Explosive Smisa application

[garzo]

5 hours ago, doakie said:

Guys,

I’ve been sent this analysis of the board’s statement from a fan who wishes to remain anonymous – simply due to the amount of personal criticism that’s been posted here towards other contributors and towards Alan Wardrop himself. I asked for replies to be respectful and I repeat that plea.  What follows is one fan's opinion and you may agree or disagree. I offer no opinion i.e. don’t shoot the messenger but I do feel it is worthy of your attention.

Make up your own mind about this analysis but I will highlight that the deadline for stage 1 applications was 17 June 2022.

                                                       ST.MIRREN CLUB BOARD STATEMENT

SMISA members and fans will be aware that an election process is underway to fill vacancies on the SMISA Board. One of the candidates referred to a grant application, initiated by Kibble, for funding under the auspices of the Scottish Government Regeneration Capital Grant Fund (RCGF). Given the nature of the wording within that candidate statement, the Club Board wish to clarify the details regarding this matter, including the diligence undertaken in September/October 2022

[Comment] – The timing is only one aspect of AW’s criticism of Kibble.  The content of the application is the subject of deeper concern.  Here, the Club statement confirms that the Board conducted “diligence” 3 months too late, and that it had no knowledge. Stage 1 Application submitted in June, Scot Gov RCGF announcement 5^th September and Club Board meeting 29^th September.   

During the September 2022 Board meeting the Directors became aware of, and discussed, a proposal to build a Wellbeing Centre in Ferguslie Park and a funding application to the RCGF. All St Mirren Football Club Directors were in attendance. A Stage 1 Application had been submitted for RCGF funding and it was successful in moving to Stage 2 of the process. The application cited Kibble, The St Mirren Charitable Foundation and Renfrewshire Council as leading the application, the Club nor the Charitable Foundation had been engaged prior to the submission as this was very early stages of the process. It should be noted that historic discussions and meetings around the development of the Ferguslie Master Plan, including the potential development of a Wellbeing Centre, had taken place with Club Board members, Renfrewshire Council senior officials and other stakeholders.

Comment –

• “The Directors became aware of”.  Obviously, this relates to only the SMiSA appointed directors.  The Kibble directors knew months before September.  So, only some of the directors “became aware of”.  Misleading and an attempt to deflect. 
• The Statement says, “…historic discussions and meetings … with Club Board members …”  Which “Club Board members”?  Surely they are not trying to pull the wool over everyone’s eyes by referring to the Kibble representatives to the Board!  They obviously had no authority to represent the Board as the matter had not been brought to the attention of the Board until September.  The “hat” they wore during these discussions was that of Kibble and not the Board.  They cannot seriously contend that the Club Board knew merely because the two Kibble directors knew.
• Clearly, the first the Directors became aware was September.  They neglect to say when the Stage 1 Application was submitted (June 2022) – which is a damning fact in itself.  One of Alan’s points was that an application was submitted in the Club’s name without the Board’s knowledge nor approval.  The two Kibble directors had no authority to make such a submission.  The Club Statement admits as much but attempts to divert attention by claiming it was “…very early stages.”
• The Statement says “…application cited Kibble, The St Mirren Charitable Foundation and Renfrewshire Council as leading the application.”  They do not say that the Club was also named as a participant in the project.  An inclusion in June without knowledge nor authority.
• So what does this paragraph tell us?  The Directors admit that they (only the SMiSA appointed directors) first became aware of the RCGF application well after the process was initiated in June. 

From the discussions that took place at the St Mirren Football Club Board meeting on 29 September 2022 it became clear that the matter would require further conversation with the Charitable Foundation and that the Club should maintain interest in this matter to establish if the project offered any tangible benefit going forward. It was agreed that timely and appropriate discussions must take place regarding any potential projects in future to ensure that all stakeholders, directly involved or otherwise, were aware of the approach that was being taken. 

[ Comment] – The approach being taken by Kibble and not the Club nor the Foundation – yet each was declared in the application to be an integral partner and developer.

Regarding the suggestion that St Mirren Football Club was expected to offer its land for the proposed Wellbeing Centre, this was not the case. The application was unspecific as to the precise location of the proposed building, but a crucial element of the plan was that the Wellbeing Centre would be built on one of several long-term derelict sites in the Ferguslie area, not on land owned by St Mirren.

