to adopt the ACA approach of
longer breaks. We see each other so seldom that longer breaks would allow us
to network, talk about the last session, and renew acquaintances. Your
suggestion of the AGM over lunch is an excellent one. Free food makes for a
captive audience, or at least food for thought.

Regards from the frozen east,
Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: Suzanne Dubeau [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, 15 January 2004 2:03 PM
To: Henry, Paul
Cc: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Special vote on changes to the constitution -- reminder


Dear Paul...

I've decided to post this to the list to see how others feel about this
situation.

I remember at last year's AGM that a decision was made then that the
mail-in ballot would be held since we were unable to complete this
business during the regularly scheduled AGM.

However, in trying to find a bit of time to review these proposed
changes yesterday in time to vote, I found myself increasingly
ambivalent about the mail-in ballot approach.  I found that I would have
liked a chance to discuss the implications of the vote in an open forum
in the presence of other AAO members. These are important matters and
time *should* be made to deal with them in the AGM somehow.  In the end,
I could only bring myself to vote as abstaining.

I recognize that the challenges faced by the Board in governing the AAO
are real and that the decision to proceed in this manner was taken for a
reason.  But I also think we need to see whether there are other
approaches we could take to ensure that dealing with AGM issues get the
time and attention they should.

Perhaps in future annual conferences, the AGM should be held over a
lunch, or between two sessions.  This might help keep the AGM to time
while drawing on a larger number of the membership.

Best wishes to all,
Suzanne Dubeau