Tag: Alliance Council

Categories
Meetings

Meeting Minutes: April 2010

ALLIANCE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES:
April 2010

VOTING (One vote per seat) – Council seems to be in support of the ‘one seat, one vote’ idea.  Drew Carey’s suggestions of having a name associated with every seat and vote seemed to be the most favored idea… although, there was still some concern for giving too much control to a corporation or ticket broker.  Ideas varied from having an exception for large ticketholders by giving a percentage vote per seats, or max number of votes (4?) per acct, to using an ‘opt in’ type email address idea.-          “I’m in support of adding a 4 vote limit per account.  I don’t like the idea of someone being able to be overrepresented.”

–          “It seemed to me that the sub-account system that Drew Carey crafted is ideal. It allows greater email access by the club…   it limits the likelihood that brokers and corporate interests flood the Council”

–          “I’m partial towards an opt-in style voting system. If account holders with multiple tickets register a name and e-mail address, and that person confirms this registration (via e-mail I assume), then they receive an additional vote. This can be done as many times as the person has tickets. If the account holder does not have more than 1 ticket, or does not register an additional name to the account, than no additional votes are awarded.”

–          “For large corporations who buy 400 season tickets, is it possible to give them a percentage of account holders based on the number of tickets they buy?  For every 25 season tickets they buy, they get 1 account/vote.  This would be a guideline for big corporations….  For smaller account members ( households who buy 3 or 4) we ask them while they are purchasing season tickets if they intend to share their season tickets or if they would like just one person as the official account holder.  If they … provide the others full names, e-mails, and mailing addresses before the transaction even goes through…  Those who want to have a say will take the time to have more than 1 account/vote.”

–          “One seat, one vote, with a provision that an account holder needs to be a certain age or older- say 14 to 16ish?    Corporate accounts should be prohibited from voting at all.  The Supreme Court might have said that corporations are people and have total free speech and can spend whatever they want, but the Sounders don’t have to…   Truly dedicated soccer fans who are at Microsoft can (and almost certainly do) buy their own season tickets anyway.  They therefore get their vote from there.  I would throw in a provision that if there’s a ‘corporate’ account that was purchased by a group of folks, and they want to convert it to a personal account, that should happen..”

–          “I like giving a name to every seat to enable the change to one seat, one vote.  If a name/email is supplied, more people will be able to participate in ‘Democracy in Sports’ while also becoming more informed.   No need to limit voting age as parents paid for the seat and should still receive the vote.  As well, parents can get their kids involved in the process, if they are interested… wouldn’t want to take Jr. Capo or other young highly involved supporters vote away.  FO really can’t judge who should vote.  Everyone should have the opportunity.”

–          “I think that Drew’s idea from our last meeting would work, but I’m also a proponent for changing to a one vote per ticket system. The issue of large corporations potentially manipulating the councils decisions due to the fact that they would have a vote majority if we went to the ‘one vote per ticket’ system is silly. Yes they would have more votes than any other group of people but that wouldn’t matter because the council would be much larger so their ‘advantage’ would average out. Plus, let’s not kid ourselves, the council has power to make decisions but only the decisions that the FO allows us make.”

AWAY FANS – Council seems overwhelming concerned with keeping seats available for out of town teams, so that there will be seats available to us when we travel.  This year isn’t as big of a concern as next year, when Portland and Vancouver join the league.  Talks with Portland and Vancouver should begin now.

–          “I strongly support accommodating a large number of away fans, so we are treated accordingly.”

–          “I also strongly encourage as many away fans to be allowed in as practical. The LEAGUE needs it. Most of the stadiums are too small for the sport to ever succeed.” –          “This year isn’t an issue for this.  Nobody is going to bring more than 200 fans to our stadium.  What I would like to see (league-wide, actually) is …that every stadium has to set aside at least 250 seats (if they want to do more that’s allowed) and leave them available for sale until 14 days prior to the game, at which point the unsold tickets can be released to the home fans if the home club so chooses. I think the Sounders can lead the way by doing this.  If we’re so sure we’re going to sell every seat for the entire season anyway, then having a couple hundred come onto the market with two weeks to sell them won’t be an issue.”

