November 2009 Poll
RESULTS TO STRUCTURE & START GROUP POLL WHICH CLOSED ON 20 NOVEMBER 2009
Please find here the results to the Poll run on behalf of the Structure and Start Working Groups which closed at 11 pm on 20 November 2009.
168 people cast votes. (Please note there was a typo in my first email where I said that 166 people had cast votes.) Two of those votes were discarded; one was from someone
who was not an owner or moderator on a Freegle group and the other I was unable to verify due to no response from the group owner.
Of the 166 people casting votes, not all answered every question. Therefore, the percentage figure relates to the percentage of people casting a vote on that particular question,
not the total number of voters. You’ll also note that the percentage figures sometimes do not hit 100%. This is what comes of rounding!
Structure Group Questions
1. Should Freegle elect a representative body and delegate to it some decision making powers?
No - All decisions should be made by a vote open to all members following discussion on Central 22 13%
Yes - We should have a fully empowered elected body which can take any decisions on our behalf and are empowered to consult with Central as appropriate 16 10%
Yes – An elected body should be empowered to take some decisions - but with some decisions reserved for "general member" vote 126 76%
None of the above 1 1%
Other (Comments at Appendix 1) 1 1%
2. Should the vote in Question 3 be 'No - all decisions should be made by a vote' - do you want:
The present system of working groups with open membership to be continued with options brought to Central for discussion and polling 97 85%
None 8 7%
Other (Comments at Appendix 1) 9 8%
3. Should the vote in Question 3 be to elect an elected body with limited decision making powers, which of the following would you like to see as a model for how those decisions are shared?
All such decision making powers should rest with Central (ie.all moderators) until they are explicitly devolved to the elected body by general member vote 12 8%
The elected body should be empowered to make decisions necessary to run the organisation but these decisions may be overturned by a poll or vote on Central. 31 20%
Day to day decisions will be made by the elected body but major matters (eg membership conditions, constitution, major policy changes and similar) should always be referred to general member vote 107 67%
None of the above 4 3%
Other (Comments at Appendix 1) 5 3%
4.'An elected body may wish to delegate what authority it is given in particular matters to individuals or groups. (eg devolving the screening of new groups
'to a separate group, or empowering a media group to make press releases without reference back, or appointing a p'articular person to oversee the website etc) Do you feel:
Yes, the elected body may devolve its responsibility and authority to other groups as it sees appropriate – while reporting any such devolution to Central and remaining subject to later revision by whatever polls may take place on Central 103 63%
All such devolutions and appointments should be referred to Central. 34 21%
No all authority to act on our behalf should be kept with the elected body or Central 18 11%
None of the above 4 3%
Other (Comments at Appendix 1) 4 3%
'5. In some of the options offered in Question 6, it is envisaged that a poll or vote published on Central (open to all Freegle members to vote) should be the final 'authority
'and over-ride any ot'her authority granted to an elected body, working groups or other option. Who can call for such a poll on the Central group? (NB this would also be the precondition for a vote of no confidence in the elected body or any other office)
Any single member can request a poll/vote on Central 25 15%
Any group comprising 2% of Central membership at the time of first stated formal objection can request a poll/vote on Central 14 8%
Any group comprising 5% of Central members at the time of first stated formal objection can request a poll/vote on Central 36 22%
Any group comprising 10% of Central member at the time of first stated formal objection can request a poll/vote on Central 56 35%
Only working groups or the elected committee can request a poll on central 19 12%
None of the above 1 1%
Other (Comments at Appendix 1) 11 7%
6. How many members of an elected body should there be (the agreed number would be calculated as the average of answers received, rounded up to the next
odd number)
3 1 1%
5 13 8%
6 6 4%
7 37 24%
8 14 9%
9 19 12%
10 19 12%
11 11 7%
12 12 8%
13 7 5%
15 8 5%
18 1 1%
20 7 5%
7. How often do you think elections for members of an elected body should take place?
Once a year 87 54%
Once every 2 years 48 30%
Once every 3 years 18 11%
None of the above 2 1%
Other (Comments at Appendix 1) 7 4%
'8. How many terms of membership of an elected group (1-3 years depending on response to Question 9) should a member be allowed to serve before t'hey
are re-elected?
NB IF you vote for officers retaining their post for three years BUT ask that elections take place every year, his would be implemented as 1/3rd of the
members standing down and being re-elected each year. In this scenario the first year 1/3 would be elected for 3 years. another third for 2 years and the final
third for 3 years to ensure continuity.