[Comment] – While the narrative in application document may have been non-specific, an artists’ impression and location map submitted as an exhibit with the application, clearly demonstrates that Kibble had targeted St Mirren assets for use in the project.  The artist’s impression and location map, together with “Land ownership transfer” identified as a “Key next step” in the application document, demonstrate Kibble’s true intent.  Use of St Mirren land was an integral part of the plans well before the SMiSA appointed Directors knew of those plans.

Given the need to align other stakeholders, a meeting with the Charitable Foundation took place, and subsequently the Charitable Foundation Board agreed to support the Stage 2 application for RCGF funding, given the complementary nature of the establishment of a Wellbeing Centre in the area.

[Comment] – The meeting with the Foundation took place at the instance of the Foundation (not Kibble) after it was surprised by a congratulatory message from another club at moving to Phase 2.  At that moment, it had no knowledge about the application nor the pivotal part it was said to play in its conceptualisation and development.  This occurred a mere 3 days before the Phase 2 deadline.  Clearly, that was insufficient time to get acquainted with a project that had been under consideration by Kibble for at least a year and 4 months of an application process.  The Foundation was not going to stand in the way.  The Foundation did not, however, “support” the Stage 2 application.  In fact, the material presented to the Foundation prior to submission, and used during the discussions, did not match the application actually submitted.  The Foundation was misled.

The Club Board, having confirmed that alignment on the proposal had been achieved, was content that the matter had been concluded appropriately from a St Mirren Football Club perspective. As highlighted, a watching brief on the progress of the application was applied to establish it there were any opportunities for the Club arising from the initiative. The Club Board will always be supportive of any regeneration and development of the area surrounding the stadium if it is complementary to the best interests of the Club.

[Comment] – What steps did the Board take to “confirm alignment”?  Did it:

• Review the application material? 
  • If not, questions must be asked about the integrity of the enquiry process to “confirm alignment” and whether a failure to review the application and map was a failure of the Directors’ fiduciary duties to the Club.
  • If so, then how could the Director’s condone the misstatements of fact in the June 2022 application?
• Was the Board presented with a copy of the artists’ impression and location map?
  • If not, then at least two of the Directors (with full knowledge of the artists impression and the intent to use St Mirren land) were not forthcoming to the other (SMiSA) directors.  These two Directors had a fiduciary duty of transparency to the others and to make a full disclosure.
  • If so, how is it that alignment could be confirmed when the project was intended to be located on St Mirren owned land?

Notification that the application was unsuccessful was received in January 2023, and the matter is now closed.

[Comment] – While the application may have been unsuccessful, the matter is far from closed.  The events leading up the development, preparation, and submission of the application, made on behalf of the Club without Board approval, and the part played by Kibble, is an extremely important governance matter.  This issue is exacerbated by the extent of the misstatements and misrepresentations made in the application materials, attributable to the Club and the Foundation, without their knowledge.

It is also worth noting by way of background information that the Club own a parcel of land adjacent to the stadium. Any sale or transfer of that asset, or any other element of the St Mirren estate, would require to be subject to a robust process. This would include being professionally valued, recommended by a majority of the Directors and approved by Club Shareholders as part of the legal Shareholder Agreement.

To reiterate the information outlined above regarding the RCGF application, no St Mirren Football Club land was ever part of the application or discussion hence these arrangements were never required.

[Comment] – The artists’ impression and location map, prepared by Kibble, clearly show that St Mirren Football Club land was part of the application.

There have been other parties who have proposed the development of the stadium facilities and these, when they have been suggested, have been treated in a similar manner to the RCGF application by the St Mirren Football Club Board.

[Comment] – The difference is that these other projects:

• were discussed by the Board before steps were taken to gain government funding
• they were not proposed by DIrectors who had a fiduciary duty to the Club
• did not include applications for government funding that contained serious misstatements of fact and material misrepresentations.

Like all fans, the Club Board are looking forward to the next five games that see our Club in the Top Six of the SPFL for the first time, we want everyone to enjoy the games, get right behind the team and are looking forward to a positive end to one of the most successful seasons in our Club's history.

RCGF-R10-Stage-1-submission-guidance-2023-24.doc 120.5 kB · 11 downloads

This is interesting & on First reading of it, I agree with the comments.

Couple of things;

Why is application graphic in name of St Mirren? 

What are St Mirren @smisa directors playing at here? The dynamic seems to be they didn't know about any of this, didn't care when it was brought to light and waved it away, like there is no issue and now, if the club released statement is endorsed by all directors, are party to interference in a smisa election and "dodgy" PR style , statement full of deflection & potential inaccuracy. 

