CSS EGM - Minutes

Location:	Winifred Hackett (Y3) - G33 (in-person) & Zoom (online)
Date:	Wednesday 21st October 2026
Time:	13:00 BST
Attendees:	Joe Adams (JA) (Chairing), Henry Thomas (HT) (Minuting), Idris Evans (IE), Albert Waldron (AW), Harry Wake (HW), Anna Charleton (AC), Tyler King (TK), Jacob Swales (JS), Day Jones (DJ), Erin Burns, Saf Rahman, Ayati Shah, Sofiia Rog, Thomas Blackwell

1	Apologies No apologies given.	HT
2	Adoption of April 2026 AGM Minutes Unanimous adoption of previous minutes.	HT
3	Matters Arising There were no matters arising.	All
4	Chair’s Report JA suggests this should be Scrum Master’s report now. Members so far this year: 270; lower than two previous years but still good. Pretty graphs and charts. Future events: Capital One Careers Panel - 28th October Halloween Quiz - 29th October Python Beginner Workshop - 11th November Discord Botathon - 21st & 22nd November NQ64 - 26th November Christmas Market & Ice Skating - 2nd December Christmas Meal announcement: The Green Man, Saturday 5th December at 6pm. Tickets are out now. Wishes luck to everyone running today. Thanks committee, members, candidates, the school, and you!	JA
5	Treasurer’s Report Current Account Balance: £2,425.79 Actual Working Balance: £2,350.79 Pending Outgoings: Campus League Cupboard key Pending Incomings: Guild Funding Memberships 270 Members; £1,125.90 Sponsors: Capital One TPP Interrupt labs Subsidies: Christmas Meal Ball BBQ Trip - IE asks members to suggest options for this year to change it up from previous years Free snacks break; birmingHack Pizza Pizzas bought so far: 47 (£482.23)	IE
6	Changes and Amendments to the Constitution Amendment: Prohibit the use of generative AI in the society JA initiates the discussion: AW says he has linked to the guild policy on this, and that it is a very prevalent issue for our society as we run events that AI could affect and have our own website. Suggests it should be made more specific and that personally he is not a big fan of GenAI. AC asks why we need our own version if the guild has a policy. AW says there is not much knowledge of the guild’s policy and so putting it on our constitution is a better way to do it, and that it was voted on. JS’s concern is due to the wording for the codebase, as AI supported code reviews are often requested, and that this new wording may restrict that from being done. HW states the wording is too strong and doesn’t understand the problem it is addressing, and that it doesn’t go along with the ethos of letting everyone do what they want. Additionally, a lot of companies use AI and this may make sponsors harder to find. JS agrees that some members will be using AI, but disagrees that the amendment would stop students gaining the skills if companies wanted them. It should be more about how the society is seen rather than anything else. AW clarifies it goes in the committee member’s section, so it won’t impact members. But that committee will aim to not use it as it caused issues and we had people mentioning it to us. AW does agree with AI skills for educational materials at careers events, but that this constitution change is to stop the committee using it for our work. When we looked at potential sponsors we removed a lot of AI companies from it as we thought members would be more unhappy with that. AC says it shouldn’t be made now as AI might become more important later on. JS says we should add a stipulation of it being publicity to it to clarify that AI code reviews are ok. HT asks if front-facing web design should be specifically included JS says that publicity can cover front-facing web design DJ says they think our website should be trying to engage with people so it should be more personal rather than just getting a bot to do it, and doesn’t hold with the values of the society. Erin Burns asks what the point of making this a constitutional amendment is as there doesn’t seem to be a benefit. JS says we would like to consider that the committee wouldn’t put anything we consider bad out, but this is more about the ethical and legal concerns of using it, rather than how it looks outwardly. JA realises he was muted for 29 minutes and apologises to the people on the zoom call. AW says JA is not mastering the scrum very well. The amendment was put to a vote For: 16 Against: 11 Abstain: 2 This amendment has been duly adopted Amendment: Merge EDI and International roles into "Welfare Officer" JS says cutting committee roles is not necessarily a bad thing as these roles often go unelected but the concern would be that merging these would give that role a lot of responsibilities week-to-week. This may make it more difficult for them to represent both separate sets of people