GSIS and Ma On Shan

[happyhour]

1. My understanding is that no EGM has yet been called, but the board must do so before 29-5-09 (unless of course the requisition is withdrawn in the meantime) and the EGM will take place before 26-6-09.
2. The requisitionists' e-mail of 12-5-09 said that they want "to replace the current GSIS Association Board with a new Board". The board's letter of 14-5-09 also said that "the requisition calls for the removal of the 13 named directors, and all other current directors of the GSIS Association Ltd and the appointment of the 10 named new candidates and any such other person or persons as the GSIS Association Ltd at the EGM deems appropriate." genome, are you absolutely sure that we can pick and choose which one we like and dislike? Could you please let us know the exact wording of the requistion?

We all know that an EGM has been called. We all know that a vote is looming and we all know that there are candidates that have been put forward.

Why should we be afraid of the EGM? We shouldn't be afraid we should embrace this EGM for the opportunities it gives us. This is not about a vendetta against the board or its members it is about getting the appropriate qualified people in place for the future of the school.

At this EGM we will get the chance to chose in that the vote is not to remove the whole board in one go but to vote on each individual member and to make sure we have the right qualified people in place to go forward with the massive redevelopment plans we have.

If you are a present board member there is no shame in standing up and saying "I don't think I have the appropriate qualifications for what is needed now and feel I better serve the school by giving another person the opportunity to share their experience and knowledge for what is needed now". Just like if you are a candidate there is no shame if you do not get voted in. You would have offered your services and expertise and it may be deemed that they do not fit the present criteria of what is needed so be it. You would have at least stood up and offered your expertise for the good of the school.

This EGM gives us a chance as a school community to chose people with the appropriate experiences that are needed to run a project of this size. People who will know what the right questions are to ask and know what pitfalls need to be looked out for.

These candidates are to complement and to work along side people on the board who have the experience of running the school. We need to work together to accomplish this and each party brings something special and unique to the table.

Excuse the analogy but it is like an ambulance you would never expect the driver to do the paramedics job just like you wouldn't want the driver to administer first aid. But together they are a formidable force.

The thing that sadness me most is that people have lost sight of what this is all about. It is NOT about he said she said or about discrediting individuals that is too easy.

This is about our school, our community and our GSIS and collectively as a community deciding what is best and securing the future educational needs of our children. That is the hard part.

 

[genome]

My understanding is that each board member will be voted on individually in that each person of the board is named individually. So you will say ya or nay to each one in turn. This is the same for the candidates. So you get to choose.

I am sure that the requisitioners did this for a reason which I am guessing was not to turn this in to a witch hunt or to make one person solely responsible and say put all the blame on the chairman for example or the treasurer. The requisitioners are not bad people they feel strongly about what they believe in and have stood up to voice their opinions and want to help. This in my opinion is not wrong and I encourage everyone to have their say and voice their opinion.

This EGM in my mind is the best of all worlds as I keep saying it gives us choices which we never had before.

The worst situation would be if the whole board decides to resign in protest which with the little faith I have left in them I am sure they will not do in that that does no one any good.

If anyone who is reading this is a lawyer could they please either refute of confirm what I have said above re the elections and if I have got it wrong I apologize in advance.

 

[happyhour]

Everything depends on what the requistion said. No lawyer can advise us unless we know the exact wording of the requisition. That's why I was asking.

My understanding is that each board member will be voted on individually in that each person of the board is named individually. So you will say ya or nay to each one in turn. This is the same for the candidates. So you get to choose.

I am sure that the requisitioners did this for a reason which I am guessing was not to turn this in to a witch hunt or to make one person solely responsible and say put all the blame on the chairman for example or the treasurer. The requisitioners are not bad people they feel strongly about what they believe in and have stood up to voice their opinions and want to help. This in my opinion is not wrong and I encourage everyone to have their say and voice their opinion.

This EGM in my mind is the best of all worlds as I keep saying it gives us choices which we never had before.

The worst situation would be if the whole board decides to resign in protest which with the little faith I have left in them I am sure they will not do in that that does no one any good.

