Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
TsuMirren

Director Election Candidacy - Kenny Morrison

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, SaintGlenburn said:

So is it the fans who will actually own the club or SMiSA?

Im confused. The more i try and think about it the more SMiSA just looks like a company apart from the fans who will own the club.

From what i see apart from the £2 contribution spend are the fans involved at all?

Not having a moan or that, i just dont get it.

Only the fans who are members of SMISA will own the club Paul. At the moment, those members are part-owners via their SMISA membership and the majority owner is of course Gordon. There is no current plan for when SMISA take full ownership, though I'd imagine a board will be put in place to run the club with SMISA still having their own committee.

Aside from the £2, I suppose a fan can be as involved as they like so long as as he/she pays at least £144 a year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only the fans who are members of SMISA will own the club Paul. At the moment, those members are part-owners via their SMISA membership and the majority owner is of course Gordon. There is no current plan for when SMISA take full ownership, though I'd imagine a board will be put in place to run the club with SMISA still having their own committee.
Aside from the £2, I suppose a fan can be as involved as they like so long as as he/she pays at least £144 a year. 
Cheers Kenny. I was just a bit confused.

Just the norm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TsuMirren said:

You've missed the point here. As a director you have to act responsibly and protect the interests of SMISA, so in essence that's the elected or co-opted directors as opposed to the other committee members. Actioning a vote result is protecting SMISA's interests, failing to take action due to protecting the interests of others (individual, group or other)...or worse, not releasing information that could protect SMISA interests...is not.

Eh  :unsure:  Whats that got to do with the price of mince,  We would rather know why you cancelled your membership

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can see just after a few posts here that what people's understanding of what SMISA is, what it is bound to do, and how that should be independent of the club, whilst being intrinsically linked in general aims and goal is at best, muddled.

i think a good stating point is to understand that SMISA has been in place for years long before any thought/plan came about to look at fan ownership. So away from the BTB campaign Smisa actually has a day job that seems to have become much less visible, the result being a lot of buds being led to believe Smisa is the club, and the club is Smisa.

without going through the full definition, Smisa is, (and as long as it remains the 1877 Society)  totally independent of the club (although the club dont think, or treat it so). It is a legal entity in its own right, bound to put forward the interests of its members, the community and the 1877 Society above all others.

there have been attempts to suggest that the community that Smisa represents is exclusively St Mirren centric, but that is at odds with the legal status and framework a Community Benefit Society must comply with.

The club, Smisa committee, members, observers can suggest till the cows come home its just about St Mirren... however the law and body responsible for ensuring Smisa operates and complies as a Community Benefit Society hold sway. I worked tirelessly during my time on the committee to make my colleagues and club fully understand that smisa not only operated within the legal framework set out for it, but was seen to. I worked for twenty years in that sector at senior level knowing everything about how I and the organisation operated had to be first and foremost in the members and society's interest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

You can see just after a few posts here that what people's understanding of what SMISA is, what it is bound to do, and how that should be independent of the club, whilst being intrinsically linked in general aims and goal is at best, muddled.

i think a good stating point is to understand that SMISA has been in place for years long before any thought/plan came about to look at fan ownership. So away from the BTB campaign Smisa actually has a day job that seems to have become much less visible, the result being a lot of buds being led to believe Smisa is the club, and the club is Smisa.

without going through the full definition, Smisa is, (and as long as it remains the 1877 Society)  totally independent of the club (although the club dont think, or treat it so). It is a legal entity in its own right, bound to put forward the interests of its members, the community and the 1877 Society above all others.

there have been attempts to suggest that the community that Smisa represents is exclusively St Mirren centric, but that is at odds with the legal status and framework a Community Benefit Society must comply with.

The club, Smisa committee, members, observers can suggest till the cows come home its just about St Mirren... however the law and body responsible for ensuring Smisa operates and complies as a Community Benefit Society hold sway. I worked tirelessly during my time on the committee to make my colleagues and club fully understand that smisa not only operated within the legal framework set out for it, but was seen to. I worked for twenty years in that sector at senior level knowing everything about how I and the organisation operated had to be first and foremost in the members and society's interest.

Clear, concise and I suggest correct in outlining  the reasons for the existence of Smisa, it's brief and governance. Thanks.

However...your post appears certain to widen rather than bridge any gaps between the club and Smisa. 

There is, in my opinion, nothing wrong with each of the two clearly separate organisations should have differing views from time to time. Smisa retains control over it's affairs and the club over theirs.

The belief  that these sorts of issues could arise was what led me to decide not to join in the Buyout.  It would be good to see these "issues" put to bed and more done to encourage doubters like myself to participate.

Whilst I am not yet certain of the long term benefits of fan ownership, I am fully convinced of the benefit that work in the community can bring to the local area. Combine that with a strong local brand like our club St Mirren and this can be (is ) a force for good. 

So come on folks from all sides....recognise and respect each other's positions and move on. Thus dirty linen is unedifying and it's washing in public unesscessary.