–          “I would like to get the research/statistics of the number of tickets sold for each team’s visiting fans that came to Qwest per game and number of tickets Sounders fans bought or were put aside for us at away games.  We can alter the number of seats per game we give to visiting teams based on these facts and their factors such as visiting fans’ traveling costs, distance, the rivalry between the 2 teams, and most importantly their fan base… I think it can be predicted easier with the statistics in front of us and help is come to an agreement based on these facts.”

–          “I say the more the merrier. It shouldn’t matter if they can’t reciprocate the number of tickets we provide to them. Some of them can’t even physically accommodate large numbers of people in the stadiums. All that matters is the level of support WE generate. I can tell you from experience, when there is more away support at one of our home games our intensity level rises to the occasion. It’s a pride thing. Just stick em’ all in the 300 level.”

GOLDEN SCARF – The new idea hasn’t been received well.  Even though many agreed to help with the nominations, Council feels the club’s idea wasn’t executed properly.  It has actually become a joke, changing the tradition into something completely different.

–          “I vote to strongly remove membership council from handling the Golden Scarf debacle and nomination.  Too much work and the FO found a way to push off a bunch of crap work, and label it democracy in sports.”

–          “I haven’t heard anyone say much of anything nice about the Golden Scarf this year.  I don’t get why the club is trying to pretend it’s not like the raising of the 12th Man Flag that the Seahawks do when it looks like it was modeled after exactly that.   Not to take anything away from any of the nominees, but the club’s process for the whole thing is a load of crap and frankly I’m not taking part in it.  Had we voted on it and had control over the process instead of it being decided and sloughed off onto us, that would be different.”

–          “I noticed on the Sounders Facebook wall there were long discussions/comments about the Golden Scarf and most said they felt like it was kind of a joke.”

FRIENDLIES – There was strong support that no politically tainted clubs should be considered for our ‘Friendly’ matches.

–          “I would also like to state that the FO should stay away from bringing politically tainted teams to Seattle for friendlys.” –          “I object to clubs that have used bigotry to generate profits from coming to Seattle and play in “friendlies.” The team claims that community is a core value, and for that to be true than the community’s values should be respected. There should quite simply be some standard to be met by teams visiting the community.”

OTHER ISSUES MENTIONED – Several other issues were mentioned, although not enough comments to add as a subject for themselves. –          Horns – “We were once promised that we would hear back on the horns, and whether our words last year had an effect on them being sold/not sold. It would be great to see the results of that.”

–          Alliance Correspondences– “We’re too big for email.  IMO, we should set up our own bulletin board forum.  When it comes to online communication, emails to groups works up to a certain number of people, and beyond that it doesn’t work.  We’re past that number and will likely have a few more members join us this year.
If we want to do it then I can have it up and running within a few or several days.  We can even give Bart and the owners access (read-only if we so choose) to the BBS/forum so they can see what is going on.  Plus we can do polls and votes that way if we want.” –          Beer –          No Ads/band during run of play.  Ads too loud at halftime. –          Cameras blocking some season ticketholders views.

–           Fans wonder why there’s not an extended time clock or if reg. clock can continue to run.

–       Fans wonder why Sounders victory lap starts at midfield.  Some sections feeling excluded (Sections 110-114).

Categories
Meetings

Meeting Minutes: August 2009

ALLIANCE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES:
8/27/09  Conference Call

MLS Supporters Summit and Cup Final
Planning will begin next week between the Sounders Supporters Groups, MLS and Sounders FC in preparation for the Nov. 22nd Cup Final weekend festivities and events. Stay tuned for more details from the Supporters Groups and Alliance Council!

Sounders FC has been in talks with the MLS to find ways to ensure and encourage that Sounders fans show up for the Cup Final and host an enthusiastic, full stadium, to represent Seattle well across the league and finish out our inaugural season strong! It will be Fall in Seattle, so the weather may not be great…but we still need to drag ourselves out of bed and show why Seattle is the best home for soccer in the nation.

We were asked to share any ideas we might have on encouraging local attendance. There is talk of trying to provide a musical act at pre-game or half-time (The Council felt it would take a fairly well-know name to create a real draw). Other ideas discussed were to: encourage people to donate their ticket to a person who hasn’t had the chance to enjoy a game yet, send out a Sounders players to the sections to watch the game with fans, or provide a pre-game festival in the North Lot similar to the Mexico/China match.

Season Ticket Deposits and Renewals
There have already been 6,000 deposits of $50 each put down by those wishing to get season tickets next year. If projected renewals are high, the front office will again be considering the pros and cons of opening up additional seating capacity at Qwest.

