Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Kombibuddie

Empowering the SMISA Membership to begin building for the future now.

Recommended Posts

Members of SMISA will have received formal notification of the SMISA AGM on Saturday 30th March. Within this notification is notice that I have submitted a Members Resolution Proposal in accordance with Rule 26 of SMISA's constitution.

That  Resolution is to add the option ‘Save this Discretionary Spend Pot’ as a voting option for the members in the next and all future SMISA members Discretionary Spend Votes. I have attached the proposal along with SMISA's response/counter that was sent to the members also.

I have been quite vociferous in my objections to some of the options presented to the membership and have championed having an option for "Saving the Pot" for when the Buds is Bought since virtually day one.

The proposal is to add the option to save the pot to every vote to allow the members the choice to save or spend, especially when less inspiring options are presented to us. The proposal is not to replace options but to always be an option available to the membership if they wish to vote to save the pot.

I met with 2 members of the SMISA committee in November, which I thank them for their time. Our discussions were constructive and healthy. I have since exchanged a couple of emails with them too. The one thing that was apparent is, the 3 of us all want the same thing and that is the betterment of St Mirren FC. We just see how that is achieved ever so slightly differently.

Both my proposal and SMISA's counter are attached for your consideration. I will however, post a response to SMISA's counter argument separately.

For this to be passed, it requires votes in favour. If you cannot make SMISA's AGM (hopefully you can), please consider giving me your proxy vote to vote on your behalf. Thank you.

Rule 26 of the SMISA Constitution.

26. The members may by a resolution carried by not less than two-thirds of the members voting in person or by proxy at a general meeting but not otherwise give directions to the Society Board. A member wishing to propose a members’ resolution for consideration at a general meeting shall give notice in writing to the Secretary of such wish, and of the justification for, form and content of the resolution, not later than noon 28 days before that meeting is to be held. The following provisions apply to any directions given:

26.1 any direction must:

26.1.1 be consistent with these Rules and with the Society’s contractual, statutory and other legal obligations; and

26.1.2 not affect the powers and responsibilities of the Society Board under Rule 27.

26.2 Any person who deals with the Society in good faith and is not aware that a direction has been given may deal with the Society on the basis that no direction has been given.

 

 

 

 

SMISA Members Resolution Proposal.docx

Members Resolution - SMISA's reponse.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Kombibuddie said:

Members of SMISA will have received formal notification of the SMISA AGM on Saturday 30th March. Within this notification is notice that I have submitted a Members Resolution Proposal in accordance with Rule 26 of SMISA's constitution.

That  Resolution is to add the option ‘Save this Discretionary Spend Pot’ as a voting option for the members in the next and all future SMISA members Discretionary Spend Votes. I have attached the proposal along with SMISA's response/counter that was sent to the members also.

I have been quite vociferous in my objections to some of the options presented to the membership and have championed having an option for "Saving the Pot" for when the Buds is Bought since virtually day one.

The proposal is to add the option to save the pot to every vote to allow the members the choice to save or spend, especially when less inspiring options are presented to us. The proposal is not to replace options but to always be an option available to the membership if they wish to vote to save the pot.

I met with 2 members of the SMISA committee in November, which I thank them for their time. Our discussions were constructive and healthy. I have since exchanged a couple of emails with them too. The one thing that was apparent is, the 3 of us all want the same thing and that is the betterment of St Mirren FC. We just see how that is achieved ever so slightly differently.

Both my proposal and SMISA's counter are attached for your consideration. I will however, post a response to SMISA's counter argument separately.

For this to be passed, it requires votes in favour. If you cannot make SMISA's AGM (hopefully you can), please consider giving me your proxy vote to vote on your behalf. Thank you.

Rule 26 of the SMISA Constitution.

26. The members may by a resolution carried by not less than two-thirds of the members voting in person or by proxy at a general meeting but not otherwise give directions to the Society Board. A member wishing to propose a members’ resolution for consideration at a general meeting shall give notice in writing to the Secretary of such wish, and of the justification for, form and content of the resolution, not later than noon 28 days before that meeting is to be held. The following provisions apply to any directions given:

26.1 any direction must:

26.1.1 be consistent with these Rules and with the Society’s contractual, statutory and other legal obligations; and

26.1.2 not affect the powers and responsibilities of the Society Board under Rule 27.

