"...We need experience and skilled administrators and governors on the board..."
How's that worked for us so far? Running out of top, top, men, and women? Surely you are not implying we can't find acceptable skill sets within our membership rank to vote for? Outside of the remit of the WAFC?
Personally (and I do speak from experience) I find it necessary to seek some independence and breadth of perspective for a board to avoid being little less than a rubber stamp for the executive. I'm sure the early boards during MOB times were a bit put out by having wildcards like Docker Dave in there, but I'm sure it kept them on their toes, and procedure and protocol probably benefited. Although this directly led to the putting up of ex-footballing candidates in the ME seats, and hence Mercury's more recent efforts at pointing out this wasn't in the spirit of the arrangement.
I'm all for a maverick on the board, actually. I think its very Fremantle. Within reason. Of course a board should be seen as united and speak through the chair, but I would like to think that recent boards would have benefited from stronger membership perspective. Does anyone consider we have a member-elected board member we can approach with our concerns? Anyone know how to contact one?