There was a great deal of feedback heard by the Front Office regarding the standing or sitting issue early in the season, but they have heard less concern as the season progressed, and renewal preferences may better inform the situation. In general, it appears that the charter-level 100 seats prefer to stand, and club-level 200 seats prefer to sit, with the majority of those preferring to stand concentrated behind the goal ends (with the Supporter Groups), and sitters concentrated near mid-field. If you are an Alliance Member and have a specific seating request for next year, please contact your ticket rep and let them know now, so they can note it on your account, and can work to accommodate your needs. Renewal calls from ticket reps will be beginning very soon.

2010 Sounders Schedule
The good news is, the groundskeepers at Qwest have been able to turn over the field from soccer lines to football lines quickly, and will only get better with time. But, Qwest has an agreement with the city that only allows a certain number of games to be played at the same time as the Mariners. The Alliance Council felt that they were hearing a preference for night games from the fans for next season and passed that along, though again, scheduling for the Mariners and Seahawks will come into play.

While we definitely were given a treat this year with two exhibition games and the Cup Finals, there will be exhibition games included in our season ticket packages next season. After very successful Barcelona and Chelsea matches (with Chelsea speaking well of Seattle on their return), the front office has been hearing interest from other English and Mexican league teams interested in visiting Seattle. In addition, MLS will be watching the 2010 World Cup situation and how it impacts the league schedule. Though most World Cup matches should be airing in the morning (unless on replay), and won’t overlap with evening Sounders games. There might also be the possibility of Training Camp being open to fans next year (similar to what the Seahawks have offered in the past). Council members thought fans would be interested in attending training camp if access was possible.

2010 Open Cup
The conversation continues regarding the use of Starfire vs. Qwest as the location for Open Cup matches next season. While Starfire has parking, seating, access and facility limitations…it did provide an intimate and alternate viewing environment for fans, which many enjoyed. They are looking into getting a better turf playing surface installed, and exploring ideas for solving seating and parking issues. While many on the Council voiced a strong preference for Qwest (as it would likely mean a larger draw), others acknowledged that Starfire had worked pretty well, and Qwest would likely draw around 10,000 fans vs. Starfires 3-4,000.

Miscellaneous
There was additional conversation surrounding the Broadcasters, PA Announcer, all of which will also be considered anew as we approach next year. Plans for the pre-game, in-person Council meeting continue.

Categories
Meetings

Meeting Minutes: July 2009

ALLIANCE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES:
7/23/09 posted

A report from the July 8th Alliance Conference Call with the Sounders own Bart Wiley

First In-person Meeting of the Alliance Council
Date to be set in the near future, prior to a home game near, or at, the stadium (several hours prior to pre-function activities, so all can attend).

Improvements to the Council Voting system
While not perfect, the vote system this season has sufficed. Whether a “one seat=one vote” model is possible or preferable is still up for debate, both logistically and in terms of balancing corporate, ticket broker, individual or other group purchaser’s representational power…while still allowing individual fans to feel they are getting value from their Alliance Membership and Season Ticket (personal vote, discount card, email communication).

There have been some limitations to the current vendor voting software, in that season ticket holder access was processed in batches causing some access problems. Next year, the possibility of a streamed feed is being looked at. Unfortunately, there isn’t a public access point for the software to allow public access to vote standings.

Section Preferences for Next Season
Many fans this season found themselves in sections that were non-conducive to how they hoped to enjoy the game…whether preferring to sit, stand, wave flags, blow horns, proximity to the band, beer consumption…or otherwise. Ticket reps will be calling season ticket holders soon to discuss renewals, and will be asking about fan experience this year, and asking what they’d hope for next year.

The Council heard from many fans this season who felt they were in the wrong section…also, many were still accessing section preference tools available at Ticketmaster and Sounders FC. The Council recommended updating these tools with current preferences and profiles for sections so renewing season ticket holders can make more informed decisions.

Plastic Horns
Under consideration…as there’s a range of strong opinions regarding their use/sale…both pro and against. Council members reported hearing from many dissatisfied fans and hearing of several confrontations arising from disagreements over horns at games.