I know a bit about the RCGF applications.  They are a council led application for Scottish government funding.

[doakie]

10 minutes ago, garzo said:

This is interesting & on First reading of it, I agree with the comments.

Couple of things;

Why is application graphic in name of St Mirren? 

What are St Mirren @smisa directors playing at here? The dynamic seems to be they didn't know about any of this, didn't care when it was brought to light and waved it away, like there is no issue and now, if the club released statement is endorsed by all directors, are party to interference in a smisa election and "dodgy" PR style , statement full of deflection & potential inaccuracy. 

I know a bit about the RCGF applications.  They are a council led application for Scottish government funding.

I can't argue with any of your points. 

[saint in exile]

Helluva lot of "new" posters in this thread. Strange?

[bazil85]

So, just to conclude on this ‘closed’ matter. Yet another attack on the Kibble turns out to be a damp squib?

Disappointed (although not surprised) in the way AW has conducted himself here. It seems completely needless & borderline hysterics. 

[glen]

50 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

So, just to conclude on this ‘closed’ matter. Yet another attack on the Kibble turns out to be a damp squib?

Disappointed (although not surprised) in the way AW has conducted himself here. It seems completely needless & borderline hysterics. 

The only things that seem 'closed' are your ears, your eyes and your mind Mr. Kibble.

 

[billyg]

51 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Disappointed (although not surprised) in the way AW has conducted himself here. It seems completely needless & borderline hysterics. 

If it had been anyone else apart from Wardrop I may have shown a bit of concern , but he's a self-serving idiot that I pay no heed to !

[bazil85]

15 minutes ago, glen said:

The only things that seem 'closed' are your ears, your eyes and your mind Mr. Kibble.

 

I mean… have you read the club statement? It was an absolute, non-issue. 

[Stu]

On 5/7/2023 at 7:49 PM, saint in exile said:

Helluva lot of "new" posters in this thread. Strange?

Sadly, this seems to be the way of things when it comes to discussing most issues related to SMiSA, the club board and the Kibble. New accounts appear often appear and we have people posting to support their own and/or their pal's agendas. It's not even well disguised either - it's blatantly obvious who the "fan who wishes to remain anonymous" is. It's a shame because there have probably been legitimate concerns raised about this grant application, but it gets lost on all the points scoring and people pushing their own agendas.

But this all seems acceptable - making it even more laughable that the younger candidates got into trouble at the last SMiSA board elections for posting on Twitter asking folk to vote for them as that was classed as "electioneering" and apparently isn't allowed.

Edited May 8, 2023 by Stu

[Doakes]

Skim read most of this but would it really be a bad thing if the land around the stadium is developed? The clubs link with kibble could work if everyone became more positive about it rather than spinning mad conspiracy theories around. Kibble exists to care for vulnerable people, why does everyone assume the worst? 

[glen]

From today's Glasgow Herald 

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/homenews/23510874.st-mirren-rocked-public-funds-row-regeneration-project/

One of Scotland's oldest football clubs has been plunged into turmoil after a social care charity who are part-owners pushed a 'secret' plan to seek £2m of public money for a well-being centre for disadvantaged children on its land 'without permission'.
One former director of St Mirren FC has revealed he resigned from the fan-owned board at the end of last year after discovering the plan for the £13.4m project while pushed by the Paisley-based social care charity and leading social enterprise Kibble, who three years ago bought a 27 per cent stake to become part-owners of the club.
Alan Wardrop, a lifelong Saints fan who made the step up to the club's board in July 2016 has accused Kibble club board representatives, Jim Gillespie and Mark MacMillan of having a "conflict of interest" by failing to disclose to directors, shareholders and fans of the bid to build the centre that the care charity would run on club land in Paisley while it appeared to wrongly have St Mirren's stamp of approval.
As the dispute emerged, Kibble said the drawings showing the project would be on club land were an error.
Formerly one of four representatives of the St Mirren Independent Supporters Association (SMISA) on the board having played a big part in helping the club moving into fan ownership, Mr Wardrop is now seeking the removal of Kibble representatives on the board.
Applications for public funds to support the project described it as "the St Mirren Masterplan" with an "innovative partnership" with "St Mirren Football Club’s Charitable Foundation cited as one of the three partners with Kibble and the council.
But the foundation has sent a letter to Kibble saying that they had no knowledge of the project when the application for funds was sought in June "much less that its name would be associated with any submission for government funding".
It said it only found out through a third party in October, after a second stage bid was being made.   It decided not to "interject itself" from the process as there was "insufficient time" to make an assessment.
It has called for a "full explanation surrounding the application process" and why there were "material misstatements and representations in support of Scottish Government funding".
It said: "We are deeply concerned that this unilateral action on the part of Kibble was submitted without our knowledge and associates the Foundation with statements and representations of fact that we do not recognise."
 
