I don't see how a professional candidate with good credentials can fail to engage and win over such a committee, and then the members DO get to decide.

_________________
29 different attributes,
And only 7 that you like;
20 ways to see the world,
Or 20 ways to start a fight.

This is about squashing anyone that isn't deemed 'suitable'.

But by all means, exercise your vote either way as you see fit

Gleeson is going around again... So I'm guessing the independent committee would give his calibre the thumbs up...
Champion of a board member. Excellent credentials.
Club gives me the giggles...

_________________
Due to recent budget cuts and the rising cost of electricity, gas, and oil....... the Light at the End of the Tunnel has been turned off. We apologize for the inconvenience.

I fail to see how it would be anything different to what happens now except it's a more formal process than talking about who you do and don't like at Percy's bar.....

If anything it may provide a bit of clarity.

Me thinks people are jumping at shadows again

_________________
"I will rejoice in their anguish, delight in their failure and revel in our success"

We are Carlton, @#$%&! the rest !!!!!!

absolutely correct..

My reading of the amendment means that the Constitution is silent if the nominations committee does not recommend the candidate to the board , therefore the candidate is not prohibited and can still run for an election but with no approval of the nominations committee nor board

Further the board still has a discretion to reject the recommendation of the nominations committee.

Further the right for an egm with 100 signatures still stands

I will be voting for the amendment as my pet interest is satisfied by reducing the board to 6 to 10....

Good move by the judge imo....

the committee can impose additional requirements (from time to time) to what sort of nominees can apply... there is a change to section 9.3.

they can discriminate against certain candidates. I can see candidates taking legal action down the track.

Having a nominations committee is not the problem. we have a de facto system at the moment which looks at the basic requirements. Like being an ordinary member for at least two years and not having any corporate act violations etc. This is a formal administrative step.

This proposed presidential committee will have additional powers to add requirements.

This is definitely a step backwards democratically and will be abused eventually.

what is the current board afraid of? The ordinary members wanting a say?

My concerns are with the changes to the section 9.3 not whether we should set up a committee or not. The club can set up a nominations committee right now via administration. Fine by me - but I dont want this board or any presidents adding filters in any future elections.

this is why I voted no online

_________________
Vice President, International Extreme Sarcasm Society (IESS)

I have written to the Prez. Here it is:
Thanks for the message but IMHO you have already breached your pledge to be more inclusive and respectful to members. Why?

1) This letter comes only AFTER a lot of unrest about the changes. You had to send this out before the papers arrived.
2) There is a clear perception amongst members and supporters that a) Board members are chosen by the Board and NOT by members and b) the Board is run by 2 families who don't care about the common member.

I know you have received this feedback in spades and you still have not learnt. The size of the Board and the election process matters! How an important change is put up with no explanation/ discussion seems typical.

I hope things improve

_________________
TC suffers from the social media illness - the death of respect and constructive discourse by keyboard.

....board members will rally their support to vote yes. Remember, most carlton members dont even bother to vote, so the 75% needed to pass the resolution will be easily achieved if the usual turnout for voting occurs.

And of course we have online voting now. Who is recording and scrutinising the online votes ladies and gentlemen?

a disgraceful direction the club is taking IMO

_________________
Vice President, International Extreme Sarcasm Society (IESS)

It seems pretty clear that some here wouldn't be happy with any change, nor any perceived inaction on the part of the board to change things. That's a pretty deep series of trust issues.

_________________
29 different attributes,
And only 7 that you like;
20 ways to see the world,
Or 20 ways to start a fight.

3 votes against!!!

And where do you think they stem from?

This club has treated its members like mushrooms for years.

Your previous posts in this thread are naive at best.

There's some serious manoeuvring going on here and you're missing the real gist of it.

This sort of thing could almost work at a club that wasn't as corrupt as ours (for a while) but can't with ours because we'll continue to @#$%&! things up because we're obsessed with [REDACTED] up goldfish pond power plays.

The point is that when you remove democratic accessibility it might seem like streamlining but it's what others do with it down that track that can really @#$%&! you up. This is John Elliott level corruption of democracy.

The sad thing is if any AFL club was doing this I'd think it was misguided unless that club was Carlton or Essendon*. With those two clubs you know that that's what you want to believe but what's really going on is a power play.

You're absolutely right - some pretty deep series of trust issues here.

