Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Stuart Dickson

SMiSA's Latest Update

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Sonny said:

One poster resigned their membership so that should make it a bit quieter around here in future as SMiSA is no longer their concern.

Hmm, doesn't appear to have had that effect just yet.... :rolleyes:

Edited by Drew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, TsuMirren said:

 


I think I've fallen in to the trap of getting crossed wires a bit between board and committee. As a result I'll back track a wee bit and try to explain a bit better. The constitution sets out a limit and guidelines for the board, but the commitee is different. As far as I'm aware, only one external director has been co-opted to the board since the last AGM although. The commitee though is larger with I'd say 13 attending. My understanding may need tidied up, the whole organisation probably needs tidied up too since moving from a few hundred members to over 1K. At the moment I'm just glad, proud even, to be in a position to assist. Come the next AGM it'll hopefully, I know discussions are ongoing, all be sorted out.

 

This is how laughable SMiSA are. Even their own committee members don't understand their constitution. :rolleyes:

SMISA Constitution for anyone wanting to read it without having to hunt for the single word link hidden away on the SMiSA website

Kenny, read page 2. What I call the SMISA Committee, is defined as "the board". Committee meetings are defined as "board meetings". And Committee Members are terms "directors". So for clarity you were co-opted onto the board of the 1877 Society, which is a Community Benefit Society, and as a "Director" of this society, you are supposed to be upholding the constitution. 

Now check out this

Quote

56. The Society shall have a Board of Directors comprising not less than five and not more than twelve persons

Yet you've got 13. The latest two - one of which is you - were co-opted onto the Society Board of Directors without any consultation with the membership and no minutes of meetings provided to explain why the Society have breached their own constitution. 

Zip back again to this

Quote

3. COMMUNITY BENEFIT PURPOSE The Society’s purpose is to be the vehicle through which a healthy, balanced and constructive relationship between the Club and its supporters and the communities it serves is encouraged and developed. The business of the Society is to be conducted for the benefit of the community served by the Club and not for the profit of its members.

Has the Society conducted it's business for the benefit of the community served by the club? Has it achieved it's aim with an interest free loan to the £multi million business that is St Mirren FC, and with handing over money to contribute to players wages? 

I'm glad I resigned my membership. Imagine ever entrusting the current group of committee members with the running of St Mirren FC. By f**k they'd be hopeless. 

Edited by Stuart Dickson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I take it you have had a suggestion refused?
Not sure what involment you have had in a community project but most are loss making. When you consider football as a business the only way to generate money is through footfall through the gates. Or leasing out the facilities however the major draw back on that is every second Saturday and some mid week slots are unavailable not taking into account rescheduled games replays international games leasing would really be as and when rather than a commitment over a period of time.

So basically you are asking SMISA to give money away for not a lot in return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Stuart Dickson said:

This is how laughable SMiSA are. Even their own committee members don't understand their constitution. :rolleyes:

SMISA Constitution for anyone wanting to read it without having to hunt for the single word link hidden away on the SMiSA website

Kenny, read page 2. What I call the SMISA Committee, is defined as "the board". Committee meetings are defined as "board meetings". And Committee Members are terms "directors". So for clarity you were co-opted onto the board of the 1877 Society, which is a Community Benefit Society, and as a "Director" of this society, you are supposed to be upholding the constitution. 

Now check out this

Yet you've got 13. The latest two - one of which is you - were co-opted onto the Society Board of Directors without any consultation with the membership and no minutes of meetings provided to explain why the Society have breached their own constitution. 

Zip back again to this

Has the Society conducted it's business for the benefit of the community served by the club? Has it achieved it's aim with an interest free loan to the £multi million business that is St Mirren FC, and with handing over money to contribute to players wages? 

I'm glad I resigned my membership. Imagine ever entrusting the current group of committee members with the running of St Mirren FC. By f**k they'd be hopeless. 

