Early AGM: Your Chance To Change The Foxes Trust

[Foxes Trust Reform]

Per the article below in @The Fosse Way, LCFC fans now have a democratic opportunity to change the Foxes Trust at the upcoming Early AGM on 13th January 2025.

 

We’ll be fielding at least three candidates from our Foxes Trust Reform campaign.

 

This is your chance to join, secure your vote and support the candidates that you believe can deliver the kind of Supporters Trust that will represent you as you would like. We’d also encourage anyone else passionate about transforming the Trust to step forward for further involvement.

 

Our DMs are open if you’d like to speak with us about our campaign and/or the AGM 

 

https://www.thefosseway.net/viewpoint/leicester-city-foxes-trust-early-agm-reform

[davieG]

Bump

[brucey]

Are you able to have any say in requesting where the AGM is to be held? It may be easier for more people to attend and vote if it is at the stadium rather than Seagrave. 

[ramboacdc]

1 hour ago, brucey said:

Are you able to have any say in requesting where the AGM is to be held? It may be easier for more people to attend and vote if it is at the stadium rather than Seagrave. 

The vote will be before the AGM I believe. Foxes Trust just sent an email out to members saying "Should there be more candidates than vacancies, a ballot of all members will be held from the 17 December 2024, details of which will be provided if and when they are required.

 

Results of any ballot will be announced at the Foxes Trust AGM on 13 January 2025."

 

I believe there will be a proxy vote system for people who can't attend in person. I will be one for certain. If you message @Foxes Trust Reform, they can add you to the Whatsapp community and they will keep you updated on everything. 

 

[brucey]

43 minutes ago, ramboacdc said:

The vote will be before the AGM I believe. Foxes Trust just sent an email out to members saying "Should there be more candidates than vacancies, a ballot of all members will be held from the 17 December 2024, details of which will be provided if and when they are required.

 

Results of any ballot will be announced at the Foxes Trust AGM on 13 January 2025."

 

I believe there will be a proxy vote system for people who can't attend in person. I will be one for certain. If you message @Foxes Trust Reform, they can add you to the Whatsapp community and they will keep you updated on everything. 

 

Not sure if the election ballot for current board vacancies will be virtually held beforehand, but several other Trust Reform motions to change the Trust internal rules will be voted on at the AGM itself. 

 

From what I recall when reading the Trust documents a while ago, there is a maximum of ?4 proxy votes per in person attendee. There will likely be several hundred members wanting to vote, so we would still need a good number of people to attend in person. 

 

Edited 13 November 2024 by brucey

[Foxes_Trust]

2 hours ago, brucey said:

Are you able to have any say in requesting where the AGM is to be held? It may be easier for more people to attend and vote if it is at the stadium rather than Seagrave. 

It is being held at the stadium 

[Heskey2011]

Bump

[foxinsocks]

1 hour ago, Foxes_Trust said:

It is being held at the stadium 

will itr be private (,members only) or will club staff be there?

[foxinsocks]

1 hour ago, brucey said:

Not sure if the election ballot for current board vacancies will be virtually held beforehand, but several other Trust Reform motions to change the Trust internal rules will be voted on at the AGM itself. 

 

From what I recall when reading the Trust documents a while ago, there is a maximum of ?4 proxy votes per in person attendee. There will likely be several hundred members wanting to vote, so we would still need a good number of people to attend in person. 

 

At some point I will be asking members who wish to vote on any agm business to let me know if thery cannot attend - so that I can match up proxies.

(The chair person can act or any number of proxies and so there is a chance that the chairmight be willing to vote the proxies - even if thery personally wish to vote differently... I will find out)

[Globalfox]

2 hours ago, foxinsocks said:

will itr be private (,members only) or will club staff be there?

Surely only Foxes Trust members can attend or else what’s the point. If staff or club employees want to attend surely they must become members.i would expect that all entering are validated as true members of good standing with the right to vote. The elections are supposed to be proctored by an independent appointed election official. Since this is likely to be contentious this time around this is crucial.