_________________
“When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become a king. The palace turns into a circus.”
Turkish Proverb

And now it's a new President, a commitment from the board to be more inclusive and reduce board bloat.

Now they've put in a more transparent process for how they bring in candidates, as well as sounding board for those interested who they aren't affiliated with but have real credentials to contribute. I'm sure there'll be a dispute process if an individual applying feels they have had their candidacy botched by the committee.

If it's really that corrupt, then how is transparency of process going to do anything other than put the spotlight more on the puppet show that you claim is happening?

Sometimes you just need to let things happen for a bit to see how they go. If it's really a farce, then what better way to attract a white knight?

_________________
29 different attributes,
And only 7 that you like;
20 ways to see the world,
Or 20 ways to start a fight.

Corporate governance experts c'mon sub judice doubt whether either have even done the Australian Institute of Company directors course
Have the lawyer ever actually been on a not for profit board or been a director of a company
How is an accountant a corporate governance expert
Complete smoke and mirrors fast losing faith with the sub why not like other companies wouldn't the club advertise on the AICD website for people to apply to become part of the independent nominations committee and then pick the best people from the applications rather than simply the club anoint 2 people to the positions who have worked for the club for years
Once again board not going through proper and appropriate process
VOTE NO
This together with 1.6 million dollar loss seems to suggest the Sub Judice is out of his depth

What greater transparency will we now have compared to the sideshow that delivered our current board?




I've been letting things happen with this club for 35 years or so. Occasionally I get involved.

How long am I meant to wait and see?

As for the desire to find a "white knight?"

FMD.

It's posts like yours that make my good friend Synbad seem sane, rational and measured.

_________________
“When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become a king. The palace turns into a circus.”
Turkish Proverb

Even if we had just won the 2014 premiership, and posted a 10 million dollar profit and Kouta just had boy triplets, passing this resolution is still not in the clubs best interests. And the club has always centred around three elements. The players, staff and the members.

Boards and presidents come and go....

I don't want to see our club become a private Corporate cult that treats its Ordinary members like paying clients who aren't lstened to or respected.

_________________
Vice President, International Extreme Sarcasm Society (IESS)

@cretylus...your arguments are inconsistent with the legal interpretation of the amendments.
presently the existing faction secretly invites an ally onto the board without direct election by members but by merely noting the change at the next agm.
The INC makes any application to the board public and documented and accountable. Other clubs have this feature. If the INC does not recommend the candidate to the board the candidate can still proceed to an election as what happens in the present arrangements.

Bingo.....shadow hunters jump in these parts

_________________
"I will rejoice in their anguish, delight in their failure and revel in our success"

We are Carlton, @#$%&! the rest !!!!!!

I'm all for change. What we have had in the past clearly hasn't worked. To many factions, distractions and all that jazz.

I don't mind the idea of a committee canvasing good strong candidates for board positions so long as independents can still nominate.

I just want board bickering and people like Marcus Rose running to media. Thats a typical Carlton of old we are tired of.

Marcus you have had your time in the sun, now move on and lets someone else give it a good crack please.

#TEAMUNITY

spot on. Rose was saying in the Herald Sun (a paper that supports Essendon* by the way) that the amendments are non-democratic. This is an argument with no foundation nor basis.

MF

wasnt the constitution changed several years ago which allowed a board appointed replacement director to serve out the remaining tenure of a recently retired or removed director?

I have no issues with the board appointing directors as long as they face the members in the next scheduled AGM - which is still the case, outside the specific situation I mentioned before (which i dont agree with anyway - but several hundred members at an AGM put their hands up anyway and passed that resolution with very little discussion).

The first issue I have is with the charade of calling the nominations committee independent when the current president sits on it and there are two other personnel closely linked to the club sitting on it as well. This is hardly independent.

The second and main objection which I raise in this thread, is the inclusion of the 9.3 clause which allows for additional conditions or requirements to be placed on any nominees wishing to run for board positions.

I can see abuse of this clause down the track, as well as possible litigation by applicants (discrimination etc).

We dont need it included in our constitution. The club can set up a nominations committee tomorrow to ensure all applicants meet the basic requirements for running in elections. We have that administrative step in place already.

These resolutions are proposed for a very good reason - and its got nothing to do with the rank and file members or democracy.

Our club is slowly becoming a corporate and private cult

_________________
Vice President, International Extreme Sarcasm Society (IESS)