26.2 Any person who deals with the Society in good faith and is not aware that a direction has been given may deal with the Society on the basis that no direction has been given.

 

 

 

 

SMISA Members Resolution Proposal.docx

Members Resolution - SMISA's reponse.pdf

To summarise Smisa's response, "no fecking way are we accepting a lowly member's proposal, ffs! Do you think we are going to tell Gordon we arent giving him anymore money for carefully considered options like.. matchballs and hand dryers?

i admire you're detailed approach, but you are actually up against the club, and as was evidenced when Smisa members had the temerity to decide to donate some of THEIR funds to a long established youth community football club, the chairman went Radio feckin Rental.

you've got my vote bud.

Edited by Lord Pityme

Share this post


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

To summarise Smisa's response, "no fecking way are we accepting a lowly member's proposal, ffs! Do you think we are going to tell Gordon we arent giving him anymore money for carefully considered options like.. matchballs?

i admire you're detailed approach, but you are actually up against the club, and as was evidenced when Smisa members had the temerity to decide to donate some of THEIR funds to a long established youth community football club, the chairman went Radio feckin Rental.

you've got my vote bud.

LPM, cheers.

You know yourself bud, the discussions that have taken place over the past couple of years in the "3 Monthly Spend" thread. Folk go on, bump their gums and that's about it..

The option is now on the table for the SMISA membership to make the decision. Not the SMISA Committee and Not The Club.

I am in no doubt, SMISA will be championing for support in the vote as will I. I expect, those on the Club Board who are  SMISA members will vote against, in line with SMISA. Living in London, I do not have the same network, my championing for support will be done through this website and hopefully, SMISA members on here who share my thoughts about saving some pots will discuss with their friends who are SMISA members and they vote in favour of the proposal.

As I said, my discussions with SMISA have been respectful, we both listened to each others views and agree, we both want what we see as the best for St Mirren FC, how that is achieved, we see differently. No matter the outcome, hopefully, the debate provides invaluable intelligence to the SMISA members, SMISA & The Club for improvements and a successful future for St Mirren FC.

Share this post


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

LPM, cheers.

You know yourself bud, the discussions that have taken place over the past couple of years in the "3 Monthly Spend" thread. Folk go on, bump their gums and that's about it..

The option is now on the table for the SMISA membership to make the decision. Not the SMISA Committee and Not The Club.

I am in no doubt, SMISA will be championing for support in the vote as will I. I expect, those on the Club Board who are  SMISA members will vote against, in line with SMISA. Living in London, I do not have the same network, my championing for support will be done through this website and hopefully, SMISA members on here who share my thoughts about saving some pots will discuss with their friends who are SMISA members and they vote in favour of the proposal.

As I said, my discussions with SMISA have been respectful, we both listened to each others views and agree, we both want what we see as the best for St Mirren FC, how that is achieved, we see differently. No matter the outcome, hopefully, the debate provides invaluable intelligence to the SMISA members, SMISA & The Club for improvements and a successful future for St Mirren FC.

I will champion your proposal, as i am sure most of those i know will too. As you already know the Smisa committee, instead of empowering the membership to become more involved in smisa, and just listing your proposal, they have already issued their rejection of your proposal.

The club will follow suit and Scott will no doubt tug at the supporters heart strings at the AGM for good measure as he wont want to lose access to the bank of Smisa. I hope your proposal goes through, smisa, (although it doesnt see why) needs real membership involvement in its workings, or it will wither and die through apathy alone.

good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members of SMISA will have received formal notification of the SMISA AGM on Saturday 30th March. Within this notification is notice that I have submitted a Members Resolution Proposal in accordance with Rule 26 of SMISA's constitution.

That  Resolution is to add the option ‘Save this Discretionary Spend Pot’ as a voting option for the members in the next and all future SMISA members Discretionary Spend Votes. I have attached the proposal along with SMISA's response/counter that was sent to the members also.

I have been quite vociferous in my objections to some of the options presented to the membership and have championed having an option for "Saving the Pot" for when the Buds is Bought since virtually day one.