Vancouver and Portland preparations for 2011
Sounders FC has been in contact with Vancouver and Portland. There will be reserved sections for visiting supporters at both Qwest (section 203) and the rival cities. Their season ticket holder sales may impact how many extra seats will be available for traveling Sounders fans. The Council also strongly suggested preparing now for strategies to keep fan separation between teams at games…as a way to head off conflicts, and commended the good work done so far at Qwest and gave some suggestions for improvement. The Sounders FC is also already in discussions with the other teams regarding this issue. Regarding traveling supporters. At this time Sounders FC will not be organizing travel arrangements, but will assist supporter groups as they are able. This may be reviewed next year to see if changes are needed.

Partial season ticket holders from the band move
Discussed previously…it was felt value/alliance status should be given to those who put money up early for season tickets. Also, many moved from other areas of the stadium and already enjoyed STH status.

International Supporters Clubs
The front office will be focusing on building the club for the immediate future, and encouraged Council members or those hoping to help support international clubs to put together a plan for review/consideration. One suggestion was for international groups to consider the successful ECS model, putting together a package for international fans (scarf, pin, membership card, etc) and letting it grow organically.

Council Impact and Responsibilities
The Council heard back that they are indeed having an impact, and Sounders staff have been pleased with the feedback they’ve been getting. They assured us that they are hearing the fans. The Council is also acting as a sounding board and stewards for the club/brand, and the Front Office is working to take our initiatives under consideration and into action. In the future, the Council would like to continue to have their discussions available on the Sounders FC site blogs, to better keep the fans connected and informed. And keep an eye out for more issue threads on the forum.

Categories
Meetings

Meeting Recap: September 2015


Photo from SoundersFC.com

By Karl Picard

September 15th, 2015

There were no guests at this month’s meeting. We mainly discussed current events like the scarf design contest and season ticket renewals as well as business around the bylaws. The meeting took place at The Ninety with 15 people in attendance.

Hopefully, most of you have seen the scarf design contest is open for submissions. Final day to get them in is today.  The Alliance Council scarf committee will then review the submissions and determine the finalists. The voting for the scarf is scheduled to be 10/2 – 10/9, not much time so be sure to get your vote in. The weight of the scarf will be influenced by the design and ultimately the club has that final decision.  This is to ensure that the final selection meets all  of the criteria for the production and legal standards.

Season ticket renewals are also currently in full swing. The last day to renew is 9/18.  You should have noticed the opportunity to “renew for life” – Sounders ‘Til I Die. This is really a minor change and hopefully for the better. Since most renew each year, you may now auto renew, and if you decide that you no longer want to do that, just notify your ticket rep and you can opt out of the upcoming season. There were a few from the Alliance Council that reached out to current season ticket holders to discuss their renewals; they were able to help with any questions.  Hopefully they got to some of those reading our recaps.

Then it was onto bylaw changes, for the Supporter Group bylaw (bylaw 7), language around the removal of support group recognition by the Alliance Council was removed.  There was also removal of language on the need to renew, as there is currently no process to support renewal. There is still language in the bylaw around recognition and who can participate to have fan involvement in that process.

There was also discussion around adding a bylaw allowing a leave of absence for council members. This is to ensure those voting on issues and attending meetings with the front office are aware of the topics being discussed within the council and to support some potential changes with the GM voting. There is also a status for council members who cannot attend meetings (they are always on the first Tuesday of the month) but can still provide value to the Alliance Council and ultimately the Alliance as a whole; there are no voting rights with this status.

The final discussions of the night were on the GM vote. While we can’t get into too much here as we are still working out the details with the front office, there will be some changes coming and better definitions on the voting options. We’ve also proposed a change to timing of the Alliance-wide votes.  We hope to be able to supply more details in the near future. This has been a big effort this year for the council and we feel it will strengthen the commitment the club has to democracy in sports.

Feel free to drop a comment or reach out to a council member.  You can always find us on Twitter and Facebook.

Categories
Meetings

Meeting Recap: August 2015

Photo by Stephanie Steiner.  From Left to Right:  Hans Ulland, Cameron Collins, Kristina Vaughn, Paul Cox, Craig Dillon.

By Stephanie Steiner

August 14, 2015

August’s Alliance Council meeting was designated exclusively for council business without presentations from outside guests.   We had three main areas to cover:  changes to Bylaw 7 (regarding recognition and withdrawal of recognition of supporter groups), updates about our negotiations around GM Vote and GM Recall, and then finally we needed to discuss some of the things that we’ve identified that we’d need to change in our Constitution and Bylaws as a result of these negotiations.