[foxinsocks]

13 hours ago, Globalfox said:

Surely only Foxes Trust members can attend or else what’s the point. If staff or club employees want to attend surely they must become members.i would expect that all entering are validated as true members of good standing with the right to vote. The elections are supposed to be proctored by an independent appointed election official. Since this is likely to be contentious this time around this is crucial.

last year the club staff sat in

[Globalfox]

On 14/11/2024 at 07:58, foxinsocks said:

last year the club staff sat in

Then that is unacceptable I for one will write to the Trust today citing voting intimidation and demand it does not occur at the AGM unless they are paid up members. The independent running elections needs to ensure free and fair. Nothing against the club or the individuals but no outside influences should be allowed unless they stump up and be part of the trust.

[davieG]

https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/working-leicester-city-fans-inside-9712948

 

'Working for all Leicester City fans' - Inside the Reform The Foxes Trust campaign lobbying for change

ByJosh HollandFootball Writer
17:00, 19 NOV 2024

The Foxes Trust is the official Leicester City Supporters' Trust with a clear aim of representing the 'best interests of Foxes Trust members and, by extension, those of the supporters of Leicester City Football Club'.

Younger fans may not be aware, but the Foxes Trust played a big role in helping the club avoid administration in 2002. Their shares were then bought by Milan Mandaric, who bought the club in 2007.

In basic terms, the Trust is in place to ensure City is not making any bad decisions that will affect the long-term health of the club or the fans. That hasn't been an issue in the last 15 years with the on-field successes, but it has changed as of late.

 

A number of decisions made by the club have not gone down well within the fanbase. Towards the end of last season, the club confirmed the £25 fee for a physical season ticket card before matchday tickets increased ahead of the return to the Premier League. Amid the dissatisfaction among some supporters, these changes prompted a rise of memberships purchased over the summer.

Plus, there was social media outcry over the decision to charge £10 per game to stream pre-season friendlies when previously they had been offered for free. This season, fan group Union FS has claimed they were denied access to the stadium to lay out flyers on World Mental Health Day for the Bournemouth game in October.

Not every supporter will agree or have the same view on these issues. But one thing that a large proportion of the fanbase will agree on is that Leicester used to be held up as an example for other clubs to follow in regards to the relationship between the club and its supporters.

In March 2024, a group of like-minded Foxes fans joined together to form 'The Foxes Trust Reform' campaign in the hope of creating a more effective Foxes Trust. Fast forward nearly a year and the group has successfully secured an early AGM at the Trust which could result in a potential election for new faces to be placed on the board.

The early AGM comes after months of lobbying and campaigning and follows a change in Chair of the Trust for the first time in over 20 years. Steve Moulds, a member for the last seven years, and Lynn Wyeth, founding member of the Trust over 20 years ago, have been appointed by the existing board, taking over from Ian Bason - who is the Trust's representative on the Fan Advisory Board.

Recently, the club held the first meeting of the FAB to discuss important issues for supporters. The matchday experience at the King Power Stadium, safe standing and supporter behaviour were all discussed.

On the FAB, the Trust said: "The Trust is backing the FAB, and the Fan Engagement Framework generally, but the entire framework needs to deliver meaningful consultation and results, e.g on safe standing.

"The Trust would like to see more prominence given to the FAB minutes in future, as they were somewhat hidden on the LCFC website with no fanfare, and it would also like a timelier publication of the minutes."

The Foxes Trust Reform campaign are putting at least three people forward for board positions at the Foxes Trust. As well as standing to accelerate the progress made at the Trust, the campaign intends to submit a resolution to change the rules of the Trust to ensure that, in future, board members can be removed from their positions when the confidence in their ability has vanished.

To be effective in representing Leicester City fans and holding the club to account, the Trust has to be vocal to fans in its communication and independent of the club to ensure an appropriate space is in place to react when needed.

