Trust elections rerun

[Spoonz Red E]

maybe that's why many of us on here who have been a fan since the 70"s or longer are so messed up ?

It's given me fortitude.




... forty chewed comfort blankets and counting.

 

[lamrobhero]

At the risk of being shot down for talking about policies and procedures blah blah. Is there a Trust policy on fan demonstrations? And if there isn't could the Trust formulate one and impose it on the Club? Or does the separation of Corporate powers mean the Trust has no control ?

 

[ExmouthMart]

At the risk of being shot down for talking about policies and procedures blah blah. Is there a Trust policy on fan demonstrations? And if there isn't could the Trust formulate one and impose it on the Club? Or does the separation of Corporate powers mean the Trust has no control ?

Now that is a village fete committee mindset. Even at our little club with its things will eventually get better attitude it will turn ugly and possibly quite quickly if the perceived threat of relegation and going over a cliff becomes a reality. Remember League One football was sold to us as being sustainable ( don’t we have a director of sustainability?!) , we could compete for players we wanted including wages etc. we don’t need to sell anymore unless it’s in our interests to financially (again did Rotherham pay up front. I doubt it! ). Thousands of season tickets were sold on the back of this is a level we can maintain. Worse thing of all is The Trust seems only to be consulted when the Club Board needs money and seems to get blocked out by ‘ business confidentiality’ the minute anything tricky appears and there might need to be some accountability required. Also the Club Board is full of business titans who have the expertise to deal with any eventuality via the much lauded three year plans. Amazing how quickly non voting appeared by the names of certain Directors including one who positively revels in any opportunity for self promotion and telling stories from the bad old days…….
You don’t need permission to protest at Exeter City FC. We are the sodding owners aren’t we?! What they going to do if everyone holds up a Caldwell Out banner (apart from Jon Beer who’s bored by it all….) Chuck us all out?!

 

[Spoonz Red E]

.... Worse thing of all is The Trust seems only to be consulted when the Club Board needs money and seems to get blocked out by ‘ business confidentiality’ the minute anything tricky appears and there might need to be some accountability required. ....

The Trust Board have members sitting on the Club Board so there is no justification for that situation to arise.

You don’t need permission to protest at Exeter City FC. We are the sodding owners aren’t we?! What they going to do if everyone holds up a Caldwell Out banner (apart from Jon Beer who’s bored by it all….) Chuck us all out?!

Two separate issues re protest.

The 'Caldwell Out' banner and T-Shirt situation was poorly handled. No doubt about it as far as I'm concerned. Not least due to the disingenuous variety of reasons and the attempt to eject. I would say if someone feels Caldwell should go they are perfectly entitled to show it.

However, it is right for the Safety Officer to monitor any protest to ensure there are no safety issues arising. It's part of the responsibilities of the role.

In a crowd, conflict of opinions can cause aggro - Ash said himself "I got loads of positive responses and a couple of negative ones, both of whom were offensive to me and one of them was pretty aggressive too. Ash also said "To be fair to the stewards I dealt with, they were polite and even somewhat apologetic." Which is good to hear.

 

[Number13]

I believe there are two parts to the meeting, Part A is the public bit and Part B the confidential stuff. There was some waffle from Nick at the start of the Public session referencing the stuff they’d discussed in Part B so I assume that had taken place earlier in the evening.

When you say "public bit", do you mean that rank and file trust members can hear that bit but only the 4 elected trustees can be in Part B?

I'm struggling to understand the bits I could watch with just my trust membership

 

[Colesman Ballz]

When you say "public bit", do you mean that rank and file trust members can hear that bit but only the 4 elected trustees can be in Part B?

I'm struggling to understand the bits I could watch with just my trust membership

Part B business will be restricted to all elected Trustees together with Trust Officers (eg Trust Secretary etc). This is to cover confidentiality in what can be a wide ranging items under discussion, which can particularly include items relating to the Club itself with regard to finance, potential appointments, internal disciplinary matters etc. This is a pretty normal type of arrangement, although the only drawback which I experienced in my time on the Trust Board is that occasionally it can result in items being discussed there which have no need to be treated as such, not through informed choice, but rather through expediency, when it represented less convolution in managing the overall agenda to be covered. Part A open to all will generally cover all Trust Specific business.
What I do take issue with is the publication of minutes. Yes they can only be ratified at the following meeting, but there is absolutely no reason that "draft minutes" cannot be issued in the interim. They are certainly issued to those who were in attendance so why not publish them, identified as such, and then replace them with the ratified copy in due course ?

 

[Doug3101]

When you say "public bit", do you mean that rank and file trust members can hear that bit but only the 4 elected trustees can be in Part B?

I'm struggling to understand the bits I could watch with just my trust membership

There are two separate 'parts' to the monthly Trust Board meetings. It was agreed, some years ago, that Part B (the confidential items) would be discussed first at 6pm and then members are invited to join Part A that is scheduled to start at 7.30pm.
The 4 elected trustees you mention (I'm assuming you're referring to myself, Nick, Neil and Debra) were in the room with the 8 incumbents that had been elected previously.
I think that works better than before because, while the Trust Board is unable to give out confidential information (and I could explain the lunacy around 'undisclosed' transfers but won't bore anyone) we can say what has been discussed..to a point.
One thing I will say is that I felt that the discussion around the grant from Sky Bet was a pleasure to be a part of and the views and comments from the 'rank and file' as you call them were all on point and respectful.

 

[Pete Martin (CTID)]

Part B business will be restricted to all elected Trustees together with Trust Officers (eg Trust Secretary etc). This is to cover confidentiality in what can be a wide ranging items under discussion, which can particularly include items relating to the Club itself with regard to finance, potential appointments, internal disciplinary matters etc. This is a pretty normal type of arrangement, although the only drawback which I experienced in my time on the Trust Board is that occasionally it can result in items being discussed there which have no need to be treated as such, not through informed choice, but rather through expediency, when it represented less convolution in managing the overall agenda to be covered. Part A open to all will generally cover all Trust Specific business.
What I do take issue with is the publication of minutes. Yes they can only be ratified at the following meeting, but there is absolutely no reason that "draft minutes" can be issued in the interim. They are certainly issued to those who were in attendance so why not publish them, identified as such, and then replace them with the ratified copy in due course ?

Agreed. This used to happen and drafts used to appear on the website. I don't know why the practice has stopped. Using final ratification as a reason to withold them is patently wrong.