First up was Old Business: In July, a change to Bylaw 7 was proposed (by Stephanie Steiner). The change redacts the lines which allow for a 2/3 vote of the Council members present to withdraw recognition of a supporter group, and redacts the line regarding annual renewal if it is requested.  The original bylaw more than likely was written with assumptions that “Council members present” would be equal to or greater than quorum.  Council also needs to invest time into rewriting other aspects of this bylaw:  create a system for Supporter Groups to request renewals or eliminate that as a requirement, and clearly define where the Council is or isn’t to be involved. In the meantime, this new proposal eliminates any possibility of a very low-populated Council, or one populated with an aggressive anti-supporter group agenda, from damaging the supporter group culture.  The vote was to be held in August, but had to be tabled as we did not meet quorum for the August meeting.

Next, we went through the updates regarding the GM Vote and GM Recall negotiations.  We have been at tentative agreement with the Club regarding GM Vote (granted to us in our Charter) for a few months now, but GM Recall procedures are still in conversation.  Maya Mendoza-Ekstrom had submitted a re-structured proposal immediately prior to the meeting to Cameron Collins and Stephanie Steiner, but neither had the chance to read it prior to the meeting.  The purpose of her re-write was to include the MLS’s definition of a General Manager (one universal definition for the league), and to clarify some elements of the proposed recall process.  Cameron read this definition aloud to the Council members. The Council members present were updated on the last meeting with Taylor Graham and Maya Mendoza-Ekstrom, as well as concerns that have surfaced within our existing Constitution and Bylaws: currently there are too many limitations on when we can send a vote to the entire Alliance, and we are regularly unable to vote on needed changes because we don’t meet quorum.

This brought us to the proposed changes to the existing Constitution and Bylaws:  Firstly: Bylaw 2 limits the Council’s ability to send something out for an Alliance-wide vote to only two periods in one season. In order to have an effective GM Recall procedure, barriers to an Alliance-wide vote need to be removed, which is the reason why new language was presented.  Secondly: the Alliance Council has an attendance challenge.  Historically, once the size of Council doubled at the start of 2013, it hasn’t been uncommon for attendance to range from 30-45%.  In late 2013, Council passed a bylaw changing the calculation for quorum to make voting and forward momentum possible.  This helped us for a few months, but when attendance dropped again, it was no longer helpful.  Language was proposed (by Stephanie Steiner) which allows Council members to take leaves of absence, become Ex-Officio members if they cannot attend meetings but will contribute in other ways, and gives council the ability to remove members who don’t attend meetings but don’t take a leave or move to Ex-Officio status (the ones who don’t participate and don’t withdraw on their own).  This proposal will allow Council to eliminate members from the count that prevents Council from meeting quorum and prevents us from voting.  Without voting, there cannot be a democratic process.

Aaaanddd… That’s a wrap!  Because only 8 people attended the August meeting, there were fewer people in the discussions.  No voting was possible on any of the agenda items.   Until next time…

Categories
Meetings

Meeting Recap: July 2015

Photo Credit: SoundersFC.com

By Karl Picard

July 20th, 2015

July’s Alliance Council meeting was designated for Council business, without outside guests.  There were four main areas of discussion for the night: the visibility team and promotion of the council, supporter group recognition and the role the council plays in that process, community involvement, and the GM Vote and Recall process negotiations (ongoing).

On the supporter group recognition front we focused on Bylaw 7 of the Alliance Constitution. The discussion focused around the fact that with the current language, the Council could remove recognition of a supporter group without cause or criteria.  It was explained that Bylaw 7 was originally added to provide criteria for recognition, so that the Club could recognize “supporter groups” consistently. This was a concern since supporter “groups” wanted access to Cascadia away match tickets. There will be more fine-tuning of the bylaw changes with a vote on those changes scheduled for the August meeting.

Next up was the visibility group, which is focused on ways to promote the Council.  We have been working on being more active on social media outlets as well as publishing some blog posts and these Council meeting recaps.  We are in need of more people willing to help out as Alliance Council is a volunteer effort, check out a recent blog post on this request.  If you have some ideas on what we can do to improve our brand and work better for the Alliance let us know on Twitter, Facebook, or in the comments.

Within the area of community involvement, we discussed the scarf vote and the Rave Green Run . The 2016 scarf competition:  design submissions will be in September with voting on the finalists in October – so it’s time to get those ideas fired up! The Sounders have a few community efforts coming up, the big one is the Aug 9th  Rave Green Run, complete with viewing party afterwards for the LA game.  Be sure to look for these and other community events on Twitter and Facebook.