Edited by St.Ricky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, TsuMirren said:

Only the fans who are members of SMISA will own the club Paul. At the moment, those members are part-owners via their SMISA membership and the majority owner is of course Gordon. There is no current plan for when SMISA take full ownership, though I'd imagine a board will be put in place to run the club with SMISA still having their own committee.

Aside from the £2, I suppose a fan can be as involved as they like so long as as he/she pays at least £144 a year. 

Kenny what happens if you are a member through the whole period of the takeover and you die does a family member take over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Isle Of Bute Saint said:

Kenny what happens if you are a member through the whole period of the takeover and you die does a family member take over. 

I think that question should be directed to SMISA . Kenny is no longer a committee member or indeed a SMISA member. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Lord Pityme said:

You can see just after a few posts here that what people's understanding of what SMISA is, what it is bound to do, and how that should be independent of the club, whilst being intrinsically linked in general aims and goal is at best, muddled.

i think a good stating point is to understand that SMISA has been in place for years long before any thought/plan came about to look at fan ownership. So away from the BTB campaign Smisa actually has a day job that seems to have become much less visible, the result being a lot of buds being led to believe Smisa is the club, and the club is Smisa.

without going through the full definition, Smisa is, (and as long as it remains the 1877 Society)  totally independent of the club (although the club dont think, or treat it so). It is a legal entity in its own right, bound to put forward the interests of its members, the community and the 1877 Society above all others.

there have been attempts to suggest that the community that Smisa represents is exclusively St Mirren centric, but that is at odds with the legal status and framework a Community Benefit Society must comply with.

The club, Smisa committee, members, observers can suggest till the cows come home its just about St Mirren... however the law and body responsible for ensuring Smisa operates and complies as a Community Benefit Society hold sway. I worked tirelessly during my time on the committee to make my colleagues and club fully understand that smisa not only operated within the legal framework set out for it, but was seen to. I worked for twenty years in that sector at senior level knowing everything about how I and the organisation operated had to be first and foremost in the members and society's interest.

Think we have a vacancy coming up :rolleyes: you could be the guy that could lead us to the promise land, I will nominate you if you agree to push forward some of my ideas for the £2 spend :guinness :cheers :guinness

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenny what happens if you are a member through the whole period of the takeover and you die does a family member take over. 
Lazy bassa, read the constitution.

17.2 Shares shall not be transferable except on death or bankruptcy or with the consent of
the Society Board;

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously i do not know the reasons for Kenny resigning,i do know his input will be missed,we largely agreed on ideas for engaging with groups who exist outside of the club.

I resigned from the board of directors of SMiSA but did not cancel my subscription to the trust because i believe that fan ownership is right for our club.

The fact that Kenny has stopped his subscription gives me cause for concern,we might find reasons at the trust AGM or in the pages of the accounts,although i believe we are going to see less detail in the accounts this year. I would suggest that for him to cancel his subscription there must be something he does not want his money spent on,and clearly that certain something did not exist when he became involved with the committee,or he would have cancelled it long before now. Pure speculation on my part but it does worry me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/02/2018 at 7:15 PM, TsuMirren said:

It's the community stuff that, in my view anyway, should be for SMISA to run with as they're a Community Benefit Society and have a duty to the wider community (something a lot of members don't understand). 

Not a dig but interesting to note the change of opinion there. I remember plenty of arguments previously where you stated the "st mirren community" were the community to be benefited rather than the wider community. I'm sure it was in an argument with Dickson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The club have a Scottish Charitable Incorporated Organisation, St Mirren in the Community , which does not appear very active (from looking at the OSCR website) so I would have thought that would have conflicted with what SMISA do (community wise). That's not to say they couldn't work together on things mind you or agree not to do similar things. I'm not sure how the Street Stuff is done, via RC?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, slapsalmon said:

Not a dig but interesting to note the change of opinion there. I remember plenty of arguments previously where you stated the "st mirren community" were the community to be benefited rather than the wider community. I'm sure it was in an argument with Dickson.

No, that was misinterpreted then and you have again now. I stated that the primary community served was the St Mirren support, but SMISA also had a duty to the wider community. That's the same for any community benefit society in that you obviously have a primary community that is served, but you also have a duty to the wider community. It was indeed with Dickson,  who actually sent me quite a nice message after I resigned, and at the time I was struggling to grasp where the misinterpretation came from. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, melmac said:

The club have a Scottish Charitable Incorporated Organisation, St Mirren in the Community , which does not appear very active (from looking at the OSCR website) so I would have thought that would have conflicted with what SMISA do (community wise). That's not to say they couldn't work together on things mind you or agree not to do similar things. I'm not sure how the Street Stuff is done, via RC?

The Community Trust is being brought back to life by Alan Wardrop and others. Street Stuff is indeed funded by RC, badged under St Mirren and charged for use of The Dome. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×