My withdrawal from the election

[Mark Colling]

Gareth, maybe we aren't so far apart as it appeared then.

I believe that a Supervisory Board has a lot of merit. I also believe that if the current process is halted, it will never happen.

If, as was suggested on another thread, the club is staying out of the process (however, odd that may be in one sense as they have organised it and are footing the bil) in order to maintain its independence that would seem to strengthen my feeling that the interim board is needed to force the pace and set its mandate. Your suggestions in that regard are entirely reasonable and if the PASB isn't given executive access, it is a dead duck.

I agree that the process has failed to ignite the imagination but the cynic in me believes that there are many who want the process to fail and are happy for there to be no interest.

 

[Tim Chown]

At the risk of that part of what I wrote being taken out of context, my 'solution' involves ensuring that people who vote for candidates know not only who the candidates are but what (even if only in outline) they'll be empowered to consider when they're elected.

There is another lower league club that has just got a Supporters/Supervisory Board up and running. It has met once and will meet again next week. It has a pretty well-defined terms of reference for its Board, and what access it has, that were agreed with the help of Supporters Direct in advance of the Board forming. Their Trust plays an active part, performing for example much of the administravia for the meetings with the club.

I understand from SD that that club will be making a public announcement towards the end of next week. Their model may be something we should look at here and where appropriate draw from. Their process for choosing their interim Board was far from perfect, but they are up and running.

 

[Greenblooded1]

If it's any use, this is the document I drew up for consideration when all this got mooted by Tony Campbell way back in 2009.

The structures and processes seen below are mostly lifted from successful constitutional protocols currently in place at a number of other League clubs.

PS - PASTMA was just a simplistic term to cover all recognised PAFC membership holders, however they would be defined. Still an issue to this day...


PAFC Supporter Representatives – Organising Principles

Purpose and Objectives

To represent the Plymouth Argyle Season Ticket Member Association (PASTMA) and other recognised regional Supporters Branches at Board level.

To assist Plymouth Argyle FC (PAFC) in developing and maintaining a close relationship with its supporters and improving communications on matters relating to club policy and strategy.

To provide a direct channel to allow constructive observations, comments and suggestions to be presented at Board level.

Role Description and Responsibilities

Two persons will be appointed to serve as PAFC Supporter Representatives (SR’s) for a period of 12 months, from 1 July to 30 June each year.

Each SR must be a current Season Ticket holder, above 18 years of age and be a “fit and proper person” according to the definitions provided by the English Premier League and by the Companies Act.

No former or current employee or director of PAFC may be eligible for the role of PAFC SR.

The specific responsibility of an SR will be for effective two way communication between PAFC and PASTMA members, as well as all other members of the fanbase.

The SR will have the rights and responsibilities of a non-executive Board member of Plymouth Argyle FC, with full access to all relevant information and shared accountability for Board decisions.

The SR will also adhere to the highest levels of personal and business confidentiality required in relation to details of financial matters, details of contracts and other commercial agreements that they may be party to whilst in their role. SR’s will not vote in any matters specifically relating to financial, commercial or contractual issues.

SR’s will be expected to communicate at all levels with all stakeholders on a frequent basis. They will also be expected to liaise closely with the media and to use all available channels to garner opinions and report on progress intelligibly with all media channels.

SR’s will focus their attention on matters relating to the experience of the ordinary fan – ticket prices, merchandising, stewarding, catering, pre-match entertainment, access issues and so on, but will also be encouraged to present opinions and suggestions related to other issues.

SR’s will not receive any financial payments, match tickets or other rewards for their time or presence at Board meetings, except for reasonable and itemised travel expenses, where deemed necessary and agreed in advance.

Nomination and Electoral Process

PASTMA Representative

One PAFC SR will be directly elected from PASTMA, following a formal nomination, seconding and electoral process that will be conducted independently by PASTMA.

This process will commence in March with a call for nominations and secondings in the matchday programmes and in the local media. Nominees will be expected to produce a 100 word manifesto, followed by an interview process.

