The OFFICIAL 2011 Board Election Thread

[RoyalBlue]

Hi Caroline, thanks for joining in the discussion, I think it's great that you've decided to get involved.

Could you give us some more information on your marketing expertise aside from your involvement with the coterie?

 

[MaddAdam]

Re: We have an election

DawofPerception – Obviously the debt reduction campaign is key at this stage. It is great that the Club has launched this initiative, but we need to ensure we keep focussed on also building the business and engaging our members during the process. We need to aim to take North members on the journey so we ensure that once the debt demolition has succeeded (and indeed during that process), the Club does not fall back into the financial situation we currently find ourselves in.

We also need to explore external revenue raising activities (which I'm sure has been done to an extent already). While we need all our members to be part of this, we also need to ensure we expand our networks so we can bring in "new money" – and with arguably the most marketable coach in the league, we have some real positives on our side.

While any initiatives of my own would need to work in with the direction already announced by the current Board and administration (which has some details yet to be provided), I have a proven track record with fundraising for the Club through the Northerners, which would no doubt be of benefit to the debt reduction campaign.

Caroline - thanks for taking the time to reply. I do appreciate it.

That said, what you've posted there is pretty vague motherhoody type stuff.

I asked for 3 debt reduction initiatives you could come up with hoping for specifics.

I appreciate you've got a career and a busy life etc so I'm not taking this to heart.

 

[Tas]

Re: We have an election

Jokes aside, and at the risk of sounding like a nervous nellie, am I the only one slightly concerned about this?

I am not concerned at all.

The head of our only coterie running against a candidate very recently appointed to the board ( which one would assume means she has their backing) and another candidate who (iirc) took up the gig at the behest of JB as part of his Roosurgence (so to speak).

I don't see it as problematic that we have good candidates to choose from and it makes me happy that no matter who gets the gig that we will have a strong board to assist Euge and the team.

Can't imagine the honchos would be too impressed, to be honest.

This would be different to the issue that arose from the PDR scenario last year.

After JB implied he would take his bat and ball and go home if results didn't go as he planned last time (an entirely understandable position, imo, given the work he had done), how would he react if one of his candidates got rolled this time?

I think it was more of an issue with PDR coming in than losing an existing board member. JB said he felt if PDR came in he wouldn't have an effective or cohesive team so there wouldn't be much point in him continuing.

That may be a bit insulting to PDR, possibly a lot insulting, and it wasn't handled very professionally by JB but we still had directors who campaigned to remove PDR from the board initially and PDR is probably not the easiest person to get along with if things aren't going his way.

I think JB just wanted to avoid the board going back to how it was before him, that was a board that lacked direction or cohesion.

With Head and Inserra stepping down I think they were the last of the pro-Aylett reign directors from memory. Dilena, Lewis, O'Hoy amd Houghton came in 2007 or later, Mark came in with JB and Julie is holding the vacant position with the 8th spot removed.

As the leaks and other commotions showed us pre-JB, a board without unity is a recipe for disaster at a club like ours.

It is disastrous for any organisation really. I don't think the AFL was too keen on PDR either, they didn't even bother to talk to him when the GC fiasco was going on and he was a major shareholder. We know how bad things can get if you are on the the AFL's shit list.

The environment this year is probably a better one had PDR taken Archer's advice and delayed his run for the board.

At such a young age, Carnegie shouldn't be in any rush, so why run now? The suggestion that she is close to PDR (who I have given up on after his Utah comments, even if I don't like how he was treated in last year's process) makes it all the more curious a decision.

She nominated before, she ran the same year JB and MB got on board because they were relocation friendly, apparently. That was when the shareholders decided most positions.

If someone feels they have something to offer then age shouldn't be a factor, nor should not getting the nod be a deterrent against trying again in the future.

Did she nominate with JB's genuine blessing? That's the central question...

Who knows, who cares? CC wouldn't be someone JB should feel he couldn't work with or would disrupt the board should she get elected.

I hope the situation with PDR was a one-off and in the last year or so even people who were staunch PDR supporters got to see a side of him which probably was never seen before. I can imagine he would be a lot of work to deal with, especially if your views and his would differ, kind of reminds me of Teffy.

 

[Tas]

Re: We have an election

Caroline - thanks for taking the time to reply. I do appreciate it.

That said, what you've posted there is pretty vague motherhoody type stuff.

I asked for 3 debt reduction initiatives you could come up with hoping for specifics.

I appreciate you've got a career and a busy life etc so I'm not taking this to heart.

In Caroline's defence, not that she needs it, I doubt she would be able to give any specific initiatives as a potential director other than just being general ideas anyone can come up with.

You should be speaking to Euge if you want ideas on revenue generation as he is directly responsible for and oversees the departments responsible for this area. Coming up with day-to-day ideas isn't generally one of the roles for board members unless they are specifically assigned to oversee or review performance or asses the entity's policies, objectives, etc.

 

[MajakHarpeWright]

@Kimbo. The 'democratic process' sounds all nice in theory but as far as nfp sports organisations go, it is not always ideal. Why do you think the board has reduced from 9 to 7 over the past two years? Why do you think it was JB, MB and O'Hoy put up for reelection last year instead of others? It aint rocket science, my friends.