The proposal is to add the option to save the pot to every vote to allow the members the choice to save or spend, especially when less inspiring options are presented to us. The proposal is not to replace options but to always be an option available to the membership if they wish to vote to save the pot.

I met with 2 members of the SMISA committee in November, which I thank them for their time. Our discussions were constructive and healthy. I have since exchanged a couple of emails with them too. The one thing that was apparent is, the 3 of us all want the same thing and that is the betterment of St Mirren FC. We just see how that is achieved ever so slightly differently.

Both my proposal and SMISA's counter are attached for your consideration. I will however, post a response to SMISA's counter argument separately.

For this to be passed, it requires votes in favour. If you cannot make SMISA's AGM (hopefully you can), please consider giving me your proxy vote to vote on your behalf. Thank you.

Rule 26 of the SMISA Constitution.

26. The members may by a resolution carried by not less than two-thirds of the members voting in person or by proxy at a general meeting but not otherwise give directions to the Society Board. A member wishing to propose a members’ resolution for consideration at a general meeting shall give notice in writing to the Secretary of such wish, and of the justification for, form and content of the resolution, not later than noon 28 days before that meeting is to be held. The following provisions apply to any directions given:

26.1 any direction must:

26.1.1 be consistent with these Rules and with the Society’s contractual, statutory and other legal obligations; and

26.1.2 not affect the powers and responsibilities of the Society Board under Rule 27.

26.2 Any person who deals with the Society in good faith and is not aware that a direction has been given may deal with the Society on the basis that no direction has been given.

 

 

 

 

SMISA Members Resolution Proposal.docx

Members Resolution - SMISA's reponse.pdf

A great proposal which I fully support.

 

If the spend options are appropriate, they will get my support as priority but I will never support spend for spends sake and this gives a perfectly reasonable alternative.

 

I was surprised at the wording of the SMISA reply though, as they are not just presenting the option for the membership to decide, but essentially advising to vote against it!

 

If this was a political party, they are essentially trying to use the whip!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My comments on SMISA's counter

Quote

We thank our member Graeme Aitken for taking the time to submit a resolution to the AGM. In response, the SMISA committee would like to make the following points:

We could have a substantial sum in the bank at the point of takeover anyway

  • Saving the Pot will enhance that. Saving for the future now.

We fully agree with Graeme’s suggestion SMISA should have a cash reserve at the point we take on the majority shareholding in St Mirren.

  • Case closed.

  • A saved pot will be invaluable and will allow a SMISA owned club to hit the ground running and not have to scrimp and scape for much needed funds. Budgeting now and saving for the future when able to do so, is prudent financial management (imho).

As it stands we are on track to have one – and we don’t need to save the £2 pot to do it. As we remain ahead of our initial target of 1,000 members, our finances are healthy. Under our detailed long-term financial projections – and even factoring in a gradual drop-off in membership – we expect to have the sum we need to buy Gordon Scott’s shares in 2023 – year seven of what was meant to be a 10-year project.

  • Buy the Buds detailed purchasing GLS’s majority shareholding within 10 years. The legal agreement with Mr Gordon Scott is that SMISA had ten years to raise the money to buy his shares. The purpose of the project is to bring St Mirren FC to be fan owned and safeguard it for the future.

    Planning for the future, the sooner St Mirren FC is owned by the supporters, the sooner it is protected as intended.

    2023 is a prospective buy out year. SMISA does not need to wait until 2026 to complete the purchase of St Mirren FC

If we continue to fundraise we would have roughly £150,000 a year of ‘share purchase money’ income which could quickly form a very substantial SMISA cash reserve by the planned takeover date of July 2026. It possible the takeover could happen earlier than that if we felt we were ready.

  • The Well Society have recently gifted Motherwell FC a substantial sum of money (a couple of hundred thousand shy of £1 million pounds) which “we cannot at present compete with”.

  • With SMISA’s projected surplus supported with a “saved pot” will allow St Mirren FC (when fan owned) a greater ability to compete financially with clubs like Motherwell.

To give members a better idea of our long-term options, we are working on a detailed document laying out how the transition to majority fan ownership could work and how a SMISA-owned St Mirren could be run. This will be published in the coming months and your feedback will be invited.

