The caretaking committee have discussed the subject of elections and feel that now that we have a solid membership its time to consider electing officers.

Contact has been made with a number of other associations around the world asking them for feedback on what they find works for them.

Many have said that small is the way to go because more seems to get done. The idea sounds reasonably good, particularly when you consider that each elected member can have others to assist. For example, we will need an officer who is tasked with maintenance of the website. There are many members with strong talents/experience (a number have offered) in that department who can give that officer some help, and so they should.

We envisage that there will always be some way in which each member can help if he/she feels inclined.

We also feel that the GAGB belongs to the members and the members should dictate how the association is run. To this end, before we hold polls to decide who should represent us, we should find out what roles should exist on the committee.

As I said above, small would probably be better but here are a few suggestions of some roles which might be worth considering. Perhaps some of the roles should be integrated and others just deleted.

  • Chair
  • Webmaster
  • Secretary
  • Negotiation Officer (for negotiation with land managers etc)
  • Comunications/Publicity
  • Law/Statutes (to keep us up to date with legislation)
  • Environmental/CITO
  • Regional Officer (with helpers in each region)
  • Events Organiser (to organise events and get togethers, of course)
  • Geomuggle Guardian (to help introduce Geomuggles to caching with loads of helpers of course.)
  • ETC. ETC.

As we believe that there will never be any association funds or fund raising, we do not envisage the need for a treasurer.

So, What do the members think ?