More Winter Clubs in Surrey ??

[LauraH]

Im not on, nor do I monitor facebook so I havent seen that.

My position on PUFC is that they wanted to expand fast. They wanted to make an impact on the first season of play. In order to do that, they had to get into bed so to speak, with the Summer club at the heart of the CCB issues last year. BCT is not stupid. They put just enough players into PUFC so that they could win a vote if they lost the fight for CCB. Unfortunately they are in a position to take over the club via a vote. Maybe morally wrong, but most likely within the rules and will probably end up in BCT's favor. Majority rules.

Every year there are take over attempts. Club AGM's, District AGM's, you name it. I have gone and I have seen it all.

Practically everyone in Newton operates the same way. For themselves. If they dont get what they want to go on offence. From the coaches all the way up to the people in charge of the clubs.

If a club denies a coaches request, and if someone from another club can offer the coach what he wants, then he goes. Valid or not, If a group of people or parents want to remove a coach they band together and remove the coach. If a group of coaches dont get along with club executive, they can get together and influence the vote at the next AGM.

The district needs to set rules on the amount of players from the previous season that can move to a new fall club. This would help eliminate the constant changes.

There also needs to be rules in place to block the voting of new members on the issue of club executives until maybe year 2 or 3 in a club.

I'm curious how they're able to arrange the voting takeovers. What's the voting structure of these clubs?

 

[easoccer]

A member puts forward a motion. They ask who is for and who is opposed. They count those who raise their hands.

 

[LauraH]

A member puts forward a motion. They ask who is for and who is opposed. They count those who raise their hands.

So everyone that attends the AGM gets to vote?

 

[WTF]

I have heard that there are now two board of directors at PUFC. Apparently at the disputed SGM a new board of directors was elected. Even the districts contrary to last year keeping it very quiet

What I read into this is the importance of the Club Charter. Year 1 is about administrative aspects, which is an excellent start. But I believe year 2 or 3 has to put in that clubs require a certified Technical director. There has been talk for a while about there actually needing to be a Technical Director course along the lines of CSA "A". What I hope the charter says is that every club who has a TD has to prove that TD has the right qualifications. If a club has a TD without the qualifications hopefully this means they can't participate in certain leagues. And further clubs that don't have a TD at all can't participate in certain leagues (lower level than clubs that do). If a TD is fired, or quits, then of course you give the club time to replace that TD (no clue what's an appropriate amount of time - but there are plenty of people who want to work in BC!).

But charters are only as good as their enforcement.

TKBC , with respect you seem to be a genuine soccer with alot of knowledge but you simply don,t understand the Newton/Surrey soccer scene and especially the infighting/politics etc. Your posts on the Newton soccer season stops or takes the topic off course .

 

[easoccer]

So everyone that attends the AGM gets to vote?

Members. Parents of players. Coaches.

 

[TKBC]

I'm curious how they're able to arrange the voting takeovers. What's the voting structure of these clubs?

Members can vote. To be a member you have to be a parent of a child registered to the club. Coaches and other volunteers can vote too. But you'd have to check the clubs constitution to know for sure.

 

[TKBC]

TKBC , with respect you seem to be a genuine soccer with alot of knowledge but you simply don,t understand the Newton/Surrey soccer scene and especially the infighting/politics etc. Your posts on the Newton soccer season stops or takes the topic off course .

You put two quotes there. One of which was mine and one was someone else's. But the quote you referenced of mine had nothing to do with the other one you referenced. People were basically bashing Bassi (re: his ability/age). I don't know Bassi in anyway, so my post is regarding TD's in general. Basically, I am trying to set an example by re-directing the topic away from an individual but rather a discussion of the job he held. But yes, strictly speaking, not relevant to Surrey/Newton soccer, you are right.

 

[TKBC]

So everyone that attends the AGM gets to vote?

I am aware of at least 1 club that requires any motions that people intend to be put forward be emailed to the incumbent board 30 days before the Board meeting. My guess is they put that rule in their constitution, but that's a guess. If it's not in the constitution they couldn't enforce such a rule, is my guess. (I am a president of an NFP - non-soccer - so it's an educated guess on my part).

The constitution defines who a member is. Anyone who is a member that attends an AGM can vote.

 

[4_the_kids]

The issue regarding supposed takeover attempts is there is nothing wrong with doing so, rallying support , exercising voting right , holding people accountable is about as democratic as it gets. Imagine if boards were hand picked and didn't allow me .Unfortunately the intent is all about control / power as the Newton community is still largely untapped, its growth potential is significant. I can only hope that wallets are not being padded somehow.... as we all know power = greed = money ....

@ easoccer you post a few back summarized Newton well. I am sure we have crossed paths, both at the same clubs, both attended the same meetings...
@ TKBC you are correct in that Newton highlights the needs for a Charter. for the record Ontario Soccer Association is offering a trial TD course and C cert course if these go well they will be mandated by CSA...As BCSPL requires head coaches to hold a B National license it would only make since that would be the min criteria for a TD, however being a certified high level coach doesn't mean one knows how to administer or develop technical programming, which is I believe what the TD course is about.

Back to Newton - until USSL / USSA is dissolved the winter clubs will struggle to implement any significant change or influence change in the culture of the Newton community.

 

[LauraH]

Members can vote. To be a member you have to be a parent of a child registered to the club. Coaches and other volunteers can vote too. But you'd have to check the clubs constitution to know for sure.

