%-----------------------------------------------------------------------
%	Committee Meeting Minutes
%	Academic Year 2000/2001
%
%	Mark Dennehy
%
%-----------------------------------------------------------------------
%
%	$RCSfile$
%-----------------
%	$Date$
%	$Revision$
%	$State$
%
%-----------------------------------------------------------------------

\documentclass[11pt,oneside,a4paper]{scrartcl}
%\documentclass[11pt,oneside,a4paper,draft]{scrartcl}

\usepackage{scrpage}
\usepackage{acronym}
\usepackage{euler}
\usepackage{rcs}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage[rflt]{floatflt}
\usepackage{picins}
\usepackage[dvips]{graphicx}
\usepackage[dvips]{color}
%\usepackage[light,all]{draftcopy}
\usepackage[english,german]{babel}
\usepackage[ListTitle,Secret,Fileinfo]{minutes}
\usepackage{booktabs}


\RCS $Revision$
\RCS $Author$
\RCS $Date$
\RCS $Header$
\RCS $Locker$
\RCS $RCSfile$
\RCS $Source$
\RCS $State$

\author{Mark Dennehy\\Secretary}
\title{}
\titlehead{\sf Dublin University Rifle Club\\
\includegraphics[width=0.8in]{Graphics/DURC_Logo.eps}\\[10mm]
\tiny
Version~\RCSRevision\\
Date :~\RCSDate\\
Filename :~\RCSSource\\
Status :~\RCSState
}

\renewcommand{\headfont}{\normalfont \sf}

%\renewcommand{\acffont}[1]{\textsf{#1}}
\renewcommand{\acsfont}[1]{\textbf{\textsf{#1}}}

\bibliographystyle{alpha}

\definecolor{Heading}{gray}{0.50}
\definecolor{mygrey}{gray}{0.8}
\definecolor{ltgrey}{gray}{0.8}
\definecolor{midgrey}{gray}{0.5}
\definecolor{dkgrey}{gray}{0.2}

\renewpagestyle{headings}{%
	(\textwidth,0pt)%
	{\textcolor{Heading}{\headmark}\hfill}%
	{\hfill\textcolor{Heading}{\headmark}}%
	{\hfill\textcolor{Heading}{\headmark}\hfill}%
	(\textwidth,1pt)}%
	{%
	(\textwidth,1pt)%
	{\hfill\pagemark\hfill}%
	{\hfill\pagemark\hfill}%
	{\hfill\pagemark\hfill}%
	(\textwidth,0pt)}



%\topmargin -0.5in
%\evensidemargin -0.5in
%\oddsidemargin -0.5in
%\textwidth 7.25in
%\textwidth 7in
%\textheight 9.5in
%\footskip 0.75in



\begin{document}
\selectlanguage{english}
%-----------------------------------------------------------------------

\begin{Minutes}{Minutes of the 12th Committee Meeting of the Dublin University Rifle Club}
\participant{
Steven Watterson \textit{(Captain)},\\
Benjamin Jones \textit{(Treasurer)},\\
Mark Dennehy \textit{(Secretary/Match Secretary)},\\
John Keeney \textit{(Ammo\&Equipment Officer)},\\
Alan Smyth \textit{(Chief Range Officer)},\\
Deirdre Ninaber \textit{(Ladies' Coordinator)}\\
}
\minutetaker{Mark Dennehy}
\moderation{Steven Watterson}
\missingExcused{
Conor McDermottroe \textit{(Public Relations Officer)},\\
}
\missingNoExcuse{
Jason Sibley,\\
}
\minutesdate{30 October 2001}
\starttime{1840}
\endtime{2140}
\location{Ben Jones' lab, IAMS building
}

\cc{
DURC Committee\\
}

\maketitle

%-----------------------------------------------------------------------

\topic{Meeting formality}
Steven proposed that we run the meeting very formally as we
had a lot of items to get through and noone wanted an
all-night session. This was agreed to by all.

\topic{Capital Grant Meeting}
Steven scheduled a meeting to deal with the Capital Grant for
Tuesday 6th October at 1830 on the DURC Range (relocation to
be discussed once we all arrive).