In seeking election to join the SMISA board Mr Wardrop says that he and many others, "no longer have trust and confidence in Kibble’s directors serving on the board of St. Mirren FC" and that he put forward his application "on the basis I wish to remove them".
It comes three years after Police Scotland launched an investigation into financial irregularities at the club, which is currently sitting sixth in the top tier of Scottish football.
The club alerted police after concerns surfaced over commercial agreements, sub contracts and possible non-payment of tax and national insurance.
The Scottish Premiership club then called in forensic accountants to carry out what they call a "thorough review of a number of areas of its operations".
Renfrewshire Council initially applied for a £2.65m grant for what was titled the "St Mirren Regeneration and Well-being Masterplan" through the Scottish Government's Regeneration Capital Grant Fund in June, last year.
The proposal documents stated the project was due to start on April 3, this year and finish on March 3, 2025.
Project details put to the Scottish Government confirms that Kibble produced a business plan for the well-being centre on the derelict site which would support vulnerable young people and "provides evidence" that it is "financially viable".
It states that Kibble "will deliver personalised, tailored approaches agreed alongside the child and their family".
The plan stated: "The centre will be the first of its kind, to support children & young people with complex mental health needs who are currently falling through the gaps of existing Scottish mental health provision. The centre will provide a safe, nurturing environment for those who have experienced significant trauma."
It stated that "collaboration is crucial to the delivery of the St Mirren Masterplan and will require collaborative working between Renfrewshire Council, Kibble, St Mirren Football Club, residents, local stakeholders and businesses."
Mr Wardrop, who is an SMCF trustee and a retired financial advisor, says the application was not disclosed to other SMISA club board directors and no prior agreement was secured before the funding application was initially sought in June, last year and it was only discovered in September, when a second stage submission was made.
 
Mr Wardrop said: "The situation is scandalous. I have taken legal advice on this. At the very least it is secretive, it has not been transparent. It is not in keeping with the values of fan ownership or the way you should conduct yourself as company directors acting in the best interests of the football club to put in an application for government money and build on St Mirren land, and you don't share it with fellow directors for a period of three months.
"SMISA directors had no idea about the application when it was put in. I challenged at every turn, and the answers I got was there was nothing to see. St Mirren were never going to be a beneficiary of this project. It is a Kibble-run centre, they would operate it and get money from the government.
"The application is full of the use of the word 'collaboration', but there has been no collaboration with St Mirren Football Club. It is unbelievable what they had done."
He added: "As a born and bred Buddy, from the high flats at Stock Street, Paisley, I have supported St. Mirren since a child in the mid 70’s when Sir Alex Ferguson’s, Fergie’s Furies got me hooked. I simply want to serve in the club’s and fans’ best interests and protect and build a successful future for our wonderful club."
Plot drawings submitted as part of the application to Scottish Government, seen by the Herald, confirm that the land earmarked was owned by St Mirren.
According to the grant application submitted in September, the sale of the land "has been agreed" and that the land ownership would transfer on January 2023.
As disquiet about the project began to surface, an email sent by Mr Gillespie on Monday and shared with candidates standing for election to the board of SMISA said that the council "wrongly shaded in an area of land owned by St Mirren" and gave a "categoric assurance" that club land would not be used.
According to submissions to the Scottish Government, the project aimed to develop 10 acres of land - the equivalent of around five football pitches - and create a well-being centre "which will support inclusive growth in the Ferguslie Park area of Paisley, an area consistently ranked in the top 10 most deprived SIMD data zones in Scotland".
The application stated: "The partnership aims to effectively demonstrate how collaboration can leverage investment for the benefit of the physical and social infrastructure of a community and provide a basis to strengthen and sustain regeneration in an area suffering from high levels of deprivation."
St Mirren confirmed that neither the club or the charitable foundation had been engaged prior to the submission "as this was very early stages of the process".
It said "historic discussions and meetings" had taken place around the development of a Ferguslie Master Plan, including the potential development of a well-being centre, had taken place with club board members, Renfrewshire Council senior officials and other stakeholders.
But it said that it had not been expected to offer its land as part of the project.
It said any sale or transfer of its land "would require to be subject to a robust process" including being professionally valued, recommended by a majority of the directors and approved by club shareholders as part of a legal agreement.
"From the discussions that took place at the St Mirren Football Club Board meeting on September 29, 2022 it became clear that the matter would require further conversation with the charitable foundation and that the club should maintain interest in this matter to establish if the project offered any tangible benefit going forward.
"It was agreed that timely and appropriate discussions must take place regarding any potential projects in future to ensure that all stakeholders, directly involved or otherwise, were aware of the approach that was being taken," the club said.
It said that after a second stage application had been submitted, the board confirmed "alignment on the proposal had been achieved and was content that the matter had been concluded appropriately from a St Mirren Football Club perspective."
The club said: "A watching brief on the progress of the application was applied to establish if there were any opportunities for the club arising from the initiative. The club board will always be supportive of any regeneration and development of the area surrounding the stadium if it is complementary to the best interests of the club."
St Mirren became fan owned in the summer of 2021, when SMISA bought out the remaining shareholding of chairman Gordon Scott to become majority (51%) owners of the Buddies in what it called "a historic day".
The move to fan ownership of the Paisley club came after Kibble became part-owners in March, 2020.
SMISA said the deal helped to safeguard the future of the club – formed in 1877 – by placing it in the hands of its supporters, "the people who care for it the most".
Mr Wardrop was previously credited with making fan ownership possible by teaming up with SMISA to initially begin a buyout process in 2016.
When SMISA became majority shareholders, they asked Mr Wardrop to remain on the board as one of their representatives and he willingly agreed.
 