In my club, the voting members are 2 per team, assigned by the coach of that team (if the coach/assistant/manager wants to vote, they can keep them for themselves). That's 2 per team total. Most parents don't ever get the chance to vote. And of course board members and life members. So this type of "takeover" would be extrememly difficult because the board always has the numbers and list of voters. The list is established by Jan 31. And yes, any resolution has to be submitted by April 1, in writing.

 

[easoccer]

You put two quotes there. One of which was mine and one was someone else's. But the quote you referenced of mine had nothing to do with the other one you referenced. People were basically bashing Bassi (re: his ability/age). I don't know Bassi in anyway, so my post is regarding TD's in general. Basically, I am trying to set an example by re-directing the topic away from an individual but rather a discussion of the job he held. But yes, strictly speaking, not relevant to Surrey/Newton soccer, you are right.

As a person its possible he is fantastic. As a TD of huge club like CCB he was definately not ready. And he replaced someone who had a lot of respect. He was in and out in a matter of a month or two. He could have been a victim of circumstance. We'll never know.

There was no intent to bash anyone. And for the record this is not the first time and individual has been spoken of. Named directly or via position.

 

[easoccer]

In my club, the voting members are 2 per team, assigned by the coach of that team (if the coach/assistant/manager wants to vote, they can keep them for themselves). That's 2 per team total. Most parents don't ever get the chance to vote. And of course board members and life members. So this type of "takeover" would be extrememly difficult because the board always has the numbers and list of voters. The list is established by Jan 31. And yes, any resolution has to be submitted by April 1, in writing.

I think this system has as much chance as any for takeover. If this was a policy in Newton I think it would be much easier than the current.

One thing it may do is keep the politics away from the parents.

 

[4_the_kids]

I think this system has as much chance as any for takeover. If this was a policy in Newton I think it would be much easier than the current.

One thing it may do is keep the politics away from the parents.

quick research GAC and Coastal allow one vote per parent or coach, CCB one vote per registered player or non paid coach, SUSC one vote per player over age of 16 and one vote per card official of each team.

 

[CanadianSpur]

In my club, the voting members are 2 per team, assigned by the coach of that team (if the coach/assistant/manager wants to vote, they can keep them for themselves). That's 2 per team total. Most parents don't ever get the chance to vote. And of course board members and life members. So this type of "takeover" would be extrememly difficult because the board always has the numbers and list of voters. The list is established by Jan 31. And yes, any resolution has to be submitted by April 1, in writing.

That would seem to be in contravention of the Society Act. I believe each member is entitled to a vote and while a Society can have a class of non-voting members, the number non-voting members cannot be greater than the number of voting members.

May I ask what club this is?

 

[TKBC]

In my club, the voting members are 2 per team, assigned by the coach of that team (if the coach/assistant/manager wants to vote, they can keep them for themselves). That's 2 per team total. Most parents don't ever get the chance to vote. And of course board members and life members. So this type of "takeover" would be extrememly difficult because the board always has the numbers and list of voters. The list is established by Jan 31. And yes, any resolution has to be submitted by April 1, in writing.

That's very interesting. I understand the reasoning. But, I doubt it would hold up if challenged in court. I've never heard of someone paying dues to an NFP and not being allowed to vote as a member. The board may want to contact the Society Act of BC. (note, I am the President of an NFP - non-soccer).

Having resolutions, or proposed new board members identified in advance of the AGM definitely makes sense though.

 

[TKBC]

quick research GAC and Coastal allow one vote per parent or coach, CCB one vote per registered player or non paid coach, SUSC one vote per player over age of 16 and one vote per card official of each team.

The parents don't get a vote @ SUSC?

The other rules make sense. Every club will have a variation of the same rule, and so these slight differences make sense. Typically any player over a certain age can vote as well yes - each club may adjust that age to whatever they deem is appropriate.

 

[TKBC]

That would seem to be in contravention of the Society Act. I believe each member is entitled to a vote and while a Society can have a class of non-voting members, the number non-voting members cannot be greater than the number of voting members.

May I ask what club this is?

I agree. If I was a parent at that club and not allowed to vote you bet I'd be leaving that club. If for no other reason that it appears the board doesn't understand the Society Act of BC (please note - significant changes are coming for the Society Act. I hope all of our local clubs are aware!)

 

[SoccerMom]

AGM's are held

That's very interesting. I understand the reasoning. But, I doubt it would hold up if challenged in court. I've never heard of someone paying dues to an NFP and not being allowed to vote as a member. The board may want to contact the Society Act of BC. (note, I am the President of an NFP - non-soccer).

Having resolutions, or proposed new board members identified in advance of the AGM definitely makes sense though.

At CCB's last year AGM they did not allow current members a vote and BC Soccer saw nothing wrong with this.
Only parents who were registered for the following year were allowed to vote. Which IMHO is wrong at so many levels and against the Society Act.

I believe BC Tigers/CCB members were not able to vote. Is this the same group of people trying to take over PUFC?

 

[LauraH]

That would seem to be in contravention of the Society Act. I believe each member is entitled to a vote and while a Society can have a class of non-voting members, the number non-voting members cannot be greater than the number of voting members.

May I ask what club this is?

This is Richmond. It's in their constitution.

 

[LauraH]

This is Richmond. It's in their constitution.

Sorry, I should clarify. Richmond FC, the boys club.