Lions just done what we cannot

[floppinab]

Yep, I'm resurrecting this one again

http://www.couriermail.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,6034705%255E10389,00.html

Maybe those on this board who have had the time and are a little closer to the coterie/cocktail/Arunas groups might have heard something more about, what I believe was the majority view on this board following last years debate, a desire for AGM's & a democratic Board.

I've been doing what I generally don't like to do, peppering the Swans front office with questions about what might be going on with this issue. So far I have had no joy, plenty of we'll get back to you responses but nothing else.

We've had the financials issued

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/02/04/1044318608864.html

but as usual not distributed to members where their merits or otherwise could be openly debated. The only way to get 'em is to come up with hard earned to ASIC.

Even if an AGM is held at some point this year any reasonable debate on the financials would be pretty pointless given they are published now not in conjunction with any AGM held a long way down the track.

Last year the Chairman issued a statement confirming the intention to begin a democratic Board in 2003. I hope he is a man of his word.

[Rizzo]

Lets keep the pressure up. The theme for the club this year is Evolution. We need it at the boardroom level as well as on the park.

[Bron]

Swans Supporters Inc did flyer hand outs at NSO. Couldn't do so because of legalities at Stad Oz. One of the group's objectives is to get voting rights for members. Not for all board spots, but to make a start and get one or two elected members. There is currently a membership drive. Many people are supportive of the aim. Please click here for more information. The more members with SSI, the stronger the voice is. A united front has greater credibility with the Club then voices in isolation.

Having said that, on the last occasion that I heard Colin Seery speak he restated that this was on the agenda for this year ... but there are still 10 1/2 months left in the year! Organising such a thing will be a pretty significant exercise and I can see no signs of activity.

[Charlie]

I just had a thought. Won't a fully-elected board be too fan-heavy? Possibly without enough specialist expertise?

Maybe the best way to do is a mirror of the US government executive branch. The members elect the Chairman and dep. chairman, and then they choose the other members of the board.

[Bart]

Originally posted by Bron
One of the group's objectives is to get voting rights for members. Not for all board spots, but to make a start and get one or two elected members.

"Members of SSI were instrumental in the 'Choose Roos' campaign" the brochure said. I'd be amazed if this was true

Why doesn't Carlos come on this board. He has been invited to this board on several occasions. Why does everything have to be so cloak and dagger.

[Charlie]

Originally posted by Bart
"Members of SSI were instrumental in the 'Choose Roos' campaign" the brochure said. I'd be amazed if this was true

Why doesn't Carlos come on this board. He has been invited to this board on several occasions. Why does everything have to be so cloak and dagger.

It would certainly be alot easier to trust the guy if we were able to talk to him!

Bron - if you ever want to get general support on RWO, I would say you need to convince ACB to poke his head out.

[Bron]

SSI is more than one person. Arunas has been the most visible from a media perspective, but others are involved, just as actively.

However, if you want to post some questions here, I can pass them on to get some responses. Not everyone wants to visit internet forums on a daily basis to keep up with discussions and answer questions.

[Bart]

What about in the chat room on a Thursday night ?

[floppinab]

Having said that, on the last occasion that I heard Colin Seery speak he restated that this was on the agenda for this year ... but there are still 10 1/2 months left in the year! Organising such a thing will be a pretty significant exercise and I can see no signs of activity.

This is a concern Bron, and as I said even if it held this year apart from the issue of hopefully having some sort of elections (whatever or however form they might take) the possibly to debate the accounts is lost given the Swans usually prepare them in the Nov. Dec. timeframe and publish in Jan/Feb.

My guess is the earliest we see action now is Jan/Feb. next year, a little disappointing given the stated Chairman's comments.

I just had a thought. Won't a fully-elected board be too fan-heavy? Possibly without enough specialist expertise?

Well Charlie, one way or another, I'm sure you could classify the current board as fans. I guess when you look around the current group of Swans members you and I may know, it could be easy to conclude that they would generally lack enough expertise. However I have no doubt that among the current Swans membership base there will be no shortage of people having the requisite or greater expertise (and more than likely a much fresher outlook) than the current Board to stand for a position.

[CureTheSane]

I am still very anti having an elected board.

And as for this SSI thing, I have very grave reservations about that.

Just my opinion, but I am very happy with the members past and present that have represented the Swans on the board, and I see no reason for change.
It seems like change for changes sake to me.

[Rizzo]

Hang on a sec, why the assumption that an elected board would have less of a skill set or be made up of fans? Or Charlie, are you referring to the skill set of the voters?

I can't see why an elected board would rule out candidates with a professional football, sporting club or financial background.

I'd vote for the best person for the job based on the skills they bring to the board and on the platform they stood for election on.

CTS - The change to an elected board has nothing to do with the performance of boards part and present, it's about giving the club's financial members a democratic voice and a chance to be more involved with the club beyond supporting the team. It would also provide transparency in the appointment process.

Charlie - After studying the American political system for a semester an Uni, I couldn't go anywhere near replicating something they do!

[Charlie]

Rizzo - my concern is that an elected board would most likely not have the right mix of skills.

I have no doubt that at least a majority of Swans fans would be careful in who they vote for. However, I have a vision of our board being made up of former players, a couple of businessmen and.... well.... not a lot of other, specialised talent that may be less visibly important.

Say for instance, an advertising/marketing professional would be a huge asset on our board, but the role they play isn't visible like that of the chairman, or the former player who oversees the football department, or the high-profile businessman who is instrumental in securing sponsorship.

I'd much prefer to be able to choose one or two people, who then appoint a good mix of boardroom ability.

[floppinab]

but I am very happy with the members past and present that have represented the Swans on the board

That you are happy with them is great CTS, but this is not the issue I believe. This issue is that if you were not happy with them, what could you do about it. The answer to that is of course there is nothing you can do.
Under a democratic scenario if you are happy with them, and enough other members agree with you then they will stay on and good luck to them.

And of course if they are screwing up, got their noses in the footy dept. too much, dragging the Club into too much debt, whatever, and enough members think the same then they'll be out on their ear.

[CureTheSane]

Originally posted by Rizzo
I'd vote for the best person for the job based on the skills they bring to the board and on the platform they stood for election on.

Perhaps you would.
How much time would you put into the reasearch of the candidates?

Here's an example of just one potential problem.

Paul Kelly running for the board.
Now maybe Paul has every single skill and attribute rquired to make the best board member ever, maybe not.
The point is that THAT doesn't matter, he would be voted onto the board in a landslide.

And then we have the potential division within the supporters and coups and the like.

The only potential I see is a big mess.
And I swear to God, if that dude from this SSI runs, I will run for a spot on the board under the slogan
"if you're gonna vote for THAT no name unqualified person, why not vote for me"

[LondonSwan]

Originally posted by CureTheSane
[B
The only potential I see is a big mess.
And I swear to God, if that dude from this SSI runs, I will run for a spot on the board under the slogan
"if you're gonna vote for THAT no name unqualified person, why not vote for me" [/B]

What is the SSI and how do I contact them.