Trust Board and Trust elections

[John William]

Thus discouraging people/members from attending. The thought of having to sit (often alone) in the bar whilst Part B is concluded is serious disincentive to being there.

Let's not delude ourselves. I seriously doubt if sitting in the bar has put anyone off. Non-member attendance at TB meetings has for the last couple of years and more generally been one (me) whether Part B was taken before or after part A. And I just had a lime and soda, or at most a half of Guinness.

I genuinely don't care which Part is first, there are arguments either way. But Part A has not led to long waits, if necessary they have gone back into Part B after Part A was finished. So Part A at 7.30 makes most sense to me.

However, both Pete Martin and I made it a key part of our manifestos that Part B (which we agree should be kept for genuinely confidential matters) should be restricted to such issues, and once we are Members I'm sure we will both question if items are put in Part B that don't need to be. If there is not much on the Part B agenda it can be put back to 7.00.

 

[John William]

In effect, any ****-ups, indiscretions, bad news or any other matters which might embarrass the board (s) or upset the great unwashed can be shoved in to B. There's democracy for you.

I think this fear has reduced considerably now, though it remains to be seen whether anyone turns up for Part A. And Pete and I will be vigilant on such matters. Genuinely confidential personal or financial matters only for Part B, and if they later become non-confidential (eg because the Club has gone public on something) they can then be minuted in Part A.

 

[IndoMike]

I think this fear has reduced considerably now, though it remains to be seen whether anyone turns up for Part A. And Pete and I will be vigilant on such matters. Genuinely confidential personal or financial matters only for Part B, and if they later become non-confidential (eg because the Club has gone public on something) they can then be minuted in Part A.

OK, John. I guess the key question, which has been posed before on this thread, is how confidential financial matters is defined. I don't expect you to answer that question btw, John.

 

[John William]

OK, John. I guess the key question, which has been posed before on this thread, is how confidential financial matters is defined. I don't expect you to answer that question btw, John.

There may well be marginal decisions. I imagine the watchword will be caution at first, until we see how it goes.

 

[Spoonz Red E]

It's a mindset thing as well.

The way the Trust and Club work together should be to aim in the long term for the elimination of the need for Part B discussion (a target it might not be able to hit but should always be aimed for).

In the meantime, if something is discussed in Part B for currently justifiable reasons the question should be 'How much of this can now be communicated without compromising any necessary confidences?'. The desire should be to communicate as much as possible as soon as possible.

 

[David Treharne]

I've put together a motion for the AGM with regard to changing the monthly "donation" back to a "loan" and I'll be asking some of those attending the Mansfield game to check wording and workability. I'm now looking to provoke the Trust Board into finalising any ideas that they might have for a share issue to raise funds for a couple of projects.
I think it's imperative that this is done as soon as possible if only to head off any schemes dreamed up by the Club Board to fund raise. The Trust has the distinct advantage that it has the possibility of matched funding from a range of sources, and the ability to potentially mobilise a relatively large number of small investors- rather than going cap in hand to the usual suspects.
If you have any specific experience of working in this field I'd like to hear from you by PM.

 

[Antony Moxey]

I wonder, WRT to the Trust Board, whether anything is that commercially sensitive that it needs to be in Part B. Can anyone give examples of topics discussed that we cant be privy to?

 

[Phil B]

Details of contacts of employment are usually a private matter between an employer and employee. That doesn't mean the BOS should be privy to the details. Cue more angst about the managers contract.

 

[David Treharne]

Cue more angst about the managers contract.

The Manager's contract really is the hands of the Club Board, and for them to decide what to do about the terrible situation that they've got themselves into. In the meantime Trust members CAN do something about ensuring that the Trust Board is far more open about where the money that comes from the fans to the Trust actually goes, and whether or not there are hard reasons why it shouldn't return to being a loan. That and the business of making a share issue that will start to resolve some of the others issues that beset the Club with regard to short term finances. Having wasted four years waiting for a bolt of lightning to illuminate the way forward for ground development it looks as though it's going to have to be bit-by-bit rather than hoping that all the elements will miraculously come together to enable a build of the stadium we'd all love (but will never see).
It's all very well aiming (and I quote directly) for "an asset that as a supporters owned football club provides the community with a facility of which we can all be proud"- I think we need to accept that we will only be able to move very slowly, and with one phase at a time, rather than with grandious plans that will cause the Club further financial turmoil.

 

[cityregular]

DAVID please stand for election