  • A short term and viable option is to start preparing for the future now and allow the membership the opportunity to save the pot by ratifying this proposal.

2) The £2 pot is there to take the club forward - we need flexibility in how to do that

  • The proposal is not to remove this option but to empower the SMISA membership to save the pot ever 3 months if they feel that is the better option available to them.

It was always key to #BuyTheBuds that the £2 pot lets members choose how to take the club forward and invest in assets SMISA will one day own. We are proud to have funded projects like community season tickets, a wheelchair platform and one of Scotland’s best 4G surfaces at Ralston.

  • SMISA and its members can continue to do so. The proposal is not to remove the £2 pot votes.

Under the current system members always have the option not to spend – if a project is rejected, unspent money stays in the pot and is available for future use. That gives us flexibility – on occasion we have asked members if they want to use unspent money from a previous quarter. If this resolution is adopted SMISA could lose some of that flexibility – as some £2 money might be locked away, even if there was a compelling reason to use it.

  • In accordance with Rule 26 of SMISA’ constitution, proposals can be put forward to spend the pot, much in the same way, proposals to use money from the ring fenced pot were used to support funding the astro replacement at Ralston. No flexibility is lost.

It’s worth pointing out that keeping unspent money available doesn’t mean it will be spent. We have never and will never put forward projects for the sake of it – only those we think are worthwhile. And with the current system there is nothing to say unspent £2 money wouldn’t end up being banked for use post-takeover. If a sizable sum builds up in future members could be asked if they want to save it. But you should also have the flexibility to use the full £2 pot for the purpose it was intended for if that’s what you want – and this resolution could erode that.

  • Please see above, no flexibility is lost. The members will always have the right to decide to spend the pot. This proposal does not erode or remove that.

3) It risks making the ballots more complicated

  • Adding an option to “Save the Pot” is not complicated and there is no evidence to support a claim that it would make ballots more complicated.

    Members would have 1 standing option on all votes “Save the Pot”

Lastly its worth pointing out that one big strength of £2 ballots is the voting system is always simple and the results are always clear – but this could change that. Although we appreciate Graeme has given an example of how his suggestion would work, implementing it will create a few issues.

  • The results would still be clear. Regardless of how many options are presented (3, or 4 or 5) one option will always receive the most amount of votes and be carried.

  • If SMISA’s concerns are centred on plans to split a vote, as has happened previously, perhaps, communicating with the membership ahead of a vote to gauge opinion would negate their issues. I am happy to work with SMISA on a workaround for this.

For example, should we continue to offer a ‘keep the money in the pot’ option alongside the ‘save the money for the future’ option? We’ve looked at this and it could be done but it would make the ballots more complex and could lead to voting anomalies. Also, a resolution binding the organisation to have to offer a certain option in every ballot also ties the hands of any future committee should they need or want to do things differently in the years ahead.

  • The ballots could only be more complex if there is an appetite to make them complex. I am confident a suitable workaround exists to resolve SMISA’ issues. As previously stated, I would be willing to work with SMISA on this.

In summary, while we understand and agree with the reasons behind this resolution, we believe what is being proposed is unnecessary and not the best way to achieve what it is aiming to

  • This is where SMISA & I do not agree. The proposal is, in my opinion, very much warranted and is necessary.

    In a time when St Mirren FC received substantial transfer fees from selling players and received dividends from sell on clauses totalling in the region of £1 million pounds, the £2 pot spend has been perceived to have been utilised like a club shopping list and was not the best use of the members money.

 

This proposal is to empower the SMISA members to choose to spend the £2 pot on worthwhile projects and will allow them the option to save the pot when they feel less inspiring options have been presented to them.

The proposal is to add the option, not replace options. The SMISA membership will always have options presented to them to spend/invest each pot. This proposal will provide the SMISA membership greater autonomy to decide how they spend their money.

 

Edited by Kombibuddie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kombibuddie said:

Members of SMISA will have received formal notification of the SMISA AGM on Saturday 30th March. Within this notification is notice that I have submitted a Members Resolution Proposal in accordance with Rule 26 of SMISA's constitution.