Lastly, our main discussion was centered on the GM Vote and Recall Process negotiations. We are working with the Front Office on updating the Charter regarding the vote to ensure the terms are clear, and the Alliance retains the power to recall a current General Manager. We also strive to ensure that what we create will never be in the way of the Club to recruit top talent for that role.  Look for more to come on that in the coming months.

Categories
Uncategorized

Lawyers and Writers and Prayers, Oh My!

Photo Credit: SoundersFC.com

By Stephanie Steiner, Alliance Council President

July 8, 2015

As people become acquainted with the Alliance Council and learn a little about what the Council is and does, members of Council are asked questions like, “Why can’t the Council post surveys a few times each year?”  “Why can’t the Council get old minutes posted?” “How come the Council never has one open session?” “Why does the Council still meet at Sounders Headquarters?”  and so on…

The answers are all pretty much the same:  The Alliance Council is without any financial resources,   meaning: our resources are made up of the ideas we create and the efforts we contribute.  We simply don’t have enough resources currently to get to everything.  We have barely started creating our own mailing list.  We don’t have access to the Club’s mailing list of Alliance Members. If money is needed, it’s currently coming from our own pockets.  Luckily, what we have needed to take on so far has been inexpensive. Meeting space has been generously provided by the Club, and as far as ideas go – we often collaborate and brainstorm back and forth.

So why would I write about lawyers and writers and prayers?  Well that’s how we get by, and in a way, that’s what we need.  It’s time to recruit for the Alliance Council.  For example, the Council has a Constitution with bylaws, but not enough people to be operating a rules committee.  We need a rules committee to be looking at those bylaws and making necessary adjustments.  The Constitution and bylaws are a relatively short, but tedious document that people are tired of dealing with.  With a couple more good attorneys on the Council, we could make really light work of this – one or two sessions at most to get some language updated and clarified.

The Council needs more writers so that we can divide that work, but more importantly: share the spotlight.  More people writing would give more of our alliance members the opportunity to get to know more Council Members and the topics that drive us.  We are great at tweeting, and we like the idea of having blogs for our members.  But even though writing a blog is a short task, it’s one that people have to work into their busy lives – and that kind of task needs to go to people who are comfortable with it.

As far as prayers – well I’m not actually religious, so maybe that’s a fib.  But I do worry about the number of times I call upon the one attorney we have on Council, or the one community organizer, or the one other writer.  They are all fabulous, but we need a few more.  Alliance Council should be about fifteen to sixty minutes of work per person, per month, between meetings.  If it’s more than that, then it’s a strong indicator that we need people with specific sets skills and experience – and that’s where we are today.

Last year we made a significant schedule change and voted to meet exclusively on first Tuesdays. It was the day that worked for the most people, and when we enacted that step we knew we’d leave some behind: it’s not uncommon for only ten to make it to a meeting.  We wear many hats, and can’t get to everything we’d like to or to everything Alliance members would like us to.  But when I look at what the supporter groups have been able to accomplish, or at what owner-groups have done in clubs around the globe, I know that building this up is certainly within our capacity. Next up for us to take on: building a budget.

That’s where you come in:  we have a stadium full of amazing and incredibly talented Sounders Season Ticket Members. We don’t just need random people, we need you, with your skills, your voice, and your contribution of knowledge.  You have the ability to make a difference. The Alliance Council could greatly benefit from people with strong backgrounds in the areas of:  finance/money management; project management, event planning, writing, marketing, community outreach, legal: lawyers, legal aids, law clerks; web design/production, video production, content management, and volunteerism. To nominate yourself for Alliance Council, you’ll need your login email and your account number (it’s on your match pass): https://vote.soundersfc.com/Login.aspx.  Thank you for considering it!

Categories
Meetings

Meeting Recap: June 2015

The Ninety display window – photo by Karl Picard

By Karl Picard

This is the second in a series of Alliance Council meeting recaps.  For more information about the Council, click here.

At the June 2nd Alliance Council meeting, which was held at TheNinety, we met with Mikaela Purvis, Fan Relations Manager, to discuss options for Season Ticket Members. Currently, the club is promoting the Priority List where fans can reserve a place on the list to get season tickets in the lower bowl.  Additional benefits for season ticket members are discounts at the pro shop and pre-sale access for other event tickets. The priority list is only for those who want to be new season ticket holders – existing Alliance members are already at the top of the list.