Mr Wardrop was the mastermind behind the 1877 Club in the main stand of the SMISA Stadium and has also contributed several items to the mini-museum inside the club from his personal collection of memorabilia.
When he announced he was quitting the board, A SMISA spokesman said: “Everyone at SMISA would like to thank him for all his time and effort on the board, both before and after he agreed to become one of our representatives.
“Everything he ever did was undoubtedly with the best interests of St Mirren at heart.”
The council have been asked by the Herald if the land designated in the bid for funding was their error.
A council spokesperson said: “The council submitted an application for Regeneration Capital Grant Funding to the Scottish Government on behalf of Kibble last year.
“The formal application itself was non-specific on the exact location of the proposed development, however we did add an appendix to the Stage One application as a guide, showing a site plan with an indicative location, to the north of St Mirren’s stadium.
“Should the funding bid have been successful, the exact location would have been subject to the outcome of a wider masterplan covering all development in the Ferguslie Park area.”
St Mirren said: "This is a storm in a teacup. The board were clear that this project did not involve any land owned by [the club]. However, the club will always be supportive of any proposal that improves SMFC and helps rebuild the economy and social fabric of the Ferguslie area. 
Kibble is classed as one of two that had "significant control" of the club according to Companies House with more than 25% but not more than 50% of the shares.
A spokesman for Kibble said: “Mr Wardrop’s allegations are based on the entirely false premise that there was ever any intention to build on land owned by St Mirren. There simply was not, as has now been confirmed by Kibble, the St Mirren FC board and Renfrewshire Council. 
“Indeed, Mr Wardrop was a member of the board of the St Mirren Charitable Foundation when it discussed and expressly supported the decision to move to Stage 2 of the funding application process. 
“We made a very early-stage, exploratory funding application for a much-needed Wellbeing Centre on one of the many vacant, derelict sites in the Ferguslie Park area.
“The unfortunate error on the part of the council in shading an area of land next to the stadium has led to ill-informed speculation, which has since been clarified.”
Police Scotland were approached about the outcome of the financial irregularities investigation.

 

 

[antrin]

So… the final few paragraphs state that, “There’s nothing to see here!”, then…?

The Cooncil shaded in a wrong bit of drawing…

[djchapsticks]

Embarrassing from Wardrop. Been told there's no wrongdoing by all involved parties and still goes to the press.

[faraway saint]

17 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:

Embarrassing from Wardrop. Been told there's no wrongdoing by all involved parties and still goes to the press.

Desperation. 

Surely this "ego over the club" attitude will see the end if any support for this individual? 

[SamSmith99]

On 5/8/2023 at 8:20 PM, Stu said:

Sadly, this seems to be the way of things when it comes to discussing most issues related to SMiSA, the club board and the Kibble. New accounts appear often appear and we have people posting to support their own and/or their pal's agendas. It's not even well disguised either - it's blatantly obvious who the "fan who wishes to remain anonymous" is. It's a shame because there have probably been legitimate concerns raised about this grant application, but it gets lost on all the points scoring and people pushing their own agendas.