If anyone who is reading this is a lawyer could they please either refute of confirm what I have said above re the elections and if I have got it wrong I apologize in advance.

 

[genome]

There are lawyers who read this forum who I am sure helped put the request for the EGM together. Those are who I was asking. Members of the board also read this so we may get lucky and have them attach the wording of the request. Also I am sure that if we phoned the school we could get a copy. Lastly maybe one of the requisitioners who read this forum could confirm that that is the intention of the EGM.

 

[happyhour]

genome,

I thought you know the requisitionists or at least some of them. Couldn't you get a copy of the requisition and post it here? Just the part relating to the proposed resolutions will do.

 

[Dragon]

confused again

genome,

I thought you know the requisitionists or at least some of them. Couldn't you get a copy of the requisition and post it here? Just the part relating to the proposed resolutions will do.

with the informed content coming from knowing all posters of this thread I find it very surprising that, no one seems to know, what the "requisitionists" have requested.

I am very certain that, the mail from GSIS informing the community on the latest request for an EGM contained the wording of the resolutions put forward for the EGM:

.........
1. to remove all of the following (then the entire current board members are listed) and any other directors....

2. to vote for all of the following (then the list of new board members proposed)...........

I can not ascertain as to whether or not this wording is exactly what has been put forward and I have deleted the mail from my computer, so I cannot attach it into this response, but it was very clear that the issue is the removal of the entire board at the forthcoming EGM and to replace it with an entirely new board of directors.

 

[genome]

Dragon each of the board members are listed hence each one will be voted on. So some could be voted to stay and others may be voted to be removed. This is the same for the new board members.

The intention may be to replace the whole board but we vote as parents on who stays and who goes.That is why I think this is such a unique opportunity for us all. I did read the requisition but as you i also do not have it to hand.

 

[happyhour]

That's what I thought too ie. a resolution for the removal of the entire board and the appointment of the 10 named new candidates and others (if any) to the new board. But contrary to what genome said, such a resolution would not allow us to, say, pick and choose just some and not all of the 10 news candidates to the board. That's why I want this point clarified.

with the informed content coming from knowing all posters of this thread I find it very surprising that, no one seems to know, what the "requisitionists" have requested.

I am very certain that, the mail from GSIS informing the community on the latest request for an EGM contained the wording of the resolutions put forward for the EGM:

.........
1. to remove all of the following (then the entire current board members are listed) and any other directors....

2. to vote for all of the following (then the list of new board members proposed)...........

I can not ascertain as to whether or not this wording is exactly what has been put forward and I have deleted the mail from my computer, so I cannot attach it into this response, but it was very clear that the issue is the removal of the entire board at the forthcoming EGM and to replace it with an entirely new board of directors.

 

[happyhour]

genome,

The naming of each individual board member doesn't mean a thing. What's important is the words "the removal of the following (ie the board members named) and all other current directors of the GSIS Association Ltd." It means either the entire board is removed or they will stay as a whole. If the resolution had allowed you to remove just one or more of them, it would have included words such as "one or more of them" or words to that effect. The same applies to the appointment of the new candidates. Either they all go in or none of them makes it.

Dragon each of the board members are listed hence each one will be voted on. So some could be voted to stay and others may be voted to be removed. This is the same for the new board members.

The intention may be to replace the whole board but we vote as parents on who stays and who goes.That is why I think this is such a unique opportunity for us all. I did read the requisition but as you i also do not have it to hand.

 

[NewHorizon]

From what I gather, there are two possibilities:

A. We must either vote out the whole board or allow them all to stay. Voting them all out sounds too drastic. There will not be continuity etc. Just as someone posted above, this will not be desirale.

B. It is not sure if we can pick and choose who to vote in and who to vote out. Even if we can, how do we know which are the good ones? A glossy brochure or a glib passage does not mean that that person is good or has worked well. Conversely, the good ones may be too modest to advertise themselves. How do we know?

Also - are we able to add more candidates on the day of EGM?

How do I find out who is a good leader and who isn't?

How do I find out who has vision?

How do I find out who were the ones on the board resistant to finding alternatives to MOS? They should leave.

How do I find out who it was that was instrumental in getting Wanchai? That person should lead the board.