Constitutional Changes

[feck]

I'm sorry if this is in the wrong forum or if you dont deal with these things here, but i will try my hardest to explain.

 

I'm part of a kind of tenants board called an estate board set up under a Housing Asssociation. Recently over the past few months, I've become increasingly aware that no real consultation has been going on with residents with regards to developments in the area, and also monies being spent by both the association and members of our own are not being brought forward for members to discuss freely.

 

Last night we were told that the Housing Association had decided to change our constitution, and a member of our own board as well as 2 from other estate boards were set up as a kind of 'constitutional advisory group' to change the constitutions of all estate boards under our landlord. Some fundamental changes to the constitutions, (we're told) will be ratified soon, and must be accepted by members of all estate boards.

 

In our constition at present is this clause

"amendments to the constitution of the Estate Board may be made at Ordinary General Meetings, subject to these being agreed by a majority of all Estate Board members (a minimum of 51% of elected members). Any agreed changes must then be ratified at the next Annual General Meeting of the Estate Board."

I immediately assumed and parroted back to the manager of the enabling officers this clause, assuming that we would have to as a board agree these changes.

 

He informed me that a consultation had been carried out where members were invited to come to an event (2 2hr sessions, 1 evening, 1 weekend) and dicuss this. I myself came to the session on the weekend, and was told that these changes were going ahead, without any real discussion.

I told him that we had to discuss this as a board and agree these changes, and then ratify them at an AGM as protected under the above clause.

 

I was told this would not occur, when pushing the point home to him he told me in no uncertain terms that members had had enough consultation, and that the matter should now be dropped.

 

My question is this, what is the point of adopting a constitution if members never get the chance to agree on ammendments? And can i get some form of legal action to prevent them from changing it without following the above clause?

 

Sorry if this is the wrong place to put this, if anyone can offer any advice in these matters, i'm at my wits end.....