 

13 directors are allowed under the constitution:

64. The Society Board may co-opt up to one external Directors to the Society Board in addition to the number of Directors specified in these Rules provided that at all times the total number of external directors and Members co-opted under Rule 65 shall be in the minority. A Director co-opted in accordance with this rule shall serve for a fixed period determined by the Society Board at the time of co-option, subject to a review at least every twelve months, may be removed from office at any time by a resolution passed by a majority of the members of the Society Board, and may be remunerated in an amount (to be disclosed in the published accounts) from time to time, as fixed by the Society Board. External Directors shall be selected by virtue of their specialist skills and experience considered to be of benefit to the Society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bud77 said:

 

13 directors are allowed under the constitution:

64. The Society Board may co-opt up to one external Directors to the Society Board in addition to the number of Directors specified in these Rules provided that at all times the total number of external directors and Members co-opted under Rule 65 shall be in the minority. A Director co-opted in accordance with this rule shall serve for a fixed period determined by the Society Board at the time of co-option, subject to a review at least every twelve months, may be removed from office at any time by a resolution passed by a majority of the members of the Society Board, and may be remunerated in an amount (to be disclosed in the published accounts) from time to time, as fixed by the Society Board. External Directors shall be selected by virtue of their specialist skills and experience considered to be of benefit to the Society.

Is that Blub being shown to be wrong again?

I see he's keeping up the time honoured tradition of being laughed out of yet another club/committee that he's tried to infest with his attention seeking, toxic shit stirring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Has the Society conducted it's business for the benefit of the community served by the club? Has it achieved it's aim with an interest free loan to the £multi million business that is St Mirren FC, and with handing over money to contribute to players wages? 
I'm glad I resigned my membership. Imagine ever entrusting the current group of committee members with the running of St Mirren FC. By f**k they'd be hopeless. 


The community served by the club, in the most immediate sense, would be the fans of the club and even the employees of the club. The loan will see the USH repaired and games being on. The playing budget being assisted could see the fans watching more wins, but will assist Jack with his plans. The disabled platform gives the obvious match day enhancement.

I'm really not sure what community you are hell bent on serving, but it never appears to be the primary one served by the club. You can obviously engage other community groups, but they aren't the spine of what takes priority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
13 directors are allowed under the constitution:
64. The Society Board may co-opt up to one external Directors to the Society Board in addition to the number of Directors specified in these Rules provided that at all times the total number of external directors and Members co-opted under Rule 65 shall be in the minority. A Director co-opted in accordance with this rule shall serve for a fixed period determined by the Society Board at the time of co-option, subject to a review at least every twelve months, may be removed from office at any time by a resolution passed by a majority of the members of the Society Board, and may be remunerated in an amount (to be disclosed in the published accounts) from time to time, as fixed by the Society Board. External Directors shall be selected by virtue of their specialist skills and experience considered to be of benefit to the Society.


Imagine providing actual facts.

That will be you on his imaginary ignore list

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bud77 said:

 

13 directors are allowed under the constitution:

64. The Society Board may co-opt up to one external Directors to the Society Board in addition to the number of Directors specified in these Rules provided that at all times the total number of external directors and Members co-opted under Rule 65 shall be in the minority. A Director co-opted in accordance with this rule shall serve for a fixed period determined by the Society Board at the time of co-option, subject to a review at least every twelve months, may be removed from office at any time by a resolution passed by a majority of the members of the Society Board, and may be remunerated in an amount (to be disclosed in the published accounts) from time to time, as fixed by the Society Board. External Directors shall be selected by virtue of their specialist skills and experience considered to be of benefit to the Society.

So which one of Kenny Morrison or David Riley has specialist skills and experience, was co-opted onto the board as an external director and can expect remuneration? What is their fixed period? And how many members of the current board were co-opted into their posts? 

Edited by Stuart Dickson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, TsuMirren said:

 


The community served by the club, in the most immediate sense, would be the fans of the club and even the employees of the club. The loan will see the USH repaired and games being on. The playing budget being assisted could see the fans watching more wins, but will assist Jack with his plans. The disabled platform gives the obvious match day enhancement.

I'm really not sure what community you are hell bent on serving, but it never appears to be the primary one served by the club. You can obviously engage other community groups, but they aren't the spine of what takes priority.

 

Really? 

I think you misunderstand the duties of a Community Benefit Society.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Stuart Dickson said:

Really? 

I think you misunderstand the duties of a Community Benefit Society.  

You're an honest idiot, if nothing else.

For Community, see - the Cooncil or SNP - for fitba-related matters see SMISA, who ARE the paisley fitba community in action..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So which one of Kenny Morrison or David Riley has specialist skills and experience, was co-opted onto the board as an external director and can expect remuneration? What is their fixed period? And how many members of the current board were co-opted into their posts? 