That  Resolution is to add the option ‘Save this Discretionary Spend Pot’ as a voting option for the members in the next and all future SMISA members Discretionary Spend Votes. I have attached the proposal along with SMISA's response/counter that was sent to the members also.

I have been quite vociferous in my objections to some of the options presented to the membership and have championed having an option for "Saving the Pot" for when the Buds is Bought since virtually day one.

The proposal is to add the option to save the pot to every vote to allow the members the choice to save or spend, especially when less inspiring options are presented to us. The proposal is not to replace options but to always be an option available to the membership if they wish to vote to save the pot.

I met with 2 members of the SMISA committee in November, which I thank them for their time. Our discussions were constructive and healthy. I have since exchanged a couple of emails with them too. The one thing that was apparent is, the 3 of us all want the same thing and that is the betterment of St Mirren FC. We just see how that is achieved ever so slightly differently.

Both my proposal and SMISA's counter are attached for your consideration. I will however, post a response to SMISA's counter argument separately.

For this to be passed, it requires votes in favour. If you cannot make SMISA's AGM (hopefully you can), please consider giving me your proxy vote to vote on your behalf. Thank you.

Rule 26 of the SMISA Constitution.

26. The members may by a resolution carried by not less than two-thirds of the members voting in person or by proxy at a general meeting but not otherwise give directions to the Society Board. A member wishing to propose a members’ resolution for consideration at a general meeting shall give notice in writing to the Secretary of such wish, and of the justification for, form and content of the resolution, not later than noon 28 days before that meeting is to be held. The following provisions apply to any directions given:

26.1 any direction must:

26.1.1 be consistent with these Rules and with the Society’s contractual, statutory and other legal obligations; and

26.1.2 not affect the powers and responsibilities of the Society Board under Rule 27.

26.2 Any person who deals with the Society in good faith and is not aware that a direction has been given may deal with the Society on the basis that no direction has been given.

 

 

 

 

SMISA Members Resolution Proposal.docx

Members Resolution - SMISA's reponse.pdf

You have my vote buddie. We are simply wishing to add an option, not remove all other options, why do the SMISA board not like that ? it would be part of the democratic vote. If members don't want it they will not vote for it. If it complicates the voting system as the board have said, then why do the other options not complicate the voting system. If they want one less option, i would say that this option could replace the "save until the next vote" option.

Share this post


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

A great proposal which I fully support.

If the spend options are appropriate, they will get my support as priority but I will never support spend for spends sake and this gives a perfectly reasonable alternative.

I was surprised at the wording of the SMISA reply though, as they are not just resenting the option for the membership to decide, but essentially advising to vote against it!

If this was a political party, they are essentially trying to use the whip!

Thanks.

If the spend options are appropriate, they'll get my vote too and that is what I would expect of every member. My entire agenda is for the members to be given an option to save the pot if they feel that is appropriate.

 

Share this post


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

Have always thought there should be a portion or all spare cash saved  for fans ownership rainy day fond. We also need working capital the day we get the keys so to speak. You have my vote. 

Good man, lets spread the word and get KB's proposal voted through. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, BuddieinEK said:

A great proposal which I fully support.

 

If the spend options are appropriate, they will get my support as priority but I will never support spend for spends sake and this gives a perfectly reasonable alternative.

 

I was surprised at the wording of the SMISA reply though, as they are not just presenting the option for the membership to decide, but essentially advising to vote against it!

 

If this was a political party, they are essentially trying to use the whip!

 

I'm not sure whether it's your comprehension or intelect that's at fault here as SMISA even explain what they see as the biggest problem with your suggestion..............................................

Under the current system members always have the option not to spend – if a project is rejected, unspent money stays in the pot and is available for future use. That gives us flexibility – on occasion we have asked members if they want to use unspent money from a previous quarter. If this resolution is adopted SMISA could lose some of that flexibility – as some £2 money might be locked away, even if there was a compelling reason to use it.

you fairly obviously would like things done your way and you have every right to offer your proposal, what you don't have is the right to dis or belittle those who have different views.  You state in your follow up post (the one highlighted in red).............. Please see above, no flexibility is lost. The members will always have the right to decide to spend the pot. This proposal does not erode or remove that.   However; the portion emboldened above seems to contradict this,is someone lying or being selective in what they ARE or are NOT saying?  I am not a great fan of SMISA; but cannot fault their logic insofar as the response is concerned at any rate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read through this and the SMISA response.