\topic{Code of Conduct}
Steven suggested that a formalised document was unnecessary
as common sense should suffice. Ben disagreed, saying that
formalisation was needed so we could discipline people if
needed. The question of how to do so would also be covered.
Alan said it was difficult to articulate the rules of
ettiquette, Mark said it was also time consuming and that a
formal document acted to cover us as well as to serve as a
reference document. John suggested that it be included in
Club regulations instead. Ben said it should be more explicit
than that. A vote was called for. 

\Onevote{Explicit document}{2}{4}{0}{Motion rejected}

\Onevote{Covered in club regulations}{5}{1}{0}{Motion carried}

Steven asked who looked after the regulations, Mark replied
that that was his job as Secretary and agreed to bring
them to the next committee meeting.

\task{Mark}{Bring regulations to next meeting}

\topic{Pony Club Training}
Steven noted that we had looked at DUEC and Westmeath
seperately to this point. We do one afternoon with DUEC a
week (with two weeks to go) and one weekend every 3 weeks
with Westmeath. More ROs need to assist. Steven felt a rota
should be drawn up and asked if volunteers or conscription
should be used. Mark said that Westmeath and DUEC should be
seperate things to volunteer on and that we couldn't ask ROs
to give up lectures. Alan asked why we were doing this
training and what did we gain from it? Ben pointed out that
we need to watch DUEC's time as it upsets normal shooting by
delaying the 1800 detail. Mark suggested shooting at target
holders 10m from the 25yd firing line and thus integrating
the DUEC shooters with regular times. John said that this
took away from our own members and Mark pointed out that DUEC
shooters were DURC members. Alan said that we don't exist to
shoot non-ISSF events, Mark retorted that this was completely
wrong, that the club has never specified what events we
shoot. Steven listed three alternatives and called for a vote:

\Onevote{Take over a full evening for prone 10m shooting}{0}{6}{0}{Motion rejected}

\Onevote{Use an afternoon for shooting prone
10m}{4}{2}{0}{Motion carried}

The option of dropping support for DUEC was not voted on.
However, the afternoon was moved from Thursday (1500-1800) to
Friday by vote:

\Onevote{Use Friday as the DUEC training day}{4}{2}{0}{Motion
carried}

Steven is to contact DUEC and arrange for this change. Mark
said he could not assist with DUEC on Friday or Westmeath on
Saturday due to an NRPAI conference for the ISC.

\task{Steven}{Contact DUEC and arrange day change}

\topic{Shooting Trousers}

Steven was going to bring this up in relation to the capital
grant, but diverted it to the Tuesday meeting.

\topic{Squads}
Steven is still waiting responses for times for training from
Liam Murray, John Keeney, Jason Sibley, Adrian Costigan,
David Gallagher and Shane Kelly.

\topic{Liam Murray}
Ben reports that Liam has missed his last few RO duty
details. John said he had sent a copy of the duty roster to
Liam. Mark points out that this is the CRO's job to sort 
out and Alan agreed to take care of it.

\task{Alan}{Speak to Liam about his duty roster slots.}

\topic{Treasurers Report}

Ben reports that we have about \pounds300 available for use,
with more available soon when we turn in some more receipts.
Mark is to get petrol receipts for this. 
\task{Mark}{Get receipts for petrol used in UCD Open}
Capital Grant applications must be in by November 20th. 
Mark pointed out that we should get ours in early due to a
new DUCAC treasurer. 

\subtopic{RO Credits}
Ben reported that the RO Credits were climbing again,
especially Alans and Johns. Mark suggested that we should
implement the limits system Ben, himself and Steven had
discussed earlier. There were questions about the legality of
credits in the first place. Ben noted that non-payment was
only one problem, some ROs were not noting down ammo used in
the RO credits book. At this point the options for limiting
were a hard limit beyond which credit would not be extended
and a soft one, beyond which interest was charged. John
suggested a soft limit beyond which extra RO duty was imposed
on a proportional scale. A vote was called for

\Onevote{Hard Limit}{0}{6}{0}{Motion rejected}

\Onevote{Soft Limit with Interest}{0}{6}{0}{Motion rejected}

\Onevote{Soft Limit with extra RO Duty}{0}{6}{0}{Motion
rejected}

At this point it was evident more discussion was needed!