There will then follow a polling process that will be paper-based only, with forms produced in the April matchday programmes and in the local media. The polling form will still allow for a "write in" candidate.

The polling forms will be posted to a PO Box address, which will then be opened, counted and tallied under the supervision of one PAFC employee, one member of PASTMA and one member of the local media.

The process will be concluded by the end of May, to allow the previous incumbent a period of time to assist their replacement in familiarisation with the role.

The runner-up to the elected person will act as a Deputy, should the elected person be unable to attend a meeting.

It is recommended, though not necessary, that the PASTMA representative live within thirty miles of Plymouth, in order to ensure that the person elected to the role is able to gauge local opinion on an ongoing basis.

Regional Supporters Branch Representative

The other PAFC SR will be selected at random from within a group of nominated individuals drawn from the recognised Regional Supporters Branches (Cornwall, Plymouth, North Devon, Avon, London, Northern, Midlands and the Disabled Supporters Association).

Each of the recognised Regional Supporters Branches will be responsible for organising their own nomination and electoral process. The random selection of one individual from a potential list of eight persons will be carried out under the supervision of one PAFC employee, one member of PASTMA and one member of the local media.

PAFC SR’s may not stand for consecutive terms, but can stand again after a two year interval, should they wish to do so.

Advisory Committee

All nominees from the PASTMA electoral process who receive more than 5% of the vote will join all non-elected Regional Supporter Branch nominees in forming an ad hoc Advisory Committee.

They will then be responsible for requesting and collating opinions and contributions from the fanbase at large, to be presented by the selected SR’s at Board level. This will be a “virtual” committee, with meetings not being required and contributions presented by email or by letter.

PAFC SR’s will be expected to attend all Board meetings, or in the event of difficulty, to provide a minimum of fourteen days notice in writing to PAFC, to allow sufficient time for their deputy to arrange attendance in their place.

Non-attendance at two Board meetings within the 12 month period of service will immediately be followed by de-selection as SR, to be replaced by the Deputy in the case of the PASTMA representative, or by one of the Regional Supporter Branch nominees in the case of the Regional Supporter Branch representative.

PMSL-Fit and proper person. I don't think this new board should use any ideas from that of the old regime!

Old ideas like common courtesy you mean. I think John was only trying to help, glad you appear to know everything now though .

 

[Lee Jameson]

If it's any use, this is the document I drew up for consideration when all this got mooted by Tony Campbell way back in 2009.

The structures and processes seen below are mostly lifted from successful constitutional protocols currently in place at a number of other League clubs.

PS - PASTMA was just a simplistic term to cover all recognised PAFC membership holders, however they would be defined. Still an issue to this day...


PAFC Supporter Representatives – Organising Principles

Purpose and Objectives

To represent the Plymouth Argyle Season Ticket Member Association (PASTMA) and other recognised regional Supporters Branches at Board level.

To assist Plymouth Argyle FC (PAFC) in developing and maintaining a close relationship with its supporters and improving communications on matters relating to club policy and strategy.

To provide a direct channel to allow constructive observations, comments and suggestions to be presented at Board level.

Role Description and Responsibilities

Two persons will be appointed to serve as PAFC Supporter Representatives (SR’s) for a period of 12 months, from 1 July to 30 June each year.

Each SR must be a current Season Ticket holder, above 18 years of age and be a “fit and proper person” according to the definitions provided by the English Premier League and by the Companies Act.

No former or current employee or director of PAFC may be eligible for the role of PAFC SR.

The specific responsibility of an SR will be for effective two way communication between PAFC and PASTMA members, as well as all other members of the fanbase.

The SR will have the rights and responsibilities of a non-executive Board member of Plymouth Argyle FC, with full access to all relevant information and shared accountability for Board decisions.