Won't be voting for it, agree with the SMISA point that it is not really necessary. We all knew that the 2 pound pot would be there when we signed up, I don't really see the option to pull the plug on these positive contributions as a step forwards at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jaybee said:
I'm not sure whether it's your comprehension or intelect that's at fault here as SMISA even explain what they see as the biggest problem with your suggestion..............................................

Under the current system members always have the option not to spend – if a project is rejected, unspent money stays in the pot and is available for future use. That gives us flexibility – on occasion we have asked members if they want to use unspent money from a previous quarter. If this resolution is adopted SMISA could lose some of that flexibility – as some £2 money might be locked away, even if there was a compelling reason to use it.

you fairly obviously would like things done your way and you have every right to offer your proposal, what you don't have is the right to dis or belittle those who have different views.  You state in your follow up post (the one highlighted in red).............. Please see above, no flexibility is lost. The members will always have the right to decide to spend the pot. This proposal does not erode or remove that.   However; the portion emboldened above seems to contradict this,is someone lying or being selective in what they ARE or are NOT saying?  I am not a great fan of SMISA; but cannot fault their logic insofar as the response is concerned at any rate.

Are you talking to me or BuddieinEK here. You quote BinEK but refer to "your" proposal and also refer to the bit in red. It is my proposal and my response in red

The irony of you questioning "comprehension or intellect"

If you disagree, fine, say so but you have mugged yourself off by question his/my/our comprehension or intellect by getting it arse over tit. No harm done though

Anyways, have you followed the 3 monthly spend thread? Quite some healthy debate in there that this proposal has been born from.

Are you aware there are a number of SMISA members who would like the option to "save the pot"?

Are you aware SMISA has other cash available? Therefore there is flexibility. This is evidenced by the money that was given for the christmas meal after that lost out to goals for the academy.

Have you not thought your response through before posting?

but you dig me / BuddieinEK out for comprehension / intellect. It's really not clear who you are having the pop at

As has been presented, this is a proposal to have "save the pot" as an option, not replace options.

Enjoy your day.

 

 

 

Edited by Kombibuddie
removed duplication

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jaybee said:

I'm not sure whether it's your comprehension or intelect that's at fault here as SMISA even explain what they see as the biggest problem with your suggestion..............................................

Under the current system members always have the option not to spend – if a project is rejected, unspent money stays in the pot and is available for future use. That gives us flexibility – on occasion we have asked members if they want to use unspent money from a previous quarter. If this resolution is adopted SMISA could lose some of that flexibility – as some £2 money might be locked away, even if there was a compelling reason to use it.

you fairly obviously would like things done your way and you have every right to offer your proposal, what you don't have is the right to dis or belittle those who have different views.  You state in your follow up post (the one highlighted in red).............. Please see above, no flexibility is lost. The members will always have the right to decide to spend the pot. This proposal does not erode or remove that.   However; the portion emboldened above seems to contradict this,is someone lying or being selective in what they ARE or are NOT saying?  I am not a great fan of SMISA; but cannot fault their logic insofar as the response is concerned at any rate.

 

9 hours ago, jaybee said:

How about, lets NOT.

Ahhh the roasters are on the table. You actually seem to be saying you arent a smisa member? Of course that doesnt stop you having a view, just means it's irrelevant.

Share this post


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

I've read through this and the SMISA response.

Won't be voting for it, agree with the SMISA point that it is not really necessary. We all knew that the 2 pound pot would be there when we signed up, I don't really see the option to pull the plug on these positive contributions as a step forwards at all.

Always youre choice, but an option like this will help us build a reserve ready for takeover which many members have indicated they want. For me its Matchballs & Hand dryers v Healthy Bank Balance for new owners. No contest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've read through this and the SMISA response.
Won't be voting for it, agree with the SMISA point that it is not really necessary. We all knew that the 2 pound pot would be there when we signed up, I don't really see the option to pull the plug on these positive contributions as a step forwards at all.
Fair enough Kemp but as has been said and the proposal stipulates, it is adding the option not pulling the plug on the spending options.