The club consistently renews at a high rate, but they are looking at ways to engage those who have not renewed in order to determine the reason they don’t renew and make sure they aren’t missing anyone. One big change Mikaela mentioned was that the club will have a 6 month payment option that should make the financial impact less on those that need a little relief, just be sure to renew by the deadline for this benefit Also, the club is looking for a way to combine the processes of renewals, playoffs, and seat designation to make it as easier for Alliance Members. They are looking at a few other things as well, working both with the Alliance Council and others.  As those options get more developed, we’ll be sure to get the details out.

Following our conversation with Mikaela, we discussed the Council’s involvement with Supporter Group Recognition.  Currently, Bylaw 7 of the Alliance discusses how supporter groups are to seek formal recognition from the Alliance Council, which may also remove that recognition.  The discussion tonight was about whether the recognition process is something the Council should do, or if that is more of a role for the front office. Article 6 of the Alliance Constitution discusses the relationship of supporter groups with the club and precludes the Alliance and supporter groups from interfering in each other’s business. Discussions will continue and hopefully a vote on what that bylaw should look like going forward will happen in the next couple of months. For more on supporter group members participating in Council, read the recent blog post by the Alliance Council president Stephanie Steiner.

The Visibility group gave a debrief their activity with Twitter, Facebook, the outreach table at the Sounders game, as well as working with the Sounders front office to get Council blogs published on the SoundersFC.com website.  If you missed it the first one, Democracy in Sports ran this past week.  You can find all articles published about the Alliance Council using their tags at the bottom of articles.  We expect to publish two articles each month by the group, along with the usual Facebook and Twitter activity.  Give us a follow if you haven’t already.

The last business item covered was the GM Vote and Recall.  Discussions are still ongoing around how the GM Vote and Recall should be structured. We continue to work with the Sounders front office to make sure the Alliance voice is heard. We all know Drew Carey wanted there to be a way for the fans to provide feedback on the direction of the club, so we are working to ensure Alliance members have a key role– not just today but forever.

Let us know what you think Council should be talking about and working on for Alliance members.  You can do that in the comment section below or via the social media avenues mentioned in this article.  Until next month…

Categories
Uncategorized

When Will You Limit Supporter Groups on Alliance Council?

By Stephanie Steiner, Alliance Council President

The question I’m asked most frequently since becoming President of the Alliance Council is, “So are you finally going to set a limit on the number of supporter group people who can participate?”

The short answer is “Nope.” The much longer explanation is worth your time, I hope you’ll grant me the courtesy:

Firstly, it’s not up to me, nor should it be.  For the Council to make any changes such as limiting the participation of any particular type of person or group of people, we’d have to create the language, discuss it, and vote it into effect.  It wouldn’t be up to any one person.

Yes – the Alliance Council is made up of quite a few people who are also part of supporter groups.  That’s accurate.  People who are involved in Seattle’s soccer community are exactly that:  involved.  The Alliance Council needs people who can make commitments and keep them.  We need people who know how to stay organized and get things done.  Many of those people are organized and get things done for other groups – it’s true:  supporter groups are part of them, but also charities, soccer clubs, PTAs, neighborhood associations, and the Sounders Community Trust.  But people only get bent out of shape about supporter groups.

I think the reason some people have issue with “supporter group people” is that the person in question has made a negative mental association with the idea of “supporter group people.” I did it too. Back in 2010, when I learned about the Alliance Council, and later when people were getting elected, I was irritated that nearly everyone on the council was from the south end of the stadium. Then when their profiles were added to the website – I was really ticked off.  Everyone was young!  Insult was sufficiently added to injury.  What kind of garbage was this? I was so mad it took me almost two years to get the ability to vote (long story – some other time), and then I got myself elected – there was no way those young, good looking, jumpy-ass singing people were any good at representing me.

