Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

Peter says he will resign as chair, but will remain a trustee for the remainder of his term, so I believe that is until May 2028?

 

Yes, I was meaning as Chair, @Old Kent Biker . I'm surprised Miles didn't resign as a Trustee too, but the focus for the Trust in the near future must surely consist of two things:

(i) Planning Permission to extend to Parracombe
(ii) Sorting out the finances of the OSHI/LBBC.

Good luck to Giles Perkins and Co; I'd advise them to leave the running of the railway to the CIC and focus on these two points.

Here's to a brighter, less acrimonious future.

 

Agh, finally! The official resignation notice is rather disingenuous, in that the last 10 years has been either wasted/ misdirected effort, plus a lot of money going the same way.
I'm not going to be in any way sentimental about this. It should have happened several years ago.
Here's to the future. It can only be better.

 

Thanks Mr Miles. Good work etc.
Here's to the future

 

I'm also interested in finding out how much money was spent on planning consultancy, the red line fiasco, and what the real exposure to OSHI is. With Miles gone in March, perhaps we'll actually get the truth rather than his half-truths and outright lies.

 

I hope for change, but suspect much of it will be subterranean as work is done to establish the true status of the L&BRT.

 

Well, it was, after all, entertainment over the holiday period. However, as 35B has already said, change is coming, and I think the next AGM could be a bit lively if you can make it. I am not sure where we will be by the time it happens, but I hope that a new, open style of management comes forward,

 

Well, I think you are going to have to wait to see what happens and what direction the wind blows on this one. Some may say this is great news, but it also has to come with a warning not to wish for what you want, as you may find it not as good as you want. Right now, not every member will be aware of this news, and I am sure this will divide the membership.

But don't forget that Peter still holds directorships in other parts of the L&BR Family. ie the 762 Club and the Blackmoor (OSHI) PLC, so there is that to dwell on as well, and how is this going to change these relationships if at all?

For what it is worth, maybe we might want to consider introducing a time limit on how long people can serve on the Trust and the CIC boards

 

"and I am sure this will divide the membership"
Is there anything that hasn't?

 

That depends on how many members are willing to stand for election and effectively carry out the duties if they are elected.

You've publicly said that you want to create more companies as part of the L&B, so I just hope that you've considered where you're going to get all these new trustees from?

 

I'm sure this may divide people; it's clear that there are people in and around the L&BRT who have considerable time for Peter Miles and who will, presumably, be saddened at this change - especially if the reality was less harmonious than the public announcement.

However, rather than jumping to conclusions about how X or Y will play in the immediate short term, I prefer to look at what seems to be happening quietly under the surface. Those are changes, and they are welcome changes.

 

Putting to one side specific individuals and the contribution they have made, I agree it is worth asking whether it is good for the individuals themselves, or the organisations they serve, to be in post for very long periods. I think there are well rehearsed arguments for having time limits but I accept there may be other views.

 

Term limits are a great idea, but with significant drawbacks. They create a culture where people can't be around too long, but the moment that there is a shortage of candidates, they can create gaps. As demonstrated by previous US presidents, they can also lead to a period of paralysis towards the end of a term of office, in which the knowledge that the person will be leaving creates a leadership hiatus.

 

Retired as Chair from March 2026 and will remain a Trustee until the end of his current term - not resigned.

 

Perhaps a limit of two consecutive elected terms would be flexible enough?

 

It is recognised by the Charity Commission that the idea to limit trustee tenures will not fit all charities especially smaller ones where the pool of members where trustees can be drawn from is quite small.

As a general rule of thumb I tend to reckon that in any membership you may have ~10% of members actually active, and of those only perhaps 1-2% are suitable trustee candidates. It is quite possible to exhaust any trustee candidates quite quickly unless the membership has a high turnover.

In the L&Bs case, let's say 2,500 members, perhaps 250-275 active members including area groups, and 2-3 trustee candidates. Being as there isn't a high turnover of members then we may already have exhausted any possibles in the past few years.

This is why the Charity Commission allows longer tenures and doesn't set a hard limit to try and prevent situations where there are no trustees at all and the charity's board collapses.

 

Very fair and valid points. However, I think some provision could be made within limits on terms to prevent any such collapse.