@Tas. I once heard you described as 'the North board's long-winded answer to questions nobody asked'. If you REALLY 'dont care' whether or not CC has JB's blessing then you are, quite frankly, clueless. I suspect however that this is not the case.

 

[Kimbo]

@Kimbo. The 'democratic process' sounds all nice in theory but as far as nfp sports organisations go, it is not always ideal. Why do you think the board has reduced from 9 to 7 over the past two years? Why do you think it was JB, MB and O'Hoy put up for reelection last year instead of others? It aint rocket science, my friends.

@Tas. I once heard you described as 'the North board's long-winded answer to questions nobody asked'. If you REALLY 'dont care' whether or not CC has JB's blessing then you are, quite frankly, clueless. I suspect however that this is not the case.

@MHW It really doesn't matter, so long as CC is well-credentialed, and isn't going to reactively work against the basic spirt and intent of the current Board strategy. She's entitled to run, and as a club 'returned to the members', we get the privilege to vote for her, or not - Board 'politics' notwithstanding.

Board's and President's may have their preferences, and trust me, I get that. But, they need to be very careful they are not, in the process, undermining the members' right to choose. Do that and they lose their mandate.

 

[MajakHarpeWright]

But, they need to be very careful they are not, in the process, undermining the members' right to choose. Do that and they lose their mandate.

In that case JB lost his 'mandate' last year when the board decided to not fill a vacancy, and put up the three they did instead of Head and Inserra.

And yet, people like me will vote for JB and his preferred candidates once again this year. And next year and so on so long as I think he is the best man for the top job.

Which is why I want to know whether or not CC has JB's blessing to run against Laycock (which is what it amounts to). If he genuinely is cool with it, then I'll shut up and on a cloud of sound drift right into the night.

:stern look

 

[Tas]

@Kimbo. The 'democratic process' sounds all nice in theory but as far as nfp sports organisations go, it is not always ideal. Why do you think the board has reduced from 9 to 7 over the past two years? Why do you think it was JB, MB and O'Hoy put up for reelection last year instead of others? It aint rocket science, my friends.

@Tas. I once heard you described as 'the North board's long-winded answer to questions nobody asked'. If you REALLY 'dont care' whether or not CC has JB's blessing then you are, quite frankly, clueless. I suspect however that this is not the case.

Is that you, Teffy? I wonder how long this account will last, judging by the form to date probably not as long as the last one.

JB explained why he said what he did against PDR joining. He didn't say he was opposed to anyone joining who he didn't hand pick.

We all respect JB and give him the mandate he wants to steer the club in the right direction. However, he has to learn that a club which he has returned the powers to the members has the right to determine the composition of the board. He should only seek to influence who is voted in the most dire of conditions.

It is why I don't care. JB has never said to just vote for people he likes or he has appointed in temporary roles.

 

[Event Horizon]

Which is why I want to know whether or not CC has JB's blessing to run against Laycock (which is what it amounts to). If he genuinely is cool with it, then I'll shut up and on a cloud of sound drift right into the night.

:stern look

Given CC has decided months ago that she will no longer be part of Northerners committee, suggests to me she has been planning this for some time. We can also assume that she knows JB fairly well, given her role for the Northerners in the past. So given she has made the decision to run for the board, tells me that she certainly doesn't anticipate causing any great angst to JB and his plans, at the very least.

 

[LT Smash]

Given CC has decided months ago that she will no longer be part of Northerners committee, suggests to me she has been planning this for some time. We can also assume that she knows JB fairly well, given her role for the Northerners in the past. So given she has made the decision to run for the board, tells me that she certainly doesn't anticipate causing any great angst to JB and his plans, at the very least.

While I do not wish to cast aspersions on anyone's campaign or their right to run or the right of the members to decide, the mail is, the executive and board were somewhat surprised to learn of this nomination. Which again, is not necessarily to say that anyone resents the nomination, just that they didn't have forewarning.

 

[Kimbo]

While I do not wish to cast aspersions on anyone's campaign or their right to run or the right of the members to decide, the mail is, the executive and board were somewhat surprised to learn of this nomination. Which again, is not necessarily to say that anyone resents the nomination, just that they didn't have forewarning.

Ogdenville = 'the inner scrotum'?

 

[LT Smash]

Ogdenville = 'the inner scrotum'?

I overheard some people talking on the monorail.

 

[hilly]

@Artichoke - any tips on the 10th race at Bathurst dogs tonight?

 

[year of the roo]

Re: We have an election

Hi all, I have been following the thread and thought I would jump on and let you know I am more than happy to answer any queries you may have about me on BigFooty, or if you would prefer to email me privately feel free to do so (cecar@bigpond.net.au).

Just for your own background, I made the decision not to re-nominate for the Northerners committee for 2012 some months ago, so now is a perfect time for me to look at other ways to support the Club. After having spent around 20-30 hours a week dedicated to the coterie, I feel I now have time to dedicate to the Board and to continue to assist the Club in a new capacity.

