3P Promises

[cv8z]

yes, I fully understand that.
They can also get the constitution changed but there is a proper way to go about things., not to mention legal

http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,25396876-23209,00.html

The 3P rebels claimed Fitzgerald failed to pass on a resolution to members that would have allowed that clause in the club's constitution to be changed at the leagues club's annual general meeting next week.
The resolution was allegedly lodged with the Parramatta chief executive the required 21 days before the AGM was to be held.
If it is not addressed next week, the rebels have suggested an extraordinary general meeting could be called to allow members the chance to vote on the matter.
"After putting the club through what we just did to get to an election, and a clear mandate has been drawn that the members want change and a new board, and he's not accepting it," 3P spokesperson Terry Leabeater said.
"We're going to have to drag the club through s--t again to have an extraordinary general meeting which could cost the club up to 50 grand.
"With all due respect to Geoff and Ron, they were flogged in the election.
"We won by a clear mandate. The members want that seven there, so we want that seven there to remain. We're not going to accept that."
However, Fitzgerald countered 3P's version of events, claiming there was no hope of changing the club's constitution in the short term.
"It was a very poorly worded resolution that was sent to me," Fitzgerald said.
"All I can do is go by the constitution and our legal advice. It's very clear cut that they've missed the boat as far as having any changes to the constitution at this annual general meeting."

 

[born an eel]

http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,25396876-23209,00.html

"All I can do is go by the constitution and our legal advice. "

bloody lawyers getting in the road making sure thing are legal

 

[KMP08]

Is it true you dont need to be a 3 year financial member to vote at the AGM?

Am I the only person with a copy of the constitution? The same 3 year rule applies to voting at the agm.

I presume this is for the same reason as elections. To stop someone stacking the membership to get something across the line.

 

[fish eel]

Am I the only person with a copy of the constitution?

I dont know? Are you?

The same 3 year rule applies to voting at the agm.

I presume this is for the same reason as elections. To stop someone stacking the membership to get something across the line.

I dont have one, thats why I asked as I was told the 3 year rule doesnt apply - which would be odd for the reason you state.

Goleel also seemed to believe the 3 year rule doesnt apply

 

[parra pete]

Is Terry a member of the Leagues Club. If not, what has the result got to do with him? He should become a member before commenting. As it stands now..Terry has as much say on the LC elections as me, as much say as Bob Fulton, as much say as Peter Peters who are also a non members...and that is NONE, NIL, ZILCH...

Rhetoric without authority is as handy as tits on a boar pig...

 

[spiderdan]

i don't see what the problem with df is now really. 3p have the numbers to move control of the nrl side back to the fc and ensure the lc maintains its funding until the fc can generate its own revenue. surely df's position as lc boss is irrelevant to them and the sponsors they can get for the fc if they transfer control of the team.

am i missing something in this scenario?

 

[Stagger eel]

Is Terry a member of the Leagues Club. If not, what has the result got to do with him? He should become a member before commenting. As it stands now..Terry has as much say on the LC elections as me, as much say as Bob Fulton, as much say as Peter Peters who are also a non members...and that is NONE, NIL, ZILCH...

Rhetoric without authority is as handy as tits on a boar pig...

well maybe this will interest you...

Bart we had a 77% voting majority, that is called clear mandate for change. I told you guys that I would be stepping back after the elections and I am, but I will be coming on here after the AGM, to talk about issues that you have concerns on, and I will voice them to the management. I will not however be privy too, or talking about board matters.

Talk next week.
Sevens.

does that satisfy you, Pete?

 

[SimonTemplar]

Is Terry a member of the Leagues Club. If not, what has the result got to do with him? He should become a member before commenting. As it stands now..Terry has as much say on the LC elections as me, as much say as Bob Fulton, as much say as Peter Peters who are also a non members...and that is NONE, NIL, ZILCH...

Rhetoric without authority is as handy as tits on a boar pig...

Well said. If he's not a member, he cannot attend the meeting, let alone vote.

Reality is: the election operated under the constitution and there is no way the result can be changed now. Sure, if an extraordinary meeting is called to change the constitution, it will apply - to the next election. Even if the resolution 3P supposedly sent made it in time and was in order, it would only apply to the next election. That's how it works in public companies, why would this be different?

You cannot change history, you can only learn from it.

Accept the result, move on with the rest of the season.
`
`
`

 

[mickdo]

Well said. If he's not a member, he cannot attend the meeting, let alone vote.

I believe he has reapplied for membership. Don't know the status of that.

 

[mickdo]

Accept the result

Have you? :lol:

 

[Gronk]

I believe he has reapplied for membership. Don't know the status of that.

That whole membership story had less cred than a Greg Bird police statement.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

ensure the lc maintains its funding until the fc can generate its own revenue.

How will the FC generate its own revenue to the extent that it no longer requires LC funding?

Transferring assets? Will an equal amount of debt be transferred along with those assets in order to keep the LC's books fairly balanced?

 

[parra pete]

well maybe this will interest you...



does that satisfy you, Pete?

Just as an observer and not able to comment one way or another, but was the Leagues Club election ALL just about getting control of the Football Club - or was it about the whole operation of the Leagues Club?

Bet Terry is privy to what goes on at the Club, even if he denies he is !!!!! ;-)
But really, I don't care. I'm too far bush to worry about it.

