Cabinet Meeting at Town Hall Thursday 29th July !!

[Guest]

This is where the new cabinet make their mind's up

(to destroy our club) Yes its their decision, they stopped the fesiblity study, By Richard Stokes shooting from the hip , comments that he made about never having football stadium built at Britwell ! In fact how can Martin Deaner Trust This kind of person !

 

It's no good them saying they are helping us ..and hot air and no action, he will claim 4 ideas were on the table and were all rejected !

 

Ideas that would take month if not years to acheive, he was told and told and told and told we had days to resuce the situation and but he choose to say we rejected the proposals !

 

Utter rubbish !! Who does he think we are ??

 

Our supporters were a credit and were in fact better behaved than some !

 

All the time they spoke , for almost 2 hours and did not come up with any firm foundation to move forward, quoting they had spoke with their legal department .... sure...if they had they would have found out that they can give 30,000 even to a private company in advertising etc etc...let alone provide money to the Trust ! which they do at the moment with the leisure Trust, are we not a part of the lesuire opportunities at the moment ?

 

They speak of not using public money !!! but what are they proposing to do ??? carry on the fesiblity study without the football(community statdium) as a part of the project using tax payers money ! plus if the scheme was to go forward , then again public money will be used to build the requirements of the residents...by using tax payers money....

 

Whereas yes if the fesiblity study would have continued under Marytn Deaner's brief (signed contract) to see if or not everything was to be fesibile on the proposed site ! and the town would get 2 more years of football !! However if the council did not undertake to include Marytn Deaner on the plans , they could pay the money back , BUT BUT the group would have a fesiblity study ready for what they wanted or could take forward and build !!

 

Yes 250,000 pounds ,of tax payers money but also that was risk Marytn deaner was prepared to make ! but the anti stadium lobby pulled everyones eyes to vote these people into power

to scuttle a vision and most importantly

 

IF any one reads the fesiblity first part ! which the new council did not ask for , claiming it was a secret document...would proved that the Regeneration scheme was 90 % of the project with a community stadium taking up only 10% of the scheme.... What A bunch !!!

 

This was school boy politics at its best ! and all for the sake of allowing the scheme to continue would have cost the council 250,000 of public money to an end, giving in return a chance to build a crown jewel for the residents firstly and secondly giving us a new home !

 

at the cost to the scheme organiser ! not the tax payers money...

 

But now they will spend larger ammounts of money to acheive far far less and missed a golden opportunity to get the best not the worse for their community....

 

WAKE UP !! BEFORE IT'S TO LATE !!!

 

I don't expect them to under stand this , because of the sheer arrogancy that their conduct their business in the name of Independants liberals and Conservatives .... but being put under the same rag bag and bob tail outfit will stick !

 

So if you got any idea whats being proposed ! and read that report ! all will be set out for you !

 

I also must thanks those who said to us thing are not right within the group and apologised to us and would try to sort within....Thanks....

 

But time for us is almost at the end ....whereas we as a trust will have to sort the mess out all because Cllr Stokes open his mouth before engaging brain has cause ripples of discontent and the distruction of our club ...no one else !

 

Cllr Stokes you may have your day ! but until I have exhausted every breath in my body I will fight for my Town and Club... a thing you most certainley could learn from the decent and loyal bunch of people you would ever meet as the People of Slough Town Football Club...

 

Not Britwell - cippenham - langley - upton lea - wexham -manor park-upton - etc etc

 

SLOUGH TOWN !!!!

 

A place you are surpossed to represent ! or are you ???

 

To those independants fighting for what you want in Britwell , hats off to you for sticking to your guns, Its just a shame you did not really want a football club treading on your toes ! and persiving to take your power away from you ! We want to use you and your deprived kids to really put local yougster back into the communit and come into Britwell and be a part of the widing community of Slough, hoping that you residents would adopt us and look forward to seeing the benifits of a strong non league set up in this Town...

 

No No No you cry.... not here in your back (garden) ..... Please tell us where then ? maybe another part of our town will adopt us ?

 

I doubt it....

 

Our geniuine feeling for football in this town is to be healthy heart and soul of this town providing a cenral point for all the towns teams bringing all the local cup finals back to a real stadium and faclities ....your vision is to play in you own little world...not giving anything back to the town in general ....sad but true...

 

We are committed to this and will do our best to acheive this even without your participation.

 

 

You may get you playcentre and faclities but a tax payers money....because you will not get the grants as we would , and were prepare to share them with you and also get what you wanted ! and better without being a burden of the cost of the tax payers....

 

I hope my independants of Wexham will get moving and get some same faclities that you have requested in Britwell ... ????? can we have a swimming pool , and new floodlight play area ??

 

The big question where are you going to build these new faclities ???

 

I Guess Kennedy park is out of the question ???

 

I BET It's NOT....

 

What a complete Farce and lack of understanding .............

 

Lets see what else happens for the Town we all live in ! when your in so called charge !

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

sorry about some of my words, grammer and SPELLING...

 

My Emotions maybe to high and uncontrollerable

 

at the moment....but boy oh boy am I angry !!

 

and so should you all be...!

 

get writing and writing if you feel passionate about your Town and Team....

 

Call the town hall and complain ! send e mail come to the town hall on thursday and demonstrate

 

These so called representatives of our town will destroy our club ...

 

 

All because he can not apologize ! and say he was wrong !

 

 

its not a political scoring game , what ever he says....

 

unhappy and angry Chris S

Personal

[Ted]

Yes, a complete farce.The meeting was about payback time by the new administration against the old,not about the future of Slough. Many of the new administration are clearly not even proud enough to accept they live in Slough, prefering to fool themselves that they live in Langley, Britwell or Wexham instead.

 

It is utterly bizarre that they intend to go ahead with a feasibility study, without a Stadium to build upon the land, but instead of getting it for free, they are going to pay for it. Any regeneration, instead of being paid for out central grants, will be paid for out of an increase in the council tax. Sheer spite and nothing else.

 

I feel particularly let down by my newly elected ward Councillors (All Conservative), who (and I praised them for it in a previous thread),told me that Stokes had spoken without their agreement, and that the original feasibility study should go ahead. This was a barefaced lie. Their group leader