But this all seems acceptable - making it even more laughable that the younger candidates got into trouble at the last SMiSA board elections for posting on Twitter asking folk to vote for them as that was classed as "electioneering" and apparently isn't allowed.

That’ll be another election Jack and Stuart have had to deal with another candidate going to the press during an election.

[bazil85]

AW is an utter embarrassment. No thought for the damage it does to the club in his campaign to take down the Kibble.
 

Hopefully this man is nowhere near our football club again. 

[antrin]

52 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:

Embarrassing from Wardrop. Been told there's no wrongdoing by all involved parties and still goes to the press.

Mr Wardrop didn’t necessarily go to the press.
Any capable journo scouring obscure fitba forums will bump into similar gossip/trivia that can be built into a story… then tied up neatly by a few further questions to informed sources.

[djchapsticks]

26 minutes ago, antrin said:

Mr Wardrop didn’t necessarily go to the press.
Any capable journo scouring obscure fitba forums will bump into similar gossip/trivia that can be built into a story… then tied up neatly by a few further questions to informed sources.

If you genuinely believe that is what has happened here, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.

That's two SMISA board applications from former SMFC board members that have made it to national press - none of the other many SMISA applications have.

If that don't put the 'dink' in coinkydink then I don't know what does.

Edited May 10, 2023 by djchapsticks

[waldorf34]

1 hour ago, bazil85 said:

AW is an utter embarrassment. No thought for the damage it does to the club in his campaign to take down the Kibble.
 

Hopefully this man is nowhere near our football club again. 

AW is all about AW ,always  has been

[billyg]

7 minutes ago, waldorf34 said:

AW is all about AW ,always  has been

That's what I've been saying all along , if he doesn't get his own way the toys are out of the pram. He shouldn't be anywhere near SMISA . I have resisted the thought of ending my association with SMISA even although there's been some bad press , I think basically the money being used for club related projects is a great thing , but if AW and the likes get involved , I'll be gone , and so will several others I have discussed this with !

[waldorf34]

5 hours ago, glen said:

From today's Glasgow Herald 

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/homenews/23510874.st-mirren-rocked-public-funds-row-regeneration-project/

One of Scotland's oldest football clubs has been plunged into turmoil after a social care charity who are part-owners pushed a 'secret' plan to seek £2m of public money for a well-being centre for disadvantaged children on its land 'without permission'.
One former director of St Mirren FC has revealed he resigned from the fan-owned board at the end of last year after discovering the plan for the £13.4m project while pushed by the Paisley-based social care charity and leading social enterprise Kibble, who three years ago bought a 27 per cent stake to become part-owners of the club.
Alan Wardrop, a lifelong Saints fan who made the step up to the club's board in July 2016 has accused Kibble club board representatives, Jim Gillespie and Mark MacMillan of having a "conflict of interest" by failing to disclose to directors, shareholders and fans of the bid to build the centre that the care charity would run on club land in Paisley while it appeared to wrongly have St Mirren's stamp of approval.
As the dispute emerged, Kibble said the drawings showing the project would be on club land were an error.
Formerly one of four representatives of the St Mirren Independent Supporters Association (SMISA) on the board having played a big part in helping the club moving into fan ownership, Mr Wardrop is now seeking the removal of Kibble representatives on the board.
Applications for public funds to support the project described it as "the St Mirren Masterplan" with an "innovative partnership" with "St Mirren Football Club’s Charitable Foundation cited as one of the three partners with Kibble and the council.
But the foundation has sent a letter to Kibble saying that they had no knowledge of the project when the application for funds was sought in June "much less that its name would be associated with any submission for government funding".
It said it only found out through a third party in October, after a second stage bid was being made.   It decided not to "interject itself" from the process as there was "insufficient time" to make an assessment.
It has called for a "full explanation surrounding the application process" and why there were "material misstatements and representations in support of Scottish Government funding".
It said: "We are deeply concerned that this unilateral action on the part of Kibble was submitted without our knowledge and associates the Foundation with statements and representations of fact that we do not recognise."
 