individually. HW agrees that a significant reason is that the roles often went unelected. Also a welfare officer is a role with more authority, and they would be able to take a more holistic approach to the roles. DJ says they have both often gone unfilled because people are less likely to go for them unless they feel they fit the category completely, but broadening it makes it easier for more people to feel they can run, and that they have spoken to people who have said this is why they didn’t want to run for it. JS reads something from the discord: It would require rewriting the constitution parts for these roles to clarify them. He also says this would partly mitigate his concern about them having too much responsibility. AW says that at the last AGM a second MAC officer was added, so some of the EDI roles could be shared with these to lighten the load. HT says that reducing the number of committee is a good thing as it has been difficult at times to manage everyone, so electing too many more may cause more issues. JA asks if it is a straight merge or if some parts should be rewritten. DJ says they think that rewriting is a better idea and it will give the person in the role an easier time The amendment was put to a vote For: 15 Against: 5 Abstain: 4 This amendment has been duly adopted Amendment: Create a new Infrastructure Officer role on the Committee Was voted on at the last AGM but is being voted on again as a lot of the people who voted on it have now left. HW says he thinks this is a good idea because CSS has a lot of infrastructure projects, but it is absorbed by other roles. HW says someone he spoke to would be keen to do it. IE says with all the infrastructure that CSS has, this requires a lot of different skills, eg. website, minecraft server, discord bot. This means one specific person for this may not have all the specific skills for this, but if spread out throughout the committee in general it is more manageable and likely more successful. JS says he has done a lot of this infrastructure this year and even without this role many things are running successfully and that the website is mostly up to date. Additionally, anyone can submit changes to the website for a PR if they wanted to, so a role isn’t necessary. Also people who may not want to run for committee could then get involved and it’s more of a community focus. JS also says that as we are voting on potentially merging two roles, should we be introducing a new one. HW says this person wouldn’t be doing everything but some things are remaining undone, and this would be a good role for someone to have. JS asks for suggestions for things that need doing, or could this be added to another role (e.g. hackathons) instead of making a new role HW suggests an online collection of TeX stickers JS says the hackathons officer is very heavy once a year but for the rest of that time they have less to do. HW says that they are very different roles and should be treated as such HT says that adding more committee members to an already large committee is not a good idea. DJ says that we should make it more clear to people that they can get involved with the website without needing to be on committee instead of making a new role. JS suggests doing another vote if this fails to put it into another role. The amendment was put to a vote For: 9 Against: 11 Abstain: 6 This amendment has been duly rejected Amendment: Merge infrastructure responsibilities into an existing role JA now asks if we should add it to a new role and if so which JS suggests hackathons officer again but this might raise the bar for hackathons officer as it makes it more technical, but reiterates that it would still be shared amongst committee DJ agrees with hackathons officer, and says that the role should be to make people aware of the changes they can make rather than necessarily to do them, but that this doesn’t preclude them from doing it themselves. AW says if it was put into hackathons but then we should consider renaming the role and this might make it seem like hackathons were the results of the special events officer. JS says we don’t need to have everything outlined in specific roles, so it could just be left untitled, which leaves the option for any committee member to take it on, and that the main issue is letting people know they can do these pushes DJ suggests adding more of this to the society wiki, which should then be more publicised so people have more of an idea of being able to help out. Discussion had about which role to add it to but noone has opinions on it. The amendment was put to a vote For: 1 Against: 18 Abstain: 5 This amendment has been duly rejected	JA