Alan pointed out that extra RO Duty was difficult to arrange
due to inflexibility of academic timetables. Ben said we
shouldn't really be using RO Credits except as a last resort
anyhow, but Alan felt that was removing an RO privilege.
Steven said that enforcement of sanctions was a problem. Mark
suggested a ``Name\&Shame'' policy. Steven asked if there
were other options apart from Name\&Shame and free slots in
the duty roster to be filled by those in debt. Some options
were discussed and dismissed. Mark restated that the root of
the problem was that we could not enforce sanctions
meaningfully. Alan suggested getting payment on credits every
fortnight - Mark said that simply brought up the enforcement
problem every fortnight. Mark said that John's idea of extra
RO Duty was the only solution that didn't need enforcement of
sanctions. John as the person owing the most was asked if
that was acceptable, and he agreed to it. 

\Onevote{Soft limit with extra RO Duty}{4 (3.5!)}{0
(0.5!)}{1}{Motion carried}
(John voted half for and half against in jest!)

Amounts were discussed. \pounds20 as a limit was considered
and one duty night for every \pounds10 over that limit. Ben
pointed out that this would mean people would just accept
\pounds20 as the limit and not pay past that point. At 14
range officers, this was too much for the club to bear.
Discussion on amounts followed, and it was finally agreed
that Ben would post warning to ROs that they were over the
limit and that if they did not pay by a set date, that they
would owe one extra detail if they owed more than \pounds5
up to \pounds20; and one detail for every \pounds20 over that
that they owed :

\begin{tabular}{rl}
Amount Owed& Extra Details\\
\pounds5 -- \pounds20&1\\
\pounds20 -- \pounds40&2\\
and so on\\
\end{tabular}

The time period for this was discussed, but not agreed on. It
was suggested that this was an operational point that could
be fine-tuned later.

\subtopic{Noncapital grant}
Ben reported the next application deadline was next week and
wondered if 
anything was needed. Mark suggested upgrading estimates for
entry fees.

\topic{CROs Report}
The question of adding Eric to the photo list as an
occasional RO was discussed and agreed. However, Eric had
requested a key to the lounge. This was akward as the college
only allows for Officers to have this key, and at present
Steven has none. Consensus was to turn down the request. 

\Onevote{Give Eric a key}{0}{6}{0}{Motion rejected}

\topic{Secretary's Report}
Mark reported that we had had no pertinant mail, and that we
would be using the \texttt{rifle@maths.tcd.ie} email list due to its
superior capabilities (archives, web-based admin, digests, etc)

\topic{A\&E Report}

John reported that we would soon require more Lapua Master
(1000 rounds or so). We have lots of T22 and pellets. Air
Rifle S is under repair with no time or money estimate
available. Dave Cooney has reported he can test our sights.
Alan pointed out he'd made a bad job of it before. Steven and
John disagreed over whether the problem could be traced to
the sights alone or head position. John insisted the sights
were in dire need of servicing. Mark said Anschutz had a
lifetime guarantee, though Steven wasn't sure of this. Alan
said that Mech. Eng. had equipment to allow for testing of
the sights. It was agreed Alan and John would test them
before we go to the trouble of sending them off for repair. 

\task{John, Alan}{Test the sights in MechEng}

Targets came up as a topic. The NSRA ones we now have for air
as 5-strip targets are fine for club training but Mark felt
they would not suffice for competition and would lead to the
same fiasco in the Open as happened in the Nationals' Final.
Ben said if we got Edelmann targets we had to get them locally due to
prohibitive shipping costs. John replied that the previous
high shipping costs was more probably due to the 50m and 25yd
targets we'd ordered with them. Mark suggested trying the NSRA
ones to find if they were unsuitable. John agreed to price
Edelmann targets and Mark gave him the documentation they had
sent him. 

The Priority zero purchasing list came up for discussion.
John needed the bank draft to order the gear from the NSRA
(for \pounds128 sterling). Ben agreed to arrange a cheque

\topic{DURC 10m Open}

The venue was agreed as UCDRC as WTSC was too expensive and
difficult to get our people to. Steven was adamant that the
event had to cover its own costs. It was agreed to be a 2-day
event with prior shooting by arrangement. All ROs were to be
available for duty and Steven felt they should be present
throughout the weekend from enthuasism. A rota for RO duty
should be drawn up. Scoring was mentioned - Keith will do one
day, Steven volunteered for another, Ben mentioned data entry
and Mark noted that we needed a minimum of one RO and two in
the stats office. Reentrys would be allowed and a 10-shot
final will be run. A new graduated guage was needed and added
to the priority zero list for John to buy. It was agreed to
discuss the fine detail at another meeting and the meeting
for the Capital Grant was co-opted. Mark is going to try to
find a sponsor for the event.