In seeking election to join the SMISA board Mr Wardrop says that he and many others, "no longer have trust and confidence in Kibble’s directors serving on the board of St. Mirren FC" and that he put forward his application "on the basis I wish to remove them".
It comes three years after Police Scotland launched an investigation into financial irregularities at the club, which is currently sitting sixth in the top tier of Scottish football.
The club alerted police after concerns surfaced over commercial agreements, sub contracts and possible non-payment of tax and national insurance.
The Scottish Premiership club then called in forensic accountants to carry out what they call a "thorough review of a number of areas of its operations".
Renfrewshire Council initially applied for a £2.65m grant for what was titled the "St Mirren Regeneration and Well-being Masterplan" through the Scottish Government's Regeneration Capital Grant Fund in June, last year.
The proposal documents stated the project was due to start on April 3, this year and finish on March 3, 2025.
Project details put to the Scottish Government confirms that Kibble produced a business plan for the well-being centre on the derelict site which would support vulnerable young people and "provides evidence" that it is "financially viable".
It states that Kibble "will deliver personalised, tailored approaches agreed alongside the child and their family".
The plan stated: "The centre will be the first of its kind, to support children & young people with complex mental health needs who are currently falling through the gaps of existing Scottish mental health provision. The centre will provide a safe, nurturing environment for those who have experienced significant trauma."
It stated that "collaboration is crucial to the delivery of the St Mirren Masterplan and will require collaborative working between Renfrewshire Council, Kibble, St Mirren Football Club, residents, local stakeholders and businesses."
Mr Wardrop, who is an SMCF trustee and a retired financial advisor, says the application was not disclosed to other SMISA club board directors and no prior agreement was secured before the funding application was initially sought in June, last year and it was only discovered in September, when a second stage submission was made.
 
Mr Wardrop said: "The situation is scandalous. I have taken legal advice on this. At the very least it is secretive, it has not been transparent. It is not in keeping with the values of fan ownership or the way you should conduct yourself as company directors acting in the best interests of the football club to put in an application for government money and build on St Mirren land, and you don't share it with fellow directors for a period of three months.
"SMISA directors had no idea about the application when it was put in. I challenged at every turn, and the answers I got was there was nothing to see. St Mirren were never going to be a beneficiary of this project. It is a Kibble-run centre, they would operate it and get money from the government.
"The application is full of the use of the word 'collaboration', but there has been no collaboration with St Mirren Football Club. It is unbelievable what they had done."
He added: "As a born and bred Buddy, from the high flats at Stock Street, Paisley, I have supported St. Mirren since a child in the mid 70’s when Sir Alex Ferguson’s, Fergie’s Furies got me hooked. I simply want to serve in the club’s and fans’ best interests and protect and build a successful future for our wonderful club."
Plot drawings submitted as part of the application to Scottish Government, seen by the Herald, confirm that the land earmarked was owned by St Mirren.
According to the grant application submitted in September, the sale of the land "has been agreed" and that the land ownership would transfer on January 2023.
As disquiet about the project began to surface, an email sent by Mr Gillespie on Monday and shared with candidates standing for election to the board of SMISA said that the council "wrongly shaded in an area of land owned by St Mirren" and gave a "categoric assurance" that club land would not be used.
According to submissions to the Scottish Government, the project aimed to develop 10 acres of land - the equivalent of around five football pitches - and create a well-being centre "which will support inclusive growth in the Ferguslie Park area of Paisley, an area consistently ranked in the top 10 most deprived SIMD data zones in Scotland".
The application stated: "The partnership aims to effectively demonstrate how collaboration can leverage investment for the benefit of the physical and social infrastructure of a community and provide a basis to strengthen and sustain regeneration in an area suffering from high levels of deprivation."
St Mirren confirmed that neither the club or the charitable foundation had been engaged prior to the submission "as this was very early stages of the process".
It said "historic discussions and meetings" had taken place around the development of a Ferguslie Master Plan, including the potential development of a well-being centre, had taken place with club board members, Renfrewshire Council senior officials and other stakeholders.
But it said that it had not been expected to offer its land as part of the project.
It said any sale or transfer of its land "would require to be subject to a robust process" including being professionally valued, recommended by a majority of the directors and approved by club shareholders as part of a legal agreement.
"From the discussions that took place at the St Mirren Football Club Board meeting on September 29, 2022 it became clear that the matter would require further conversation with the charitable foundation and that the club should maintain interest in this matter to establish if the project offered any tangible benefit going forward.
"It was agreed that timely and appropriate discussions must take place regarding any potential projects in future to ensure that all stakeholders, directly involved or otherwise, were aware of the approach that was being taken," the club said.
It said that after a second stage application had been submitted, the board confirmed "alignment on the proposal had been achieved and was content that the matter had been concluded appropriately from a St Mirren Football Club perspective."
The club said: "A watching brief on the progress of the application was applied to establish if there were any opportunities for the club arising from the initiative. The club board will always be supportive of any regeneration and development of the area surrounding the stadium if it is complementary to the best interests of the club."
St Mirren became fan owned in the summer of 2021, when SMISA bought out the remaining shareholding of chairman Gordon Scott to become majority (51%) owners of the Buddies in what it called "a historic day".
The move to fan ownership of the Paisley club came after Kibble became part-owners in March, 2020.
SMISA said the deal helped to safeguard the future of the club – formed in 1877 – by placing it in the hands of its supporters, "the people who care for it the most".
Mr Wardrop was previously credited with making fan ownership possible by teaming up with SMISA to initially begin a buyout process in 2016.
When SMISA became majority shareholders, they asked Mr Wardrop to remain on the board as one of their representatives and he willingly agreed.
 
