Jump to content

Alberta Soccer Dispute Continues ON


oc64

Recommended Posts

Did the judge actually stipulate that they could not change the locks? They could find themselves in a lot of trouble if they are disregarding a judges orders? CSA can't help them with that fight.

Maybe that is why Mario didn't show up for court. That way he didn't have to hear anything from the judge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I think the golden period was the time when neither board was in the office and the staff were just doing their job. I think this was after the sgm but before CSA emboldened the old guard to come out of their cave and wreak havoc. The office ran fine-the districts got answers-except from traficante who was blowing off all his responsibilities for summer games-tech guys were getting their work done. I guess my point is ASA is easy to run-just hire good staff-give them paramaters and leave them alone. Without all the money and energy wasted on infighting imagine how well a good size staff could run soccer in Alberta.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the golden period was the time when neither board was in the office and the staff were just doing their job. I think this was after the sgm but before CSA emboldened the old guard to come out of their cave and wreak havoc. The office ran fine-the districts got answers-except from traficante who was blowing off all his responsibilities for summer games-tech guys were getting their work done. I guess my point is ASA is easy to run-just hire good staff-give them paramaters and leave them alone. Without all the money and energy wasted on infighting imagine how well a good size staff could run soccer in Alberta.

I was told by several staffers that those couple weeks were the most enjoyable and productive times of their employment with ASA. (excluding the young traficante).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much money in legal fees has been spend by Mario pretending to negotiate an agreement he had no intentions of signing?

I am hoping that one of the terms of the "agreement" would be a forensic audit to determine the exact extent of the damage. Also, a stipulation that Mario's group repays every dime or misappropriated funds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am hoping that one of the terms of the "agreement" would be a forensic audit to determine the exact extent of the damage. Also, a stipulation that Mario's group repays every dime or misappropriated funds.

Good Luck with that. A judge might order it, but Mario will never voluntarily put his signature on anything like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is anyone here aware that on June 10, 2010, the Billings group was informed by Corporate Registries that the Charpentier-led cabal attempted to change the Alberta Registry Database? Because of that unauthorized action, no new registrations will be accepted by the Registry without a court order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is anyone here aware that on June 10, 2010, the Billings group was informed by Corporate Registries that the Charpentier-led cabal attempted to change the Alberta Registry Database? Because of that unauthorized action, no new registrations will be accepted by the Registry without a court order.

I assume it wasn't just to file the most recent copy of the Bylaws. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let see-estimated running tab:

bogus sgm- $15000

legal fees for charpentiers bogus lawsuit-$20000

slander/unlawful dismissal of ex dir- $250000 plus legal fees?

various dubious legal opinions by burnett at gowlings-10000

changing locks twice- $2000

severance-$20000

security guard at office-$10000 and counting

2 new lawsuits-$100000 plus costs

various other perks and entitlements-$10000

hiring and losing adams as ex dir-$10000

So in 5 disasterous months we see over $450000 liability incurred by the deposed board and counting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is anyone here aware that on June 10, 2010, the Billings group was informed by Corporate Registries that the Charpentier-led cabal attempted to change the Alberta Registry Database? Because of that unauthorized action, no new registrations will be accepted by the Registry without a court order.

I was aware of that. In fact, I went a few weeks back to try and pull a copy of the corporate registry and due to the suspension no one can even pull a list and see who the directors of record are.

Mario can't avoid court forever. The bank requires a court order, the registry requires a court order. CSA can say they need to avoid court, but the fact is that the association can not get back to business until they have been to court and received an official order stating who controls the association

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let see-estimated running tab:

bogus sgm- $15000

legal fees for charpentiers bogus lawsuit-$20000

slander/unlawful dismissal of ex dir- $250000 plus legal fees?

various dubious legal opinions by burnett at gowlings-10000

changing locks twice- $2000

severance-$20000

security guard at office-$10000 and counting

2 new lawsuits-$100000 plus costs

various other perks and entitlements-$10000

hiring and losing adams as ex dir-$10000

So in 5 disasterous months we see over $450000 liability incurred by the deposed board and counting.

I think you are being kind on the severance. I have to believe it is more than that. We are talking about at least 4 employees.