\task{Mark}{Find sponsorship for 10m Open}
\task{Mark}{Announce 10m Open}

\topic{RO Training Course}

Mark reported that an NRPAI RO Training Course was being
scheduled for November 17. The advantages of having
nationally-qualified ROs was discussed, with mention made of
the upcoming proposed risk assessment by DUCAC. It was
decided to send six ROs on the course this time.

\task{Ben}{Allocate funds for six ROs to attend course}

\topic{RO Dinner}

Mark asked if we could select a date for the RO Dinner.
Steven asked what the format for the dinner was and that was
explained. It was agreed to discuss the matter of the
Committee dinner later. Mark gave a list of people we could
expect to invite: Serving ROs, Past RO's and committee, UCD's
Committee, the NTSA Committee and members of the National
Squad. Alan said he felt it wrong to make a profit on the RO
Dinner. Ben pointed out that this didn't happen, that the
extra cash usually went on the wine. A disussion ensued on
the restaurant to select. Mark volunteered to acquire a
selection of suitable menus, after which we could make a
decision. This was agreed on.

\task {Mark}{Acquire menus for RO Dinner}

However a date still had to be selected. Balancing the
timetables of students and alumni was discussed and
eventually, after some lenghty debate, December 15 was
selected. Steven was worried that we might be excluding our
current members by choosing a late date. 

The dinner for the 40th anniversary was also discussed in
this vein. A lengthy debate on what ``black tie'' meant took
place. It was decided however, that suits were all that were
needed for the event, and that this would be reflected in the
wording of the invitations. It was agreed to further discuss
this next week.

\topic{RRPC vs DURC 40th Anniversary Shoot}

Mark reported on the proposed anniversary shoot between RRPC
and DURC. The calendar being allready full and our resources
stretched, it was debated as to why this should be done at
all. Alan felt that we should not do it as it was too great a
strain on time and resources. John felt that it was a good
idea to do it as it would strengthen relations with RRPC.
Steven summarised that the pros were better relations, prior
agreement with Nick West (RRPC) and that it looks good to
DUCAC, and the cons were that we have a packed calendar and
that RRPC and DURC aren't demographically compatible. A vote
was called :

\Onevote{Hold the anniversary shoot}{4}{2}{0}{Motion carried}

Mark is to liase with RRPC and select a date. 

\topic{UCDRC/DURC/WTSC shoot}

Ben brought up the three-club shoot that Geoff Cooney had
been discussing last year, and wondered if the RRPC-DURC
shoot would cause it to be cancelled. Mark pointed out that
a solution was to shoot this match the day after the Colours
match, ie. We would go to WTSC on Saturday and shoot the
colours match with UCD, spend the night there, and then shoot
the triad match the next day with UCD and WTSC. This was
accepted as a good idea as it kept the social side of the
colours match alive. 

