Constitutional reform meeting- September 10


A few months ago, I made an impassioned plea for everyone to get behind the constitutional reform meeting that had just been arranged. However, in the weeks or so leading up to the meeting I pretty much lost heart. There was little communication with the club to encourage a mass roll-up and it was pretty obvious we were going to go through ground-hog days and that the Spagnolo/Garrard alliance would block the reforms. I went to vote, as did many of you - but again, getting 75 percent of the vote proved too high a bar.

Today, the club has announced the next attempt at getting the reforms through, and I finally have a bit of confidence that it's being done correctly and that we will actually move forward, in what to date has been an incredibly frustrating process.

When I first met with Max way back at the start of the process to discuss the reforms, I made one key suggestion. Break the reforms into two - have one vote to pass the reforms that no one has objected to, but which are nevertheless important. And then leave the reforms that have been the subject to debate in another vote. That way things like triennial elections, postal/online voting and changing the objects of the club and critically mandating the funding of the Parramatta Eels via the club could get through. 

At the next vote, that's finally what will happen. Max will attempt in the first instance to pass the reforms in their entirety, but if that does not succeed the reforms that have not been questioned, through multiple rounds of membership consultation will go ahead. That will include postal voting so the broader membership will finally get to have their vote and say, preventing minorities from blocking reforms out of their own self-interest. 

I've also had conversations with people within the Eels, including the chairman, that the football club will finally publicly get behind the reforms and that there will be a proper effort to increase the attendance at the meeting.

Firstly, thank you to all of you who have made the effort to get to these midweek votes. I know speaking to a bunch of people at these events, that frustration is incredibly high. However, can I ask for your support one last time. This SHOULD be the last time you are ever forced to attend in person to have your say, if the second set of votes go through.

Please click here to view the entire email from Max Donnelly

You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!

Join 1Eyed Eel

Email me when people reply –


  • I will trek down from the coast again to vote. It is imperative that we rid our fine club from the small minded politics of the factions and get some professional people administering our great club.

    I assume it will be like last time where people can turn up and vote without staying for the meeting.

    • Champion John!

      • In the future Phil, what will I have do be a voter by mail/email etc.

        I haven't bothered being a member qld based but by the sound of it I should get ready?

        Is the 3 year qualifying going to be applicable in the new set up?

        • Yes, there is still the 3 year qualifying rule but that now essentially only equates to one election loop with the new triennials. You will need to register in person though, Pops, so you can combine a trip down for a game with getting membership. :-)

  • Phil if the reforms are voted in should Max Donnely be in charge of selecting the new board or should members  be the ones who vote for the new board ? Surely if the reforms are passed and all those applying for the board have  passed the criteria that  Max Donnelly has set out member should be the ones to choose site on the board,  no one deserves a free ride onto to the board don't you agree ? 

    • Fong I went to the last meeting and my take out of it was that the biggest objection is the nominations committee vetting applicants.

      Furthermore if they had accepted the new constitution from the beginning we would likely have a fully member elected board by now and Max would have been long gone.

      • John eel i have said it many times,  you jace those who don't want a criteria in place because they know they would not meet it and you have those who even if the reforms are passed they don't want members to vote because they know they would never get voted in and their best chance if Max Donnelly selects the board . 

    • I actually strongly agree. Members should be the ones selecting the board. I wish people would stop lookin out for their own interests and focus their efforts on what's good for the club. 

      • History has shown members are really good at picking the Board

        • But if the criteria is in place then aren't we going to have people with the right credentials  applying? So what is the problem with members voting for people who have passed the criteria?  Don't tell me that we are still going you have dopes applying for the board even with the reforms!!!

This reply was deleted.

More stuff to read