Mr Wardrop was the mastermind behind the 1877 Club in the main stand of the SMISA Stadium and has also contributed several items to the mini-museum inside the club from his personal collection of memorabilia.
When he announced he was quitting the board, A SMISA spokesman said: “Everyone at SMISA would like to thank him for all his time and effort on the board, both before and after he agreed to become one of our representatives.
“Everything he ever did was undoubtedly with the best interests of St Mirren at heart.”
The council have been asked by the Herald if the land designated in the bid for funding was their error.
A council spokesperson said: “The council submitted an application for Regeneration Capital Grant Funding to the Scottish Government on behalf of Kibble last year.
“The formal application itself was non-specific on the exact location of the proposed development, however we did add an appendix to the Stage One application as a guide, showing a site plan with an indicative location, to the north of St Mirren’s stadium.
“Should the funding bid have been successful, the exact location would have been subject to the outcome of a wider masterplan covering all development in the Ferguslie Park area.”
St Mirren said: "This is a storm in a teacup. The board were clear that this project did not involve any land owned by [the club]. However, the club will always be supportive of any proposal that improves SMFC and helps rebuild the economy and social fabric of the Ferguslie area. 
Kibble is classed as one of two that had "significant control" of the club according to Companies House with more than 25% but not more than 50% of the shares.
A spokesman for Kibble said: “Mr Wardrop’s allegations are based on the entirely false premise that there was ever any intention to build on land owned by St Mirren. There simply was not, as has now been confirmed by Kibble, the St Mirren FC board and Renfrewshire Council. 
“Indeed, Mr Wardrop was a member of the board of the St Mirren Charitable Foundation when it discussed and expressly supported the decision to move to Stage 2 of the funding application process. 
“We made a very early-stage, exploratory funding application for a much-needed Wellbeing Centre on one of the many vacant, derelict sites in the Ferguslie Park area.
“The unfortunate error on the part of the council in shading an area of land next to the stadium has led to ill-informed speculation, which has since been clarified.”
Police Scotland were approached about the outcome of the financial irregularities investigation.

 

 

Was this written  by Graeme McPherson, who is on the Smisa committee?

[Jockmd]

Understandably, Kibble bought their share of the club, first and foremost, to benefit themselves. Should ever an issue arise which would enhance either Kibble or the Saints who would they vote for?

[portmahomack saint]

Love the bit about being the mastermind behind the 1877 club 

Never could quite understand how it was cheaper to get signed in for every home game than it was to become a full member of the club. I did point this out to him I got a smile as a response 

[antrin]

35 minutes ago, waldorf34 said:

Was this written  by Graeme McPherson, who is on the Smisa committee?

No - the reporter was…

Exclusive by Martin Williams@Martin1WilliamsSenior News Reporter

 

Edited May 10, 2023 by antrin
Editing out what looked like an unintentional nippy comment

[kevo_smfc]

26 minutes ago, waldorf34 said:

Was this written  by Graeme McPherson, who is on the Smisa committee?

Graeme stepped down from SMISA a few months back.

[InMehmetWeTrust]

Handy of the article to go through and discuss every aspect of what their “definitely not contacting the papers in order to electioneer” source wanted to make clear, and then just bung in at the end three confirmations from the parties involved that the whole point on St Mirren land is entirely incorrect. 
 

I honestly don’t have a particular horse in this race, but the relentless public mudslinging and “if only you knew what I knew” gossip that has plagued any club or SMISA discourse for the best part of a year now is a genuine embarrassment.