………we pause this middle-aged-woman tirade for a truth-in-advertising commercial break: I am now a paid-in-full member of every single supporter group which will have me……

Why such a change of heart?  Well, I met them.  The real them, I didn’t just stick to my idea of them.  I paid for memberships in every group out of respect for the commitments they make to the community at large, not just the soccer community. I also joined because the membership payments are the mechanism by which I can contribute financial support for the awesome tifo work that I love in the stadium and the charitable work that the SGs promote. I am not going to contribute my time to those endeavors – to that I am resigned. But I have a little bit of money I can give, so to that end, I will give. But as far as my attitude shift regarding “those supporter group people on council:” the Alliance Council is made up of moms and dads, grandmas and grandpas, singles, and married people.  Some people are experiencing divorces, some already have.  Some have diagnoses to deal with, some already have.  Some are transitioning jobs, some are done with those transitions. Some are executives, some are laborers, some are unemployed and there is everything in between.  We might actually be over-representing parents as our population shifts away from parenting. We could use some better racial integration, we would benefit from members of the LGBTQ community, and we could use the perspective of some folks in their sixties and seventies. Considering that the trials and tribulations of a normal life will not stop for anyone who chooses to join the Alliance Council, we really need the Council to be about twice the size that it is currently so that we can all cover for each other when the going gets tough – because it will. But mostly what we need are people who will commit to getting a little bit done, and then stick with their commitments.

So now here I am in my third year with the Alliance Council.  I don’t see how we can represent the voice of any particular group or every type of person by limiting participation of another.  I believe the only way for anyone to be heard is to build their voice.  If you really think there are too many people from supporter groups on the Alliance Council, OK. Let’s say you’re right.  Change the ratio by nominating yourself. Participate.  If you think there are too many people from the west side of the stadium on the Alliance Council, OK. Let’s say you’re right.  Change the ratio by nominating yourself.  Participate.  If you think there are too many people with noses on the Alliance Council, OK. You’re absolutely right.  Every single person on the Alliance Council has a nose. Nominate yourself.  Get your 25 votes, and participate.

I’m not trying to be ridiculous, I’m not.  I’m trying to get your attention.  Since the Council was created in 2008, there have been fewer than one hundred people pass through. It’s hard to hear our group of volunteers criticized for not representing nearly 14,000 season ticket member accounts when we’re the only people stepping up to do it. We need people to participate and contribute meaningful effort, and that includes you.  I haven’t voted yet – will you run?

Categories
Uncategorized

Democracy in Sports: the Meaning Behind the Words

May 3, 2015

By Stephanie Steiner, Alliance Council President

In February of this year, Alliance Council was invited to SSFC headquarters to meet with Adrian Hanauer and to be introduced to our new General Manager and President of Soccer, Garth Lagerwey for the first time.  During the evening’s conversation, Mr. Hanauer introduced the topic of the General Manager Vote and asked us to collect our thoughts and make a recommendation on the right thing to do regarding the timing of the vote.  In reading the Charter, we realized the ambiguity of the language included there.  So here we are, only two and a half years following Adrian Hanauer’s landslide vote of “confidence,” facing questions we weren’t expecting so soon, if at all:  Is it the right thing to do for the Club to hold a GM Vote every four years on a set schedule no matter what?  Could it interfere with the Club’s ability to hire the best General Manager possible, if the candidate would be facing a vote within a very short time of accepting the position? If the candidate is the best and confident in their abilities, would that scheduled vote even matter to the person? What is the Alliance actually expecting or wanting?

At the March Council meeting three weeks later, we created a work group to take on the task of debating the conversation surrounding the GM Vote topic, collecting ideas and opinions, and we took those to the general council meeting in April.  After that conversation, the ideas grew and the extended list was shared with our SSFC Liaison, Taylor Graham at the end of April – and the ideas grew even further.  It is easy to see how each time we add a different perspective to the conversation, new ideas emerge as to how to solve the same challenges and our opportunities to satisfy our Alliance members get better and far more interesting.

Our challenge has been to get to the Alliance at large.  In the coming weeks, you will see these questions in social media.  Please take the time to answer them in the comment sections of that media format, or send us a direct message:  SSFCAlliance@gmail.com

Democracy in Sports:  What does it mean to you?

  • What would “Democracy in Sports” need to provide such that the Season Ticket Members could influence the direction of the Club?
  • In a perfect world, what does “Democracy in Sports” mean to you?  How would it function?
  • With regard to General Manger Vote of Confidence – No Confidence, do you believe a new General Manager should have a minimum amount of time to prove him/herself in the position before facing a vote?  If so, how much?
  • In the context of “Democracy in Sports,” what can be done to make this your Club and not just a product you are consuming?

Thank you for sharing your thoughts.  Go Sounders!