I am getting plenty of enjoyment from watching the local boys down here play, and looking forward to our Fourth Pie in the Sky weekend when Simon Woolford, Bryan Fletcher Shane Millard and (maybe) Shaun Timmins turn out with the team on July 26, supplementing our 2009 signing Ben Roarty..
The match will attract the biggest sporting crowd ever assembled in Hay.
Come on down..The Pie in the Sky Rugby League Festival keeps getting bigger and bigger. Even bigger than our 2008 guest player Mark Tookey :lol:

 

[bartman]

But Bart, whether you agree or not with the proposed change, they havent turned around after the fact, they said they would do this before the election, sevens IIRC mentioned it several times in the old thread prior to the elections. Given they previously said it was their intention, how can you now say they 'turn around'?

Sorry if I put the emphasis on turned around... that's actually pretty irrelevent to me. I'm just saying it's a dumb move and shows a lack of understanding of constitutions and election rules, whether they said they were going to do it or not. Terry posts in that thread showed he for one didn't understand that they couldn't get all seven up in the election - they needed better advice imo. That's what I meant by "turning around", after not getting something they shouldn't have been aiming for anyway...

interesting you say that, amongst the euphoria of the result in level 3 the other night came the confusion of why Hilditch and Gerard have been elected ahead of Saad and Sasson despite them finishing ahead on the poll.

I'm sure I noticed 3 different conversations trying to explain it punters were noticebly confused.

Yeah, I don't doubt that punters weren't in the know about this, as neither side went out of their way to explain how things really worked in their campaign - even though candidates would all have presumably known about it, through the compulsory Directors training prior to nominations. Or maybe this Directors training is very ordinary, I don't know?

Just because punters are confused is no reason to chnage the rules imo, especially not in retrospect. It may be a reason for campaigners to be more honest with themselves and the voters in the future, however. Just an opinion...

 

[bartman]

Am I the only person with a copy of the constitution? The same 3 year rule applies to voting at the agm.

I presume this is for the same reason as elections. To stop someone stacking the membership to get something across the line.

You might be! Do you know how we'd get one?

I'd imagine candidates were issued with one in their Director training... which means there's no excuse for the folly that is going on now re changing the constitution at the AGM. And wouldn't the FC constitution also have to be changed to mirror any LC change? That's an extra cost for an EGM there anyway, unless they do the right thing and table motions for the AGMs of each body in the following 12 months, ready for the next elections due in the 12 months after that.

 

[bartman]

Well said. If he's not a member, he cannot attend the meeting, let alone vote.

Reality is: the election operated under the constitution and there is no way the result can be changed now. Sure, if an extraordinary meeting is called to change the constitution, it will apply - to the next election. Even if the resolution 3P supposedly sent made it in time and was in order, it would only apply to the next election. That's how it works in public companies, why would this be different?

You cannot change history, you can only learn from it.

Accept the result, move on with the rest of the season.
`
`
`

At least someone's talking sense in this thread. And I'm glad none of it is really taking sides either, just calling this situation for what it is.

I'd imagine most members want their elected Board (whether it matched their exact votes or not) to get on with the business of uniting ahead of the AGM and first meeting. The business of achieving the best thing for our club as a whole, not catering to two people who should have known exactly what lay in store in they polled 6th or 7th.

 

[KMP08]

You might be! Do you know how we'd get one?

I'd imagine candidates were issued with one in their Director training... which means there's no excuse for the folly that is going on now re changing the constitution at the AGM. And wouldn't the FC constitution also have to be changed to mirror any LC change? That's an extra cost for an EGM there anyway, unless they do the right thing and table motions for the AGMs of each body in the following 12 months, ready for the next elections due in the 12 months after that.

It's not difficult, you call the club and ask for one. I have a feeling there is a small admin fee to get a copy, mine is a few years old and I can't remember.

 

[bartman]

Cheers, I bought an FC one for $2 at the AGM. Was hoping to see them on sale during the LC voting, but I guess the AGM is the more likely bet.

I probably will call the club and arrange to get one, seeing as there's been so much uncertainty over what's in the thing :lol:.

 

[KMP08]

At least someone's talking sense in this thread. And I'm glad none of it is really taking sides either, just calling this situation for what it is.

I'd imagine most members want their elected Board (whether it matched their exact votes or not) to get on with the business of uniting ahead of the AGM and first meeting. The business of achieving the best thing for our club as a whole, not catering to two people who should have known exactly what lay in store in they polled 6th or 7th.

this is just my opinion but i'm guessing they didn't think saad and sassen would be the ones to miss out so they are now trying to get them on. with guys like maroun in the background for 3P and the big lebanese vote i'm sure these guys would have been confident of getting in. in fact, there was a rumour going around the club on the saturday of the vote that sassen was already sounding out the other nominees for votes for him to be president.

i reckon lyn wallace was a token female included on the ticket to counter jennifer foong and roy spagnolo was included because of his relationship with the footy team and these were the two they didn't expect to get on. i reckon if these two had missed out they wouldn't be trying to get them on like they are with the other two.

just my opinion but it does seem strange they are continually persuing the change to the constitution when it is obvious there is no way it can happen. 3P were talking up the business credentials of these guys prior to the election but if they continue i think it will damage their reputations if they can't understand basic legislation.

 

[spiderdan]

How will the FC generate its own revenue to the extent that it no longer requires LC funding?

Transferring assets? Will an equal amount of debt be transferred along with those assets in order to keep the LC's books fairly balanced?

sponsor $$$.

terry (and col back in january) said they had a glut of sponsors waiting to sign up provided denis wasn't there anymore. they sponsor football, not the leagues. i can't remember if df was pushed aside from (or was part of) the fc board but if the nrl club is under the control on the fc and not the lc, then denis isn't really controlling it.