An entry form can be found here while the guidelines for nomination can be found here.
The content of that email can be read below. The offer of reply, of which I can give the assurance that it will be reproduced uncensored, is open to the Foundation of Hearts:
I have a few queries regarding the nomination/election procedure and would be most grateful if you could clarify them.
1. Potential directors having good commercial and business sense.
It goes without saying given the two owners the club had before administration of 2013, that the above quality is essential for all potential candidates.
However, and maybe for the next election, could an addition be made? Namely, someone that can have ideas and a structured programme into enhancing the club's community programme?
While I'm sure the current one does fine work, there is always scope for improvement.
An example is the Glasgow Rocks basketball team who via the Scottish Sports Futures programme (http://scottishsportsfutures.org.uk/) have done some sterling work with children in disadvantaged areas in Glasgow with some outstanding results.
2. Three-year elected term
Is there any scope for the FoH to step in should an elected director prove him or herself to be incompetent, or even worse, corrupt to the point where the club is inconvenienced (regardless of whether or not the police are involved).
After all, three years does seem to indicate a large leap of faith being taken in whoever is fortunate enough to be elected.
Maybe the term of office could be cut to one year instead of three with the director standing annually should he or she wish to do so?
If they have fulfilled the expectations of office during that year, then re-election should not be a problem.
If they don't, then the opportunity is there for FoH members to resolve any issues that they may have by electing an alternative candidate after the 12-month term is up.
3. No fees to be paid to elected members
If we have a situation where a particular elected director shows him or herself to have skills and abilities of a very high level (Ann Budge-esque capabilities for want of a better term) that benefit the club, will there be an option to make that director an offer to be a full-time salaried employee of Heart of Midlothian?
Naturally this would have to be done on a case-by-case basis, but if one member shows that they can take the club's off-field performance to a higher level, then it wouldn't it be wise to get them on board full-time?
After all, if other clubs notice such a person's talent, and see that they're not getting paid, then Hearts could lose a very skilled individual for nothing and have to start from scratch all over again to fill their position.
4. Exclusion from election due to mental disorder
Does this prohibit potential candidates who have depression and/or anxiety?
If that is the case then are the club and the FoH not in breach of the 2010 Equalities Act which covers amongst many things, depression and anxiety?
5. Nomination procedure
The rule where it states that each candidate must be nominated by 25 people - given the election this time last year only produced one candidate, could the figure of 25 be reduced to (for the sake of argument) 10?
It may be possible that the candidate list for this year's election may be bigger but 25 presents quite a barrier.
There is the likelihood that skilled and able candidates are deterred from putting themselves up because they cannot raised the 25 signatures needed.
The club could be losing out and maybe reducing the nominations number could see more on the list next year and give FoH members a greater choice.
Assuming there are three or more candidates on the ballot paper, will there be a second preference option should neither of them win outright on the initial count?