The purpose is,
that when given options that members are not enthused by, they will get the option to save if they think that is the better option for that particular 3 monthly spend.

Empowers the members to spend or save & not just spend for the sake of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Always youre choice, but an option like this will help us build a reserve ready for takeover which many members have indicated they want. For me its Matchballs & Hand dryers v Healthy Bank Balance for new owners. No contest.
You are absolutely correct regarding it is what some members have asked for.

I am totally in favour of having the option though I can only think off hand of one time I may have voted for it.

It's the working of it in a vote for it to achieve success I have reservations over.

Ie, if the vote had it usual couple of suggestions then the options of saving and also carrying it over I fear it won't achieve the numbers to succeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Kombibuddie said:

Fair enough Kemp but as has been said and the proposal stipulates, it is adding the option not pulling the plug on the spending options.

The purpose is,
that when given options that members are not enthused by, they will get the option to save if they think that is the better option for that particular 3 monthly spend.

Empowers the members to spend or save & not just spend for the sake of it.
 

I certainly think it is good to start having the conversation now about building up funds ready for the takeover.

On the other hand, the ongoing contributions to the club & wider society around Paisley was one of the reasons I signed up. I wouldn't want the membership getting too focused on saving for the takeover that this is pushed aside. 

FWIW, I do agree better suggestions than footballs and hand driers need to be put forward on the use of the pot!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If and i know it's a big if, the proposal was voted through and the option to save every spend was successful each and every time, it would generate over £200,000 (at current member numbers) which would be very useful come the year 2026.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/17/2019 at 9:17 AM, Kombibuddie said:

Members of SMISA will have received formal notification of the SMISA AGM on Saturday 30th March. Within this notification is notice that I have submitted a Members Resolution Proposal in accordance with Rule 26 of SMISA's constitution.

That  Resolution is to add the option ‘Save this Discretionary Spend Pot’ as a voting option for the members in the next and all future SMISA members Discretionary Spend Votes. I have attached the proposal along with SMISA's response/counter that was sent to the members also.

I have been quite vociferous in my objections to some of the options presented to the membership and have championed having an option for "Saving the Pot" for when the Buds is Bought since virtually day one.

The proposal is to add the option to save the pot to every vote to allow the members the choice to save or spend, especially when less inspiring options are presented to us. The proposal is not to replace options but to always be an option available to the membership if they wish to vote to save the pot.

I met with 2 members of the SMISA committee in November, which I thank them for their time. Our discussions were constructive and healthy. I have since exchanged a couple of emails with them too. The one thing that was apparent is, the 3 of us all want the same thing and that is the betterment of St Mirren FC. We just see how that is achieved ever so slightly differently.

Both my proposal and SMISA's counter are attached for your consideration. I will however, post a response to SMISA's counter argument separately.

For this to be passed, it requires votes in favour. If you cannot make SMISA's AGM (hopefully you can), please consider giving me your proxy vote to vote on your behalf. Thank you.

Rule 26 of the SMISA Constitution.

26. The members may by a resolution carried by not less than two-thirds of the members voting in person or by proxy at a general meeting but not otherwise give directions to the Society Board. A member wishing to propose a members’ resolution for consideration at a general meeting shall give notice in writing to the Secretary of such wish, and of the justification for, form and content of the resolution, not later than noon 28 days before that meeting is to be held. The following provisions apply to any directions given:

26.1 any direction must:

26.1.1 be consistent with these Rules and with the Society’s contractual, statutory and other legal obligations; and

26.1.2 not affect the powers and responsibilities of the Society Board under Rule 27.

26.2 Any person who deals with the Society in good faith and is not aware that a direction has been given may deal with the Society on the basis that no direction has been given.

 

 

 

 

SMISA Members Resolution Proposal.docx

Members Resolution - SMISA's reponse.pdf

 

On 3/17/2019 at 9:29 AM, Lord Pityme said:

To summarise Smisa's response, "no fecking way are we accepting a lowly member's proposal, ffs! Do you think we are going to tell Gordon we arent giving him anymore money for carefully considered options like.. matchballs and hand dryers?

i admire you're detailed approach, but you are actually up against the club, and as was evidenced when Smisa members had the temerity to decide to donate some of THEIR funds to a long established youth community football club, the chairman went Radio feckin Rental.

you've got my vote bud.