In doing so, I think it is important to clarify that my nomination does not mean a challenge to the current Board, but with my experience around the Club (14 years on the Northerners committee, and a volunteer before that), together with my "off-field" expertise, I believe I can be of real benefit to the Board!

Just confirming for those interested, yes I am 31, but I am proud that I have been able to support the Club as a volunteer for over 15 years, so I have an excellent understanding of the Roos and I am confident I can be of real value.

I am passionate and dedicated to NMFC and feel honoured to be part of our great Club!

I hope to get your support!

Hi Caroline,

many people in North land have not been impressed with how Peter De Rauch has conducted himself in the past few years around the club. You have been linked to him in the past, so I think it would be beneficial to your campaign if you address your current relationship with him.

Should I (someone who wants Peter no where near the club), and others in the same boat, be worried by your nomination?

 

[C_Carnegie]

Hi "Year of the Roo" - thanks for your post.



Having been around the Club for 18 years, and a volunteer for the majority of those, I of course know Peter well (as I do many other members that I have met over the years). He also served on my committee with the Northerners in 2010 and has been a long time coterie member.



Having said that, there is no reason why that should worry anyone in relation to my nomination. My commitment, passion and return to the Club has been evident over a long period of time, and I am not running a campaign for anyone else, on behalf of anyone else, or to do anything other than put myself forward to join the board, because I believe for all the reasons in this thread already, I have something to offer and can continue to help the club most efficiently and effectively in that capacity.

 

[MajakHarpeWright]

Given CC has decided months ago that she will no longer be part of Northerners committee, suggests to me she has been planning this for some time. We can also assume that she knows JB fairly well, given her role for the Northerners in the past. So given she has made the decision to run for the board, tells me that she certainly doesn't anticipate causing any great angst to JB and his plans, at the very least.

Lovely set of assumptions *hitches pants* but...

the mail is, the executive and board were somewhat surprised to learn of this nomination... they didn't have forewarning.

...This is what I was getting at.

If I'm the pres and I have a QC and a marketing pro lined up to remain on my board, I'm probably not going to be too impressed when somebody tries to squeeze eight into seven.

As orrahP pointed out 12 months ago, you try to roll one of Eddie's boys and you get a very friendly phone call (sans any pleasantries about the weather).

:stern look

 

[RoyalBlue]

I know win_news' style anywhere.

 

[The Other Dean]

Is that you, Teffy?

I think you could be pinning the tail on the wrong poster there, Tasalenko. Its more one of your fairdinkum, longer-haul aliases rather than one of Tef's blink-and-you-missed-it accounts.

Anyways, back on topic...

CC sounds like she would make a fine addition to the Board. Also appreciate her making herself available to field a few questions from the Bigfooty collective. (Nice work, Caroline.) Hopefully posters will give her an objective hearing.

Above all else, hoping that it's a clean campaign with the winner on the day being the fair, democratic process.

*pats unicorn*

P.S. Anyone know how JB feels about Zondor's candidacy ?

 

[Only Forwards]

P.S. Anyone know how JB feels about Zondor's candidacy ?

Sternly?

 

[Twinkletoes]

Sternly?

Tender and touched apparently.

 

[Limerick]

If I'm the pres and I have a QC and a marketing pro lined up to remain on my board, I'm probably not going to be too impressed when somebody tries to squeeze eight into seven. :stern look

Our Constitution doesn't require that a member has the endorsement of the President to be able to nominate as a candidate for the board election.

I'm not comfortable with the concept that the President lines up candidates for election to the exclusion of all others. I doubt that this would be JB's thinking.

I see us being in a strong position having quality candidates stand for election and hope that it's a clean campaign with the winners selected by the NMFC members.

 

[Benson]

Here's a novel idea given the outstanding qualification of those standing, why not expand the board.
(i know, I know JB wants a small board but if the candidates are so good surely there is scope to fit them all on the board)

 

[RoyalBlue]

Here's a novel idea given the outstanding qualification of those standing, why not expand the board.
(i know, I know JB wants a small board but if the candidates are so good surely there is scope to fit them all on the board)

Agree with this, I think we can have 11 on.

Does anyone know of more lawyers who want a spot?

 

[Hearts to hearts]

Sorry, this is too confusing. Will there be a selection to choose from, any two of whom would be sane, capable, committed contributors? None of whom want to relocate, merge, rename or otherwise destroy the fabric of the club? What am I supposed to do with a choice like that?

I need at least one candidate to demonstrate traits of criminality, stupidity, fecklessness or disloyalty. Then I can mentally mark them down as an infidel, not worthy of this high office. Surely that's not too much to expect.

 

[Limerick]

Here's a novel idea given the outstanding qualification of those standing, why not expand the board.
(i know, I know JB wants a small board but if the candidates are so good surely there is scope to fit them all on the board)

Our Board can operate with between 3 and 12 members. However the general thinking is that 6-7 is ideal. The Board can appoint additional members, as is the case with the marketing person. These board appointees have to stand at the next election.