Also, if they changed the locks again this week that will be the third time. (when they suspended Chris, a few weeks ago right before they started firing everyone and putting traficante in charge and, if true, again this week). My guess is that all of our ballpark figures are low (severance, legal fees, etc). I bet the damage is greater that we can even imagine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CSA ignores the SGM but they are very keen on the suspension. Wonder why? Ignoring the mounting conspiracy theory and the work of Traficante there one can assume that the CSA executive think that the key issue is the suspension and if this was just taken care of then all will be well. This was the essense of their mediation of this matter. How they can ignore the will of the membership in electing Chris or the will of the membership in having an SGM is beyond me. The membership represented by the Districts pick and remove the Board. This is lost on these guys and that is why the court has to decide on the SGM and the suspension.

Had CSA actually understood these issues they would have insisted on a fair hearing on the suspension and offered to facilitate it and offered to mediate an SGM after this occurred they may have been able to help rather than make all this worse. Now they have a full on revolt-have screwed ALta for years and the money that was supposed to go to them is being spent on legal fees. Sorry to say this thing has to go all the way into new and dangerous territory before it can be resolved and it will stain all the guys on the CSA executive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So lets adjust up $50000. I am not even counting the costs of the other side so i am very low. Since they are more reasonable and on a tighter budget i will peg it at $100000. With an annual budget of 3.4 million and 250000 of that going to CSA we are talking about spending $600000 and counting on a budget of $3,150.000 so far...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I find interesting is that Mario, Colin et. al seemed to be terrified of the SGM results right up until they received their first letter of support from CSA. At that time, they promptly dropped their legal action and only then did we start to see some dubious legal opinions regarding the validity of the meeting.

I have to believe (knowing this cast of characters) that if they thought they would win in court they would push for a resolution through the court system (and probably do so with the blessing of CSA)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So lets adjust up $50000. I am not even counting the costs of the other side so i am very low. Since they are more reasonable and on a tighter budget i will peg it at $100000. With an annual budget of 3.4 million and 250000 of that going to CSA we are talking about spending $600000 and counting on a budget of $3,150.000 so far...

I think all well managed organizations spend 19% of their budget on legal fees and associated costs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OC-We are only at 5 months-lots of time to get up to 50%. Wonder how much money in lost sponsorship and advertizing? That needs to be factored in. Of course it looks like we will be duplicating all provincials tournaments as well and many more trips to court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OC-We are only at 5 months-lots of time to get up to 50%. Wonder how much money in lost sponsorship and advertizing? That needs to be factored in. Of course it looks like we will be duplicating all provincials tournaments as well and many more trips to court.

It is chilling when you actually sit down and do the math.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd be surprised if the ASRPW (?) Foundation forked/will fork over the second half of the grant money, even if there was a kiss and make up session yesterday. That's another $220,000 on hold....going....

But that's nothing compared to the Grant money paid to the CSF, CMSA and a few others in the past couple years....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was no session that i know of with Alta. Mario and Colin would only use that meeting as a dodge -make some promises and then renege. Likely Alta will see through that. Of course all this bad press is hurting soccer financially and in credibilty at every level at a time when soccer numbers are down 8%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

soccer numbers are down 8%.

The sad part is that kids love playing soccer. If is a great game but the kids and their parents just get tired of the BS and move onto different sports and activities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be very interested to know if the process for another SGM has been started.

I hope so. Regardless of a court decision, the districts have the power to demand a new SGM. The current problem is that until there is a resolution as to who is the current board there will always remain a dispute about which board will convene the SGM requested by membership.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last time we did an sgm-mario responded by setting up a duplicate sgm to oversee his own removal-he made the rules prohibitive-changed the time and added agenda items that were out of time. People had to sign confidentiality agreements and staff were prohibited from coming and there were guards at the door. There is more...but i am numbed.

My point is how can anyone set up an SGM now without the Courts setting the parameters ?-the rules wont be fair if the old board runs it-if the new board runs it then mario and CSA will ignore it-who calls it-who oversees it-which bylaws-and if it removes Mario et al they will just ignore it. I can assure you that a legal and well run SGM occurred and removed these guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...