http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/2017-10-29/133rd-annual-general-meeting-of-the-richmond-football-club
RedanTiger said:Does anyone have any information as to what changes to the Constitution are proposed.
tommystigers said:Also notice there is an election for two directors but no mention yet of who is up this year.
I hope that with the lack of turmoil Michael Stahl has fixed the proxy farce and that the election by laws will be applied to all candidates.
Will be voting no again for changes to the EGM requirement.
Thanks Taz. I wonder if anyone else will nominate?taztiger4 said:reported on 29th October as below
ELECTION OF OFFICE BEARERS
In accordance with the Club’s Constitution, the positions of John O’Rourke and Joe Powell are to be filled by an election.
Each of these Directors being eligible, may offer themselves for re-election.
Nominations for the position of the two (2) Directors will be accepted at the Club until 5.00pm on Friday, 10 November 2017. All nominees must be a member of the Club and nominations signed by two (2) members of the Club (in accordance with the Club’s Constitution).
Under the Constitution of the Club, the nominee and their proposer and seconder and all members intending to vote must be a financial member of the Club for the 2017 year by the 31st day of August 2017.
Nominees should be aware that due to Directors obligations, any new Director is to be subject to a police investigation and any other enquiries necessary to ensure that the Director meets the criteria of the relevant Acts and Regulations.
Nomination Forms and further information are available by enquiry to the Company Secretary, Michael Stahl at the Club on (03) 9426 4415 or at [email protected].
tommystigers said:Thanks Taz. I wonder if anyone else will nominate?
tommystigers said:Also notice there is an election for two directors but no mention yet of who is up this year.
I hope that with the lack of turmoil Michael Stahl has fixed the proxy farce and that the election by laws will be applied to all candidates.
Will be voting no again for changes to the EGM requirement.
leon said:No, I wouldn't blame Caspar if he did that following the questionable handling of proxy votes. That should be totally above board, as long as the proper process was followed, on time etc. I will make sure I pay closer attention and be more involved from now on. I think our board need to 'fan the flames' of our current success by treating members with due respect, encouraging their commitment by best practice. Not become complacent or arrogant and out-of-touch.
If they're smart, they can take advantage of huge good will and positive spirit around the club for next season.
lamb22 said:The recent changes to s 249D are there to disenfranchise members and protect non performing boards full of failed private school prefects and various ex politicians, schmoozers schemers and the odd woman who gets in after being mistaken for the note taker. Typical of how liberals kowtow to their constituencies - entitled hacks.
Bad law. If you actually believe in democracy you'd back Redan all the way.
A relevant interest in a company is 20% for takeover purposes. Essentially an entity cannot acquire more than 20% without making a formal takeover bid. I ask my students why? You would expect something more than 50% would be a controlling interest. The fact is that only around a third of the shareholders ever vote. If you have 20% of the shares you effectively have a controlling interest if voted at AGMs.
In companies with a large number of members/shareholders (we are a company limited by guarantee) having a 5% threshold effectively means EGMs just can't get up. No way we could get 4000 plus signatures. You might as well just ban EGMs.
There are a lot of sheep in the world and very compliant unquestioning members so I am betting this cynical play by the board gets up.
caesar said:Why 100 people out of a Membership base of 75,000 can force an EGM is the most ridiculous, archaic clause in the clubs charter.
I will be voting yes for change.
Once again individuals who value their own importance ahead of the club or the majority of members have to revert to scavenging for proxies to get their way and hijack the AGM.