\topic{DIT Rifle Club}

Mark reported on the meeting with UCD/WTSC/NTSA regarding air
rifle, specifically the request from DIT for assistance in
setting up a rifle club. They have no space at present for a
rifle range and were wondering if we could let them use our
range. This request provoked heated debate. Concerns
were voiced regarding security;
extra wear\&tear on equipment; the additional amount of work
DURC would have to do; and how college would react. Alan
worried about the loss of the time on the range for the ROs
and wondered what we would get in return for the effort. Ben
pointed out that one person had to oversee them at all times.
Deirdre wondered if the effort was worthwhile. John felt it
would be nice to be able to help but was in agreement with
the others. Mark expressed dissappointment with this general
attitude and more heated debate followed. Ben wondered if we
would be sacrificing the Pony Club efforts for DIT. Steven
pointed out that there was less politics involved in
assisting the pony club. John pointed out that if a DIT
member broke a DURC piece of equipment, the question of who
pays to fix it would be politically tricky. Mark wondered if
that could be agreed upon in advance. Steven said that unless
we called in soliciters, that this would not be possible.
Since the debate was running on, Steven called for a
round-table expression of opinions. Alan thought it was a
nice idea to help DIT but that it was unworkable. Deirdre
agreed with him. Ben said that manpower wasn't that big a
problem, especially if UCDRC assist with range space. He felt
we should not rule out letting them use our range space, but
not to list it as a first option. Deirdre suggested a trial
period and this was agreed as being a necessary step. John
said that from the A\&E officer's viewpoint, they could not
be allowed access to our safe or rifles as College
authorities were allready uneasy with the idea of DURC, let
alone another rifle club. He also felt they should be able to
supply their own rifles and ammo. He suggested we assist as
consultants instead of giving material support. Mark again
expressed unhappiness with the general attitude towards the
proposal, citing the assistance that DURC received upon it's
startup, the general view expressed over the years that more
college clubs would be a good idea, the current support Geoff
Cooney is showing towards the sport and he expressed his
belief that most of the problems discussed assumed a lack of
respect for our equipment from DIT. 
Steven said that we didn't have a real manpower problem that
prevented the proposal, that giving over range space was
something he felt we could just about live with, but that we
couldn't let them use our rifles/equipment. He worried about
the longevity of the DIT club and pointed out that so far we
had not met these people, that only Denise O'Brien (UCD
Captain) and Mark had. He felt that a half-way meeting might
be better, that they get a little equipment and a little
space and we help from there. 
John at this point asked to qualify his statement in light of
Mark's and said that he had no personal bias towards the
people in the DIT club, but that normal
people cause wear and tear on equipment and the situation
with funding replacement gear was not a well-defined one. He
was also worried that College would not permit this at all,
and that should an accident happen, that while we have our
40-year history in the college to use as proof that we are
normally safe, if DIT were to have an accident, that would
not be the case. 
Ben pointed out that Denise had invited them to the meeting
and thus UCDRC were keen on the idea, so why not use UCD for
the range space and us to assist, so that both UCD and TCD
meet DIT half-way instead of us shouldering the full burden.

At this point, Steven called for votes as the debate had now
gone on for over thirty minutes. 

\Onevote{Do we want to allow DIT to use our range
space}{5}{1}{0}{Motion carried}

At this point there as some debate as to what this meant. It
was clarified to mean, did we feel that DIT using our range
was in our club's best interests, and the votes were then
checked and agreed on as before. 

\Onevote{Do we want to let DIT use our
rifles}{0}{6}{0}{Motion rejected}

\Onevote{Do we want to let DIT use our
jackets?}{0}{6}{0}{Motion rejected}


A suggestion from Steven was that we find the equipment
cheaply for them and they raise the necessary funds. More
discussion followed over our course of action and the
following was agreed on:

DIT will attend both the WAIDAM Open and the DURC Open.
Afterwards, they will shoot once in DURC and once in UCDRC.
They can use our old jackets and range space, but not our
rifles. After this, we will meet again to review the
situation. 

The above is contingent on finding out how much we have to
charge them for range hire and who receives this money, as
well as the relevant College authorities agreeing to the
scheme. Ben pointed out that we must make all involved aware
of the temporary nature of the scheme or College may think we
don't need all the time we have on the range at present.

\topic{TTT}

Mark reported that the Trinity Top Ten competition was in
dissarray. Few entries were received, and even fewer entry
fees. Mark reported he was going to announce an amnesty
period for competitiors to catch up with their cards and
settle their entry fees, and that if at the end of this
period matters were still unresolved that he would refund
entry fees and cancel the competition. Steven suggested
phoning around and checking on people's status. Alan
suggested just dropping the competition. Mark reminded
everyone of the past problems running the TTT and said that
if we dropped it this year, it was effectively over
permenantly. It was discussed and the decision was that Mark
would find out if EARC had paid their entry fees. If they had
not, the TTT would be scrapped and entry fees repaid.

\task{Mark}{Find out if EARC will pay thier entry fee -- if
not, cancel TTT and repay entry fees.}
%-----------------------------------------------------------------------
\begin{center}
\fbox{ \large \sf \bf T.B.N.O.B.T.M.W.D.C.}
\end{center}

\vspace{4ex}
\begin{raggedleft}
\rule{4in}{0.01in}\\
Steven Watterson, Club Captain\\
\vspace{4ex}
\rule{4in}{0.01in}\\
Mark Dennehy, Club Secretary\\
\end{raggedleft}

\newpage
\begin{center}
\fbox{ \large \sf \bf Tasks agreed on at meeting}
\end{center}
\vspace{4ex}
\listoftasks

\end{Minutes}
\end{document}