Speaking to LeicestershireLive about the objective and vision for the Trust, one member of the reform campaign said: "It's really important that we have a Supporters' Trust that is vocal and independent of the club so that it is able to push the club, challenge the club and have the mindset of working for all Leicester City fans.

"We've been on a recruitment campaign over the past six months and the membership number has almost doubled from 340 to over 650, nearly 700 now.

"The main thing [that we want to do] is to improve the effectiveness of the relationship with the club. What needs to be done for that to happen is the club needs to see the Trust as someone they cannot ignore.

"The Trust needs to modernise and digitise it to make it a membership that supporters want to be part of. Let's say there are 10,000+ members, we can say to the club that these fans are members, here's what they think about certain issues."

To prepare for potential involvement at board level, members of the group have been speaking with other Trusts to get inspiration for what the Foxes Trust could be doing as well as attending Football Supporters Association training.

One interesting initiative they highlight as an example of how Trusts can work with their community comes from Blackpool Supporters' Trust: "They've got some research that shows the club that you support at the age of seven is the club that you're most likely to support for the rest of your life," the member explained.

"So, given that they're in the North-West surrounded by the Manchester and Liverpool clubs, they've run an initiative where they bought shirts at a cost price and on their seventh birthday, every kid in Blackpool receives one of their shirts."

The Foxes Trust Reform campaign are encouraging those who would like to see a more effective Foxes Trust to take the opportunity presented by the AGM. The Foxes Trust have confirmed that the deadline to return nomination forms is Monday December 2 at 5pm.

[sylofox]

Your VC should resign today and be replaced. Talking for the wider fanbase he knows nothing about.

 

No one gives a fvck Cooper is ex florist. But we do care he's not upto the job.

 

No one cared Wes Morgan was a tree. No one cared MoN was a tree.

 

If you're going to stand up and talk about the wider fanbase feelings at least have the decency to talk to some and get it fvcking right.

 

He should be made by the trust to apologise for his ridiculous comment.

 

We don't need fvckwits like him representing our fanbase.

 

Oh you can also add Gary Mills to the former tree list.

Edited 25 November 2024 by sylofox

[Foxes Trust Reform]

You may have seen recently that the Foxes Trust welcomed new board members who will commence their roles following the AGM on Monday 13th January - see the announcement here. This is positive news for the Foxes Trust Reform campaign but there remains an important vote still to come...

 

We have tabled a resolution to amend the rules of the Trust so that board members can be removed from their position should members of the Trust vote to do so (currently board members can only be removed at the end of their three-year term, via resignation or as part of a disciplinary process if they have broken the rules of the Trust).  As a democratic organisation, we believe it is important for members to have the ability to remove those on the board that they no longer have confidence in, in order to promote accountability and keep standards high.

 

For example, were a board member to be hampering progress on a fan-led issue (e.g. safe standing) then members would be able to remove them rather than wait for their term to end (which could be up to three years). Put simply, we believe board members of the Trust should be accountable to the wider members.

 

Sadly, the existing Trust board have recommended that members reject our proposal.

 

In order for the rules to be changed, at least two-thirds of those voting would need to vote in favour of the change. The Trust have indicated that there will be a postal or online vote for members following the AGM so please be ready to vote 'Yes' to the motion if you believe this to be a sensible change!

Edited 1 January by Foxes Trust Reform

[Globalfox]

42 minutes ago, Foxes Trust Reform said:

You may have seen recently that the Foxes Trust welcomed new board members who will commence their roles following the AGM on Monday 13th January - see the announcement here. This is positive news for the Foxes Trust Reform campaign but there remains an important vote still to come...

 

We have tabled a resolution to amend the rules of the Trust so that board members can be removed from their position should members of the Trust vote to do so (currently board members can only be removed at the end of their three-year term, via resignation or as part of a disciplinary process if they have broken the rules of the Trust).  As a democratic organisation, we believe it is important for members to have the ability to remove those on the board that they no longer have confidence in, in order to promote accountability and keep standards high.