1 term 36 22%
2 terms 40 25%
3 terms 40 25%
Unlimited 35 22%
None of the above 1 1%
Other (Comments at Appendix 1) 9 6%
9. At the end of their term of membership of an elected body should existing members:
Be eligible to stand for re-election immediately 104 64%
Be forced to "take a break" for one electoral period 13 8%
Be allowed to serve 2 consecutive periods before being required to take a break 23 14%
Be allowed to serve 3 consecutive periods before being required to take a break 16 10%
None of the above 3 2%
Other (Comments at Appendix 1) 4 3%
'10. Depending on the working practices of an elected body, there will be a need for specific 'roles/officers within the Committee (Chairman or Facilitator, Secretary, Treasurer etc). Do you think we should:
Run separate elections for specific roles/officers 46 29%
Allow the elected body to choose their own role holders/officers from their number 107 67%
None of the above 1 1%
Other (Comments at Appendix 1) 6 4%
11. If a vacancy arises due to a member resigning from the elected body should we:
Allow the elected body to co-opt a replacement member to serve until the next scheduled elections 63 39%
Ask the elected body to ask for a "by-election" for a replacement 83 51%
Leave the vacancy open until the next scheduled elections 6 4%
None of the above 1 1%
Other (Comments at Appendix 1) 9 6%
12. A quorum is the minimum number of voters an elected body would need for a decision. What should be the quorum of elected members (in post) that
are required for a decision <span style="font-weight: bold;" /><span style="font-weight: bold;" />(larger percentages guarantee democracy - but smaller percentages mean work continues when people are
on holiday/sick/offline etc)
NB depending on results of th'e question on how many members an elected body should have (Question 6), th'is result would be adjusted in order to
have whole numbers
25% 11 7%
33.3% 20 12%
50% 46 29%
66.6% 41 26%
75% 18 11%
Allow the elected body to decide 19 12%
None of the above 1 1%
Other (Comments at Appendix 1) 5 3%
13. At the end of this poll are you happy for the Structure Working Group and the Returning Officer to set up elections based on its results and run elections?
Yes 123 76%
Not yet - I would like the a proposed, detailed electoral plan resulting from this poll to be brought back to Central for further discussion before proceeding with
any elections. 33 20%
None of the above 1 1%
Other (Comments at Appendix 1) 5 3%
14. In the previous poll a formal document which defines how the Freegle organisation operates was voted by 88% (190 votes) as being required. Are you happy for
'the Structure W'orking Group to retain the mandate, whatever the results of this poll, to prepare this written document for Freegle nationally to be proposed in
draft to Central?
Yes 136 84%
No - an elected body should prepare the written Document 5 3%
No - it should be openly discussed on Central 17 11%
None of the above 1 1%
Oher (Comments at Appendix 1) 3 2%
Start Group Questions
15. The current procedure assumes that we do not need to consider IMOD run Freecycle groups, either Yahoo or My Freecycle when approving groups. Is this
assumption correct?
No - we should be considering them when approving groups 20 13%
Yes - We should not consider them when approving groups 123 77%
None of the above 5 3%
Other (Comments at Appendix 2) 11 7%
16. Should we approve groups in areas partly or fully covered by locally-run Freecycle Yahoo groups?
No - we should never allow groups in areas with a locally run Freecycle Yahoo group 13 8%
Yes - we should consider groups in areas with a locally run Freecycle Yahoo group 125 78%
None of the above 3 2%
Other (Comments at Appendix 2) 20 12%
17. Should we approve groups in areas partly or fully covered by locally-run Freecycle MyFreecycle groups?
No - we should never allow groups in areas with a locally run My Freecycle group 8 5%
Yes - we should consider groups in areas with a locally run My Freecycle group 136 85%
None of the above 2 1%
Other (Comments at Appendix 2) 15 9%
18. Until now we have been giving Freecycle groups time to consider moving over. When should that thinking time be over?
Now 32 20%
1 month 30 18%
3 months 39 24%
6 months 22 14%
1 year 8 5%
None of the above 8 5%
Other (Comments at Appendix 2) 24 15%
19. When an application is received, should the Freecycle group/s in question be contacted and given one last chance to move?
a) Should the Freecycle group/s in question be contacted and given one last chance to move?
Yes 124 79%
No 28 18%
None of the above 6 4%
b) If we give a notice period, how long should it be?
2 weeks 49 35%
4 weeks 73 53%
None of the above 17 12%
Other (Comments at Appendix 2) 21
20. It has been suggested that where there is an overlap in area between an existing Freecycle Group and a proposed Freegle group, we should not approve a new Freegle group if the existing Freecycle group has good relationships with nearby Freegle groups, but we should approve applications in areas where the Freecycle group is never planning to move or is unfriendly.
NB (please note - If this option gets a ‘yes’ result it would have to be considered further to decide exactly how this would be done and would need to wait for things like an appeals procedure to be in place before it was implemented.)
No - We should allow new Freegle groups regardless of the local Freecycle group 98 61%
Yes - We should have some way of deciding if they are friendly and not allow new groups in their area if they are. 51 32%
None of the above 4 3%
Other (Comments at Appendix 2) 9 6%
21. Currently, an interim team is approving new groups, but only in areas without locally run Freecycle groups. This process will probably change in future as the
structu'reof Freegle is established. Subject to the results of this poll, should the interim team be given the ma'ndate to approve groups in areas
''with locally run Freecycle groups 'or should we wait until the final group approval process has been established?
(please note, a ‘yes’ result for Question 22 will force an automatic ‘no’ result to this question)
Yes - The Interim group should have the mandate to approve groups in areas with locally run Freecycle groups 101 63%
No - The interim group should not have the mandate to approve groups in areas with locally run Freecycle groups 41 26%
None of the above 3 2%
Other (Comments at Appendix 2) 15 9%
Back to Polls
