I note some errors in the minutes regarding the Work Claims item concerning the work list process.
Firstly, it is indicated as an ordinary resolution which concerns process but is pointed at changes to the Finance policy and how work is funded.
This resolution has two issues.
It was not seconded and therefore voided.
It implies a finance policy change in funding without taking into consideration the motion being put 21 days before hand, and therefore voided.
Secondly, The proposed process presented is questionable particularly with the statement concerning claims that a member can draw from the infrastructure share subscription funds which is determined by the terms of issue and for Nevertire road. This means it is not within the rules or the law. It also implies being able to draw from the sinking fund component and has not considered the zero balance of that portion of the sinking fund levy.
Thirdly, the rationale misinforms the community by implying “This will avoid the Team members having to comply with Tax Law and taking out personal injury insurance”.
Members are not covered for personal injury by Goolawah’s insurances and would be required to obtain their own insurances.
Members cannot avoid tax law, in particular income if it exceeds the threshold considering any invoice submitted. However members can complete a ATO supplier form to inform Goolawah that they do not require an ABN thereby removing the ned for Goolawah to consider withholding tax.
The method implied to claim under the work claim umbrella at a different rate is feasible but also questionable if the purpose is to avoid complying with tax law.
Some of the discussion around the exceptions should be included in the minutes. That is, it was suggested the policy committee’s interpretation of the rules missed the reason the community agreed to including the exception. The committee should have considered why the community wanted the change and came up with other options to overcome the error of placement. That way a meaningful discussion may have occurred.
It also appears the reason for including the 21 days notice on the Web to alert members of these changes is not working well.
Perhaps, in future rather than forcing a vote on a rule change by including the change in the rules, the change and wording should be discussed in detail at a previous General meeting.
As such please add the following for discussion in the agenda of the June GM.
Question.
Should all Rule, by-law and policy changes be included as an agenda items in the GM immediately before the GM to resolve the change?
rationale
It is important to give the community time to think about changes before forcing a vote on the change or new rule. As can be seen the 21 days notice does not seem to be working.
By making it mandatory to discuss and agree a way forward on these types of changes at a prior GM gives the community opportunity to make more reasonable contributions to the outcome rather than a last minute discussion and the pressure of voting on the wording of an amendment there and then.
Goolawah Co-op Members 
Work teams process and table.
I note some errors in the minutes regarding the Work Claims item concerning the work list process.
Firstly, it is indicated as an ordinary resolution which concerns process but is pointed at changes to the Finance policy and how work is funded.
This resolution has two issues.
Secondly, The proposed process presented is questionable particularly with the statement concerning claims that a member can draw from the infrastructure share subscription funds which is determined by the terms of issue and for Nevertire road. This means it is not within the rules or the law. It also implies being able to draw from the sinking fund component and has not considered the zero balance of that portion of the sinking fund levy.
Thirdly, the rationale misinforms the community by implying “This will avoid the Team members having to comply with Tax Law and taking out personal injury insurance”.
Members are not covered for personal injury by Goolawah’s insurances and would be required to obtain their own insurances.
Members cannot avoid tax law, in particular income if it exceeds the threshold considering any invoice submitted. However members can complete a ATO supplier form to inform Goolawah that they do not require an ABN thereby removing the ned for Goolawah to consider withholding tax.
The method implied to claim under the work claim umbrella at a different rate is feasible but also questionable if the purpose is to avoid complying with tax law.
By-law change – exception.
Some of the discussion around the exceptions should be included in the minutes. That is, it was suggested the policy committee’s interpretation of the rules missed the reason the community agreed to including the exception. The committee should have considered why the community wanted the change and came up with other options to overcome the error of placement. That way a meaningful discussion may have occurred.
It also appears the reason for including the 21 days notice on the Web to alert members of these changes is not working well.
Perhaps, in future rather than forcing a vote on a rule change by including the change in the rules, the change and wording should be discussed in detail at a previous General meeting.
As such please add the following for discussion in the agenda of the June GM.
Question.
Should all Rule, by-law and policy changes be included as an agenda items in the GM immediately before the GM to resolve the change?
rationale
It is important to give the community time to think about changes before forcing a vote on the change or new rule. As can be seen the 21 days notice does not seem to be working.
By making it mandatory to discuss and agree a way forward on these types of changes at a prior GM gives the community opportunity to make more reasonable contributions to the outcome rather than a last minute discussion and the pressure of voting on the wording of an amendment there and then.
A question and answer was missing from the minutes with respect to the budget.
Question: Do you agree with the DRAFT budgets for ADMIN and Infrastructure so far.
The straw vote response was YES.
Would you please update at your convenience.