 

For example, were a board member to be hampering progress on a fan-led issue (e.g. safe standing) then members would be able to remove them rather than wait for their term to end (which could be up to three years). Put simply, we believe board members of the Trust should be accountable to the wider members.

 

Sadly, the existing Trust board have recommended that members reject our proposal.

 

In order for the rules to be changed, at least two-thirds of those voting would need to vote in favour of the change. The Trust have indicated that there will be a postal or online vote for members rather than a vote at the AGM so please be ready to vote 'Yes' to the motion if you believe this to be a sensible change!

Can you share where they have indicated a postal or digital vote on the motion. The correspondence I have makes no mention of this are some form of games being played here? The motion makes sense to me and I will be voting for it in person unless something is being I acted to deny votes.

[RYM]

48 minutes ago, Foxes Trust Reform said:

You may have seen recently that the Foxes Trust welcomed new board members who will commence their roles following the AGM on Monday 13th January - see the announcement here. This is positive news for the Foxes Trust Reform campaign but there remains an important vote still to come...

 

We have tabled a resolution to amend the rules of the Trust so that board members can be removed from their position should members of the Trust vote to do so (currently board members can only be removed at the end of their three-year term, via resignation or as part of a disciplinary process if they have broken the rules of the Trust).  As a democratic organisation, we believe it is important for members to have the ability to remove those on the board that they no longer have confidence in, in order to promote accountability and keep standards high.

 

For example, were a board member to be hampering progress on a fan-led issue (e.g. safe standing) then members would be able to remove them rather than wait for their term to end (which could be up to three years). Put simply, we believe board members of the Trust should be accountable to the wider members.

 

Sadly, the existing Trust board have recommended that members reject our proposal.

 

In order for the rules to be changed, at least two-thirds of those voting would need to vote in favour of the change. The Trust have indicated that there will be a postal or online vote for members rather than a vote at the AGM so please be ready to vote 'Yes' to the motion if you believe this to be a sensible change!

If I’ve missed it then sorry but what reasons were given for rejecting your proposal?

 

Apart from self-preservation, sticking together, scared of actually doing something, worried about making Anthony accountable, being utterly useless etc

[Foxes Trust Reform]

22 minutes ago, RYM said:

If I’ve missed it then sorry but what reasons were given for rejecting your proposal?

 

Apart from self-preservation, sticking together, scared of actually doing something, worried about making Anthony accountable, being utterly useless etc

This is what was provided in the notice of the AGM:

 

There is already adequate provision in the existing Society Rules for the removal of Directors from the Board. There are also adequate disciplinary policies to determine if a Director is in breach of the ‘Board Membership and Conduct Policy’. The Board considers that such a policy opens up the opportunity for a disgruntled member to take a personal grievance to the level of a Special General Meeting in order to remove a Director they disapprove of, who may not be in breach of any Society Rules or Policies. All Directors are volunteers and are elected (and/or ratified) by the membership for a three-year term, after which they must retire from office and then decide to opt to re-stand. The Board determines that such short terms of office do not require further amendment to the Society Rules. Advice received from the Football Supporters’ Association (FSA), indicates that such a clause was not included in the blanket standard Rules, approved by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) following the Co-operative and Community Benefit Societies Act 2014 and that Rule 63 in the Dons Trust Society Rules represents an outlier that presents corporate governance difficulties. The Board understands that are no plans or reasoning for the FSA to include such a clause in updates currently being drafted for FCA approval.

 

Of course, this is just the recommendation given by the existing board on this resolution to potentially allow for the removal of members of the existing board should the membership see fit to do so...

[Foxes Trust Reform]

37 minutes ago, Globalfox said:

Can you share where they have indicated a postal or digital vote on the motion. The correspondence I have makes no mention of this are some form of games being played here? The motion makes sense to me and I will be voting for it in person unless something is being I acted to deny votes.

