"may consider" is certainly not confirmation they will do it.Tony wrote: ↑Thu Oct 26, 2023 12:39 pm Jamie, the email from the Trust says that the existing Trust directors may consider standing for re- election. That suggests that they will be subject to the same election process as any other candidate if they decide to stand. So effectively they are retiring.
New Supporters Trust elections
That’s the point. They may not stand. I thought your criticism was about them staying on without facing an election? I guess they will see who if anyone puts their name forward and then decide. If they all stepped down and no one came forward then that would be the end of the Trust so I guess they would decide to put their names forward to keep things going.
-
BeaverWatcher
- Posts: 123
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2021 8:52 am
With new members there may be new names who are now able to give their time so hopefully there will be the opportunity to have new ideas coming on board.
However, as the old saying goes, no taxation without representation. So even if you weren't a member in the past or left due to other circumstances the best way to try and get your ideas across and to be able to provide a voice for supporters is to become a member of the Trust.
A reminder of the link to join https://preview.mailerlite.io/preview/3 ... 1647829386
However, as the old saying goes, no taxation without representation. So even if you weren't a member in the past or left due to other circumstances the best way to try and get your ideas across and to be able to provide a voice for supporters is to become a member of the Trust.
A reminder of the link to join https://preview.mailerlite.io/preview/3 ... 1647829386
-
James Dean
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2021 10:08 pm
As a medium term Bev regular, it’s been interesting to read the plans in regards to the Trust, which for me comes at a time when there feels to be greater division between the ‘club’ and its longer term supporters than ever before.
I’ve never been a member of the Trust before, (cant really explain why), but I did join and become a new member a couple of days ago.
I’m planning to submit a nomination for election. It doesn’t ’feel’ like the club it used to be and I’d enjoy an opportunity to constructively shape the club and supporter relationship going forwards.
I’ve never been a member of the Trust before, (cant really explain why), but I did join and become a new member a couple of days ago.
I’m planning to submit a nomination for election. It doesn’t ’feel’ like the club it used to be and I’d enjoy an opportunity to constructively shape the club and supporter relationship going forwards.
I read it as "may not stand" as in they keep their places on the board, rather than stepping down.Tony wrote: ↑Fri Oct 27, 2023 4:34 pm That’s the point. They may not stand. I thought your criticism was about them staying on without facing an election? I guess they will see who if anyone puts their name forward and then decide. If they all stepped down and no one came forward then that would be the end of the Trust so I guess they would decide to put their names forward to keep things going.
If it is how you say, then fair enough, and maybe the way it's written can just be taken either way, not a criticism in the wording, hard to clearly put over which way the stance is perhaps?
-
TW2-Beaver
- Site Admin
- Posts: 234
- Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2021 6:02 pm
To be honest I read the email in the same way as Jamie, it is ambiguously worded and could be taken either way. In all fairness it probably does mean they are standing down and considering putting themselves forward in the same way as everyone else, but given recent history people will be suspicious. To be clear: three of the trust board members were constitutionally required to stand down in 2022 and offer themselves for re-election. This process did not happen. I and at least two other members indicated our desire to stand for election to the board and were told there was to be no election process because "those directors retiring by rotation are happy to be re-elected" and "there are currently no casual vacancies to be filled", which was just a flagrant breach of the rules which I am still unhappy about. Therefore I fully expect at least three of the existing board members (the ones who should have retired in 2022 but didn't**) to stand down and be subject to exactly the same process as anyone else who stands.
The constitution says:
28: The business of an annual general meeting shall normally comprise, where appropriate ...
28.3: the election of the Society Board or the results of the election if held previously by ballot ...
62: At the annual general meetings following the first annual general meeting of the Society [half or one third] of the members of the Society Board first elected by the members (to be chosen by lot) will resign from office. Thereafter the [half or one third] of the members of the Society Board elected by the members who have served the longest at the date of the annual general meeting each year will resign. If at any time [there is an uneven number of elected directors or the number of elected directors is not divisible by three], the Society Board shall decide the number of elected directors to resign in accordance with this Rule, which shall be approximately [half or one third] of the total number.
Note: the version of the constitution that I was sent by the trust in October 2022 was a Supporter's Direct template from 2011, despite there being more recent versions available, and it is this document I am quoting from above. The text appeared exactly as above with the template wording of "half or one third" still included (obviously they were meant to remove the text that was not applicable). I believe the trust operates with "half" and had six board members at the time. And that really does illustrate nicely how things were being run. I hope things are run fairly and constitutionally this time, and are seen to be by everyone.
** Yes, there was a quick tick box "any objections to this person? No? OK, business as usual" at the AGM, which in the absence of any other candidates being permitted, seemed pretty laughable.
The constitution says:
28: The business of an annual general meeting shall normally comprise, where appropriate ...
28.3: the election of the Society Board or the results of the election if held previously by ballot ...
62: At the annual general meetings following the first annual general meeting of the Society [half or one third] of the members of the Society Board first elected by the members (to be chosen by lot) will resign from office. Thereafter the [half or one third] of the members of the Society Board elected by the members who have served the longest at the date of the annual general meeting each year will resign. If at any time [there is an uneven number of elected directors or the number of elected directors is not divisible by three], the Society Board shall decide the number of elected directors to resign in accordance with this Rule, which shall be approximately [half or one third] of the total number.
Note: the version of the constitution that I was sent by the trust in October 2022 was a Supporter's Direct template from 2011, despite there being more recent versions available, and it is this document I am quoting from above. The text appeared exactly as above with the template wording of "half or one third" still included (obviously they were meant to remove the text that was not applicable). I believe the trust operates with "half" and had six board members at the time. And that really does illustrate nicely how things were being run. I hope things are run fairly and constitutionally this time, and are seen to be by everyone.
** Yes, there was a quick tick box "any objections to this person? No? OK, business as usual" at the AGM, which in the absence of any other candidates being permitted, seemed pretty laughable.
-
BeaverWatcher
- Posts: 123
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2021 8:52 am
Reminder that you have until midnight tonight to renew or sign up for the Supporters Trust to be able to stand for a position, nominate someone, vote and take part in the AGM on the 20th November.
Link once again is - https://preview.mailerlite.io/preview/3 ... 1647829386
Link once again is - https://preview.mailerlite.io/preview/3 ... 1647829386
-
James Dean
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2021 10:08 pm
Quick question, does the Trust have a website for trust members to access, receive updates, read minutes etc? Can't seem to find anything, but maybe I'm not looking in the right place?
-
EastTerracer
- Posts: 233
- Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2023 8:40 am
Not sure if they do but members were today sent an email with links to various documents regarding the elections and details of the AGM.James Dean wrote: ↑Wed Nov 01, 2023 7:34 pm Quick question, does the Trust have a website for trust members to access, receive updates, read minutes etc? Can't seem to find anything, but maybe I'm not looking in the right place?
-
BeaverWatcher
- Posts: 123
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2021 8:52 am
Supporters Trust members should have received a link to vote for those standing as part of the Trust board this afternoon.
There are 15 candidates for the 10 positions available from a wide range of backgrounds.
It's really good as it does give Trust members a choice on who they want to represent them going forward.
There are 15 candidates for the 10 positions available from a wide range of backgrounds.
It's really good as it does give Trust members a choice on who they want to represent them going forward.