The external director was/is already there. I even mentioned that earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, rebella15 said:

As you have resigned  it's none of your business

Charming. I don't know why anyone would believe anything that comes out of SMiSA anymore though. Just last week they were claiming you don't need to be a member to have a voice. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Stuart Dickson said:

Charming. I don't know why anyone would believe anything that comes out of SMiSA anymore though.

I never believed you when you were in SMISA.

 

I'm even less inclined to believe you now you've come out of it, so you're right, there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, El Gingero said:

Why?

 

 

Dunno. The SMiSA "board" didn't tell the membership they were doing it, they didn't ask the memberships opinion on it, and they didn't publish the minutes of any meetings. When I asked how many members of the current "board" had been co-opted into their "directorships" I got no proper answer. Maybe you could try asking? 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stuart I really don't know what your deal is with fan ownership and calling other St Mirren fans stupid.  SMISA have at no time said every single penny of the £2 discretionary fund would go to community projects and whereas it's a great thing to do the majority of fans have had their say.  To say fans are stupid for wanting to spend these funds on the player budget just isn't right.  It's a different opinion from yours that's it.  SMISA and St Mirren have done so many good things in the community and that will continue.  Right now we have to get ourselves out of this bottom of the league mess we're in. £10,000 is a drop in the ocean compared to what could be raised by the direct debit scheme.  

Get off your high horse about cancelling your membership and self righteous about how community orientated you are.  It's done now, fan ownership will happen, the money will go to the player budget and St Mirren & SMISA will learn together on the way with every single person having the best intentions of this club at heart.  You aren't better than anyone else and the way you've went about this forum (like so many others) you certainly aren't smarter than anyone else.  Take your £25 a month and do with it what you will but I'd suggest don't try and rip apart the team you (apparently) support in their attempt to get better and stronger as a fan owned club. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldn't care less how many people are on the SMiSA board or the SMiSA committee.

These guys are giving up their own time voluntarily for the good of the organisation. They get absolutely no benefit on being on committee/board or whatever.

In fact the only "benefit" they get is giving up a load of their spare time for no reward, and get abused on public forums.

I doff my cap to anyone mad enough to get involved on that basis so good on all of you I say.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Stuart I really don't know what your deal is with fan ownership and calling other St Mirren fans stupid.  SMISA have at no time said every single penny of the £2 discretionary fund would go to community projects and whereas it's a great thing to do the majority of fans have had their say.  To say fans are stupid for wanting to spend these funds on the player budget just isn't right.  It's a different opinion from yours that's it.  SMISA and St Mirren have done so many good things in the community and that will continue.  Right now we have to get ourselves out of this bottom of the league mess we're in. £10,000 is a drop in the ocean compared to what could be raised by the direct debit scheme.  

Get off your high horse about cancelling your membership and self righteous about how community orientated you are.  It's done now, fan ownership will happen, the money will go to the player budget and St Mirren & SMISA will learn together on the way with every single person having the best intentions of this club at heart.  You aren't better than anyone else and the way you've went about this forum (like so many others) you certainly aren't smarter than anyone else.  Take your £25 a month and do with it what you will but I'd suggest don't try and rip apart the team you (apparently) support in their attempt to get better and stronger as a fan owned club. 

Oh FFS, where to start! 

First off, I didn't set SMiSA up. I didn't register them as a Community Benefit Society, with legal obligations to the local community. I didn't write that I wanted to "put the club at the heart of the community", or publish on my website that they would "strengthen the bonds between the club and the community". I'm not the one applying for grants and funding for community based projects, or looking for community loans to fund my project. All of that was SMiSA's doing. They are the ones making false representations and they are the ones with the "director" who seems to think that the "community" being referred to in their legal obligation is the paid employees of a football club! :rolleyes:

Then there's the fact that this has been sold to the membership as something that had to happen to save St Mirren from relegation. Just to put this into context again for those that might have missed it - St Mirren have an annual turnover of £2.1m, £1.26m is paid out every year in wages, yet SMiSA want the membership to believe that a member donation to the club of £8,000 - £9,000 will be significant enough to achieve everything £1.26m per annum can't - and then you want to tell me that the SMISA membership isn't stupid for buying into that? How gullible are they when just a few months ago the fans of the club were in almost unilateral agreement that St Mirren FC should be living within it's means. 

I am a massive fan of fan ownership. I've seen many good examples of how competent committees have turned around the fortunes of their favourite football clubs. All, bar none, that have seen a significant turn around have done so BECAUSE of their close involvement with their local communities. Sadly I don't see that competence on the SMISA "board". 

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  

×