The SR will also adhere to the highest levels of personal and business confidentiality required in relation to details of financial matters, details of contracts and other commercial agreements that they may be party to whilst in their role. SR’s will not vote in any matters specifically relating to financial, commercial or contractual issues.

SR’s will be expected to communicate at all levels with all stakeholders on a frequent basis. They will also be expected to liaise closely with the media and to use all available channels to garner opinions and report on progress intelligibly with all media channels.

SR’s will focus their attention on matters relating to the experience of the ordinary fan – ticket prices, merchandising, stewarding, catering, pre-match entertainment, access issues and so on, but will also be encouraged to present opinions and suggestions related to other issues.

SR’s will not receive any financial payments, match tickets or other rewards for their time or presence at Board meetings, except for reasonable and itemised travel expenses, where deemed necessary and agreed in advance.

Nomination and Electoral Process

PASTMA Representative

One PAFC SR will be directly elected from PASTMA, following a formal nomination, seconding and electoral process that will be conducted independently by PASTMA.

This process will commence in March with a call for nominations and secondings in the matchday programmes and in the local media. Nominees will be expected to produce a 100 word manifesto, followed by an interview process.

There will then follow a polling process that will be paper-based only, with forms produced in the April matchday programmes and in the local media. The polling form will still allow for a "write in" candidate.

The polling forms will be posted to a PO Box address, which will then be opened, counted and tallied under the supervision of one PAFC employee, one member of PASTMA and one member of the local media.

The process will be concluded by the end of May, to allow the previous incumbent a period of time to assist their replacement in familiarisation with the role.

The runner-up to the elected person will act as a Deputy, should the elected person be unable to attend a meeting.

It is recommended, though not necessary, that the PASTMA representative live within thirty miles of Plymouth, in order to ensure that the person elected to the role is able to gauge local opinion on an ongoing basis.

Regional Supporters Branch Representative

The other PAFC SR will be selected at random from within a group of nominated individuals drawn from the recognised Regional Supporters Branches (Cornwall, Plymouth, North Devon, Avon, London, Northern, Midlands and the Disabled Supporters Association).

Each of the recognised Regional Supporters Branches will be responsible for organising their own nomination and electoral process. The random selection of one individual from a potential list of eight persons will be carried out under the supervision of one PAFC employee, one member of PASTMA and one member of the local media.

PAFC SR’s may not stand for consecutive terms, but can stand again after a two year interval, should they wish to do so.

Advisory Committee

All nominees from the PASTMA electoral process who receive more than 5% of the vote will join all non-elected Regional Supporter Branch nominees in forming an ad hoc Advisory Committee.

They will then be responsible for requesting and collating opinions and contributions from the fanbase at large, to be presented by the selected SR’s at Board level. This will be a “virtual” committee, with meetings not being required and contributions presented by email or by letter.

PAFC SR’s will be expected to attend all Board meetings, or in the event of difficulty, to provide a minimum of fourteen days notice in writing to PAFC, to allow sufficient time for their deputy to arrange attendance in their place.

Non-attendance at two Board meetings within the 12 month period of service will immediately be followed by de-selection as SR, to be replaced by the Deputy in the case of the PASTMA representative, or by one of the Regional Supporter Branch nominees in the case of the Regional Supporter Branch representative.

PMSL-Fit and proper person. I don't think this new board should use any ideas from that of the old regime!

Old ideas like common courtesy you mean. I think John was only trying to help, glad you appear to know everything now though .

?

 

[tonycholwell]

At the risk of that part of what I wrote being taken out of context, my 'solution' involves ensuring that people who vote for candidates know not only who the candidates are but what (even if only in outline) they'll be empowered to consider when they're elected.

There is another lower league club that has just got a Supporters/Supervisory Board up and running. It has met once and will meet again next week. It has a pretty well-defined terms of reference for its Board, and what access it has, that were agreed with the help of Supporters Direct in advance of the Board forming. Their Trust plays an active part, performing for example much of the administravia for the meetings with the club.