A fair and well written proposal by Kombiebuddie and an equally fair and well written response from SMISA representatives. As usual LPM jumps all over the negative just because someone at SMISA has outlined completely relevant (not necessarily correct) and weighted concerns. Almost like a bias or something... 

Right thing to do as per all the guidance we have each signed up for as SMISA members, is to put it to the vote. For me, I have absolutely no issue with having it as a standing option if that's how the vote goes. But in my observation, I don't see it being an option that will pass as the options to spend the money have always been voted on by considerably larger numbers than any possible saving option. I appreciate this is different from 'carry to another vote' or 'add to buy out' but the fundamentals are pretty mu 

It won't get my vote for that reason and the concerns placed by SMISA but again, happy regardless of the democratic outcome. I won't spit the dummy if an option I don't want wins like some people I could mention. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Kemp said:

I certainly think it is good to start having the conversation now about building up funds ready for the takeover.

On the other hand, the ongoing contributions to the club & wider society around Paisley was one of the reasons I signed up. I wouldn't want the membership getting too focused on saving for the takeover that this is pushed aside. 

FWIW, I do agree better suggestions than footballs and hand driers need to be put forward on the use of the pot!

I completely understand your view but I see this as a natural evolution of the BTB initiative.

The idea of the spend pot was when St Mirren didn't have a pot to piss in (pardon the pun). They do now unless the club has spent all the transfer money received in the last couple of years, are not managing the finances the increased revenue is generating or even frittering away the profits from the 1877 Club.

BTB can evolve to looking at the future by having the option to save the pot.

Share this post


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

 

A fair and well written proposal by Kombiebuddie and an equally fair and well written response from SMISA representatives. As usual LPM jumps all over the negative just because someone at SMISA has outlined completely relevant (not necessarily correct) and weighted concerns. Almost like a bias or something... 

Right thing to do as per all the guidance we have each signed up for as SMISA members, is to put it to the vote. For me, I have absolutely no issue with having it as a standing option if that's how the vote goes. But in my observation, I don't see it being an option that will pass as the options to spend the money have always been voted on by considerably larger numbers than any possible saving option. I appreciate this is different from 'carry to another vote' or 'add to buy out' but the fundamentals are pretty mu 

It won't get my vote for that reason and the concerns placed by SMISA but again, happy regardless of the democratic outcome. I won't spit the dummy if an option I don't want wins like some people I could mention. :rolleyes:

Fair points. There'll be no spitting the dummy from me if the resolution is not successful either.

As you say, the option has always been to spend. Having "Save the Pot" as an option should satisfy me and other like minded folk who have been arguing for it's inclusion for some time. I say should as I cannot speak for others but know, it will satisfy me. The members can then decide to spend or save and it stops folk like me thinking "bleeding eck! Footballs for a professional football club??? whatever next " when notification of the votes goes out.

My discussions with SMISA have been open, honest and respectful. Disagreeing with each other is part of life. We can disagree and argue our points without falling out.

Edited by Kombibuddie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Kombibuddie said:

Fair points. There'll be no spitting the dummy from me if the resolution is not successful either.

As you say, the option has always been to spend. Having "Save the Pot" as an option should satisfy me and other like minded folk who have been arguing for it's inclusion for some time. I say should as I cannot speak for others but know, it will satisfy me. The members can then decide to spend or save and it stops folk like me thinking "bleeding eck! Footballs for a professional football club??? whatever next " when notification of the votes goes out.

My discussions with SMISA have been open, honest and respectful. Disagreeing with each other is part of life. We can disagree and argue our points without falling out.

Absolutely let's see what happens, it all comes down to opinions and nothing more. Have to say a look at the accounts and how steady the member numbers have stayed is very promising for future finance regardless. I do hope we see some more in the way of growing numbers. 

I can't make the vote but intend to proxy. One question I would ask was about the shares. I didn't fully understand it on the accounts. Does it mean all SMISA members that complete the agreed period will end up with one ordinary share? If so that's great (not financially obviously, just symbolically) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...