Apologies, our original post should have reflected that we're not 100% certain that there won't be a vote at the AGM and have asked the Trust for clarification.

 

In the notice for the AGM, it says as follows:

 

The Board will notify members that, under Rule 56, all of the membership should be balloted on this Motion and its Resolution, and a postal / online vote will be organised post the AGM and therefore the authority of the meeting will extend to the conclusion of that ballot.

 

This may mean that there is a vote at the AGM in-person and then a postal/online vote that follows on from the AGM. We've asked the Trust to clarify so that all members are completely clear on when and how (online/postal/in-person) they need to vote. We'll also provide more details on the Proxy process and potential role of the Chair in due course as well.

Edited 1 January by Foxes Trust Reform

[RYM]

Thanks for the reply @Foxes Trust Reform

 

Strange one I guess. If they’re that confident in what they’re doing there shouldn’t be any worry about being booted off. Weird you could make three years of mistakes, or literally do nothing for three years and that be ok. Makes sense I guess with the lack of progress and amount of fence sitting on display.
 

Keep your campfire burning 🦊

[Freeman's Wharfer]

I know there have been some people that didn’t receive the AGM notice despite being members (for whatever reason).

 

Just to mention, if you want to join online you need to email [email protected] before 10th January.

 

Hopefully @Foxes_Trust might also be able to provide some clarity here for people on the resolution and proxy voting process in case people have missed.

 

 

[Foxes Trust Reform]

3 minutes ago, RYM said:

Thanks for the reply @Foxes Trust Reform

 

Strange one I guess. If they’re that confident in what they’re doing there shouldn’t be any worry about being booted off. Weird you could make three years of mistakes, or literally do nothing for three years and that be ok. Makes sense I guess with the lack of progress and amount of fence sitting on display.
 

Keep your campfire burning 🦊

As a campaign group, this is our view and why we believe the rule change makes sense and were disappointed by the recommendation to vote against it.

[foxinsocks]

To be clear.... the board are saying that board members can only be removed if they breach the code of conduct... but this does not cover the situation where a board member has lost the confidence of members.

Further, other trusts have such a rule to remove a board member... in fact the wording of the resolution is taken from such an "FSA approved" example. 

 

It was when we submitted the previous request to ask the trust to remove some board members that the FSA clarified that this could not be carried out as our trust had no rule enabling the  removal of directors... unlike other trusts. Hence the need to add a right to enable members to terminate board appointments.

 

Our reforms seek to boost membership so that the club can not ignore the trust.  Yet to attract members they have to believe that the board is accountable to the membership... so that we move away from the more cynical views of the past.  This is about democracy.

 

Edited 2 January by foxinsocks

[RYM]

3 hours ago, foxinsocks said:

To be clear.... the board are saying that board members can only be removed if they breach the code of conduct... but this does not cover the situation where a board member has lost the confidence of members.

Further, other trusts have such a rule to remove a board member... in fact the wording of the resolution is taken from such an "FSA approved" example. 

 

It was when we submitted the previous request to ask the trust to remove some board members that the FSA clarified that this could not be carried out as our trust had no rule enabling the  removal of directors... unlike other trusts. Hence the need to add a right to enable members to terminate board appointments.

 

Our reforms seek to boost membership so that the club can not ignore the trust.  Yet to attract members they have to believe that the board is accountable to the membership... so that we move away from the more cynical views of the past.  This is about democracy.

 

How many of the board are against this new proposal.

 

This has all the makings of a Scooby Doo “we would’ve gotten away with it if it wasn’t for you pesky kids”…

Edited 2 January by RYM

[Foxes_Trust]

3 hours ago, RYM said:

How many of the board are against this new proposal.

 

This has all the makings of a Scooby Doo “we would’ve gotten away with it if it wasn’t for you pesky kids”…

The entire board is against the proposal, it is not in line with the FSA model rules (originally drawn up by Supporters Direct, before the FSF & SD merger)