7	Election of New Committee Members JA invited everybody to register to vote and explained the Instant Run-off Voting system. First Year Rep Candidates standing in advance: Saf Rahman, Ayati Shah Saf Rahman: 1st Year CS Previous experience - Erasmus+ project, designed and maintained website, visited Turkey and Portugal Represented a lot of people locally and in Europe Importance of being diplomatic, empathetic, and open-minded Engaging, friendly, and inclusive environment for everyone Enhance skills and bridge any gaps in the student body, particularly with first years Ayati Shah CS and Maths More about the members than the committee Done rep work at school Here to listen and feedback Questions: AW was first year rep last year, and asks what is the candidates favourite CSS event that has been run so far, and what event would they run that we don’t do already Ayati Shah says board games, because it was it was a really good social event even though no board games were played. She suggests running an event that is gaming, or talking over food, or a quiz as a new event. Saf Rahman says he is a commuter but he loved the picnic as it was really relaxed, and that for future events for talking to people from other courses or background, suggesting more collabs with other societies. DJ asks what they would do to increase first-year engagement with the society. Saf Rahman says that availability needs to be looked into to find out what is stopping people from attending events Ayati Shah says seeing posters around campus and accommodations is a good way to encourage recruitment Results Round 1 Re-open nominations (RON): 1 votes Saf Rahman: 5 votes Ayati Shah: 21 votes Eliminated Re-open nominations (RON) Round 2 Saf Rahman: 5 votes Ayati Shah: 21 votes Eliminated Saf Rahman Round 3 Ayati Shah: 24 votes Ayati Shah is duly elected as First Year Rep. Welfare Officer Candidates standing in advance: Saf Rahman Questions AW asks what he could bring to the role of welfare officer that wasn’t mentioned in his FYR speech Saf Rahman - Creating an inclusive space for everyone, and asks AW if he means specific events. AW clarifies more role specific Saf Rahman says it is about figuring out what the society wants is the first step. Results Round 1 Re-open nominations (RON): 3 votes Saf Rahman: 18 votes Eliminated Re-open nominations (RON) Round 2 Saf Rahman: 20 votes Saf Rahman is duly elected as International Student Rep. Post Graduate (Taught) Rep Candidates standing in advance: Anupam Roy, Basit Saiyed No candidates attended to give a speech, no-one ran from the floor when offered. Results Round 1 Re-open nominations (RON): 20 votes Basit Mohammedirfanali Saiyed: 0 votes Anupam Gupta Roy: 1 votes Eliminated Basit Mohammedirfanali Saiyed Round 2 Re-open nominations (RON): 20 votes Anupam Gupta Roy: 1 votes Eliminated Anupam Gupta Roy Round 3 Re-open nominations (RON): 20 votes Nominations re-opened for PGT Rep. Special Events Officer Candidates standing in advance: Thomas Blackwell, Sofiia Rog, Anupam Roy Thomas Blackwell Second year CS Not on committee before, been a regular volunteer at park run for 5 years, including setup, pack down, briefing etc. Also been helping with committee this year already, set up ball last year, sorted the cupboard this year Went to most of the events last year and this year so knows how they were run Soffia Rog 1st year Maths and CS Currently event officer in Ukrainian society, EDI in school of maths, and student rep training Halloween event for ukrainian society Inter-house and boarding captain, organised some events Questions HT asks about balancing time management Soffia Rog wants busy schedule and has suggested events based on career and industry Thomas Blackwell says it is very important as it is specific time slots and will get help from other members if absolutely necessary Results Round 1 Re-open nominations (RON): 0 votes Thomas Blackwell: 12 votes Sofiia Rog: 16 votes Anupam Gupta Roy: 0 votes Eliminated Re-open nominations (RON) Round 2 Thomas Blackwell: 12 votes Sofiia Rog: 16 votes Anupam Gupta Roy: 0 votes Eliminated Anupam Gupta Roy Round 3 Current first-choice votes: Thomas Blackwell: 12 votes Sofiia Rog: 16 votes Eliminated Thomas Blackwell Round 4 Sofiia Rog: 25 votes Sofiia Rog is duly elected as Special Events Officer.	JA
8	Any Other Business There was no other business.	All

Actual start time	13:02 GMT
Actual end time	14:54 GMT
Duration	1 hour 52 minutes

Approved
Approved (by Guild)

Voting for elections and amendments took place on CSS’ voting platform, available online at vote.cssbham.com. This voting platform is open source and publicly auditable. Votes were cast using the instant run-off voting system, in line with policy described in the constitution.