I understand from SD that that club will be making a public announcement towards the end of next week. Their model may be something we should look at here and where appropriate draw from. Their process for choosing their interim Board was far from perfect, but they are up and running.

Who Tim? Or is it a secret?

ps apologies, but no time to look just now as still a bit busy, typical Friday afternoon!

 

[Tim Chown]

Hi Tony,

It's another league two club.

The terms of reference might change. What I have seen is only a draft, but it looks a good basis. I understand from SD that the terms will be made public this coming week, along with an initial financial statement from the club.

Their selection method for the individual (non supporter group) fans was interesting... basically fans just wrote to the club with a statement of why they were interested and got picked by someone there. But as I said, they're up and running, and look like they'll have good access to the things that matter, with their Trust heavily involved and also providing administrative support (logistics, agenda, minutes etc).

Oh, and I think they have 16 people on their board.

Tim

 

[JonB]

Tim,

That's an interesting & hopefully useful update.

The bit you mention around selection is also interesting in its own right.

As you probably know, I've been against the idea of election from day one. Also, I've been working with a few 'high level' people, both in the public & private sector over the last several months & I've detected a definite move towards slightly less objective selection methods, with an increase in the use of professional judgement.

 

[Tim Chown]

Hi Jon,

Yes, I thought that might grab your attention

Selection by the club isn't the best idea though!

One thing to throw into the mix is whether the PASB would want a means to be formed that does not require funding for elections. The supporter group reps can come from the supporter groups according to the principles those groups apply. That's for them to decide. But I suspect the current elections cost £3,000+ in ERS fees alone. And if there is desire to bring POTD fans (for example) into the mix, a large scale postal ballot will get more expensive. Would the PASB ask for that financial help from the club year on year, or find its own way to raise funds to operate, or determine a method that was cheaper or (near) free to run?

Maybe that's a separate thread in itself.

Tim

 

[tonycholwell]

Hi Jon,

Yes, I thought that might grab your attention

Selection by the club isn't the best idea though!

One thing to throw into the mix is whether the PASB would want a means to be formed that does not require funding for elections. The supporter group reps can come from the supporter groups according to the principles those groups apply. That's for them to decide. But I suspect the current elections cost £3,000+ in ERS fees alone. And if there is desire to bring POTD fans (for example) into the mix, a large scale postal ballot will get more expensive. Would the PASB ask for that financial help from the club year on year, or find its own way to raise funds to operate, or determine a method that was cheaper or (near) free to run?

Maybe that's a separate thread in itself.

Tim

If I may say so, good post Tim.

Personally, Id rather every PASB member was elected, Im not sure how else you can be held responsible to those you purport to represent. It would also rid the PASB of a 2 tier system, a sort of them (elected) and us (selected).

I also think another election, now, would be rushed and not necessarily financed by the owner. It is clear the Trust have their own election to organise and run and would they want to run and finance another? Would non Trust members trust them? Probably not.

Therefore, I propose the following as a discussion point for a way forward. There is no point going over the past or consider 2 year olds as suitable voters.Therefore we should state over 18s only, its easier to calculate on membership sales.

1. Back to first bases; David Wheeler envisaged an interim Board be set up last April with view to setting the constitution and ensuring the PASB was up and running. He then suggested elections in October based on the earlier work.

2. If that is agreed why not move the process forward 6 months and determine that now the "Interim Board" set the constitution and act like a PASB. It is worth remembering that the AFT had an interim board for at least 12 months for very good reasons.

3. Between now and April anyone who buys a POTD ticket is recorded and entered on the membership list which would enable them to vote. To put this into context, Argyle have in the region of 105,000 currently on their data base, clearly not all fans or even living! I, as an example, get offers from Bristol City every year because I am on their data base because I attended an England U21 International and a pre season friendly (against Jols Ajax). If I included all the away grouns I have boughty tickets at, I would have votes at about 40 clubs! Argyle fans are spread to wide and far to filter out.

4. We have re election in April 2013.

Personally, I had hoped all candidates to the PASB would be elected, but this seems a fair compromise to me.

 

[Chris Easton]

Maybe it is time to invest in a Peppa Pig costume and get on the campaign trail

 

[ejh]

A fair point, Tom - but the main issue here is how much credibility an electoral result has, when children as young as five have been given a vote, which would most likely be influenced by their parents.

That means a voter with a number of children will have more influence on the result than those without any children.

In a "proper" election, to Parliament, that would clearly be nonsensical. Stupid, in fact. Illegal, as well.

Have you heard of "Rotten Boroughs"? We did away with those a long time ago.

I'm reminded of a West Wing episode in which juvenile enfranchisement is discussed at great length.

By the end, it's generally agreed that children, being the recipients of the impacts of adult decisions years down the line, do deserve to have their voices heard.

And who is to say that some of the more intelligent juniors wouldn't be able to make a better assessment than some adults?

But that is beside the point.

The key question for me is whether the ERS knew that children were on the mailing list and then approved of their involvement - or not.

If not, then that was a club decision.

If so, then it would be interesting to know the thought process which led to club officials deciding that all children - as young as five, or as old as 16, would be able to make a discerning choice in this election.

If the scrutiny we saw applied to the Trust election in the Spring is anything to go by, this one ought to be laughed right into the gutter.

John this whole thread is cringeworthy to me and plain embarrassing. So much hot air and effort wasted talking about it like it's Westminster. It's just to vote a fans rep ferchristsakes. Does any fan care as much as to snatch their child's voting form? Most fans don't even care, full stop. So many egos involved with these committees and elections and boards now, some of you really need to get over yourselves. 16 year olds can fight in Afghanistan in defence of the country and study A level government and politics, but can't vote in your 4th division fans rep election? And you have to stand down because of your 'principles'? Please guys get a grip.

 

[ejh]

Are we really comparing a proper parliament election to voting in six people to a fans group of a L2 football club? Strewth!

The juniors have a membership so let them vote and feel part of the club.

Wonderfully put. Let's have no more resignation speeches and principles and just focus on getting the prices of pasties and cider down.

 

[Wozzer]

A fair point, Tom - but the main issue here is how much credibility an electoral result has, when children as young as five have been given a vote, which would most likely be influenced by their parents.

That means a voter with a number of children will have more influence on the result than those without any children.

In a "proper" election, to Parliament, that would clearly be nonsensical. Stupid, in fact. Illegal, as well.

Have you heard of "Rotten Boroughs"? We did away with those a long time ago.

I'm reminded of a West Wing episode in which juvenile enfranchisement is discussed at great length.

By the end, it's generally agreed that children, being the recipients of the impacts of adult decisions years down the line, do deserve to have their voices heard.

And who is to say that some of the more intelligent juniors wouldn't be able to make a better assessment than some adults?

But that is beside the point.

The key question for me is whether the ERS knew that children were on the mailing list and then approved of their involvement - or not.

If not, then that was a club decision.

If so, then it would be interesting to know the thought process which led to club officials deciding that all children - as young as five, or as old as 16, would be able to make a discerning choice in this election.

If the scrutiny we saw applied to the Trust election in the Spring is anything to go by, this one ought to be laughed right into the gutter.

John this whole thread is cringeworthy to me and plain embarrassing. So much hot air and effort wasted talking about it like it's Westminster. It's just to vote a fans rep ferchristsakes. Does any fan care as much as to snatch their child's voting form? Most fans don't even care, full stop. So many egos involved with these committees and elections and boards now, some of you really need to get over yourselves. 16 year olds can fight in Afghanistan in defence of the country and study A level government and politics, but can't vote in your 4th division fans rep election? And you have to stand down because of your 'principles'? Please guys get a grip.

No they can't. You can't go on the front line at 16.

 

[Ottawa Green]

16 year olds can fight in Afghanistan in defence of the country

Maybe he was talking about Afghanistan 16 year olds.