Rexy wrote:
When the current constitution allows for continuous board appointments nothing will change as they're not accountable to members.
You want accountability, change the constitution to stop appointments and real change has a chance to filter through all levels of the club.
Yes I remember the AGM that voted in that resolution. It was when Pratt was president.
It used to be the case that a board appointed director must go the members at the next AGM to have his or hers directorship position voted upon.
The new resolution enabled a board appointed directorship to complete the remaining years of a director who just retired.
I was the only member present that rose his hand in objection (even some of my friends at the time told me to lower my hand)
This is what we are dealing with at our clubs, and probably at most clubs. Sheep mentality.
I recall another AGM at carlton when Elliott was president, and they increased the number of directors possible at the club to 20. They never explained why this was being done. Plans were that north melbourne and carlton were going to merge and the club wanted room for 6 or 7 north melbourne directors to join our board. I remember sticks attending in a track suit and Elliott saying to him, "these are good resolutions sticks, you would vote for them". How could 150 or so members reject any of the resolutions? Very politically sneaky in my opinion.
But apathetic and disinterested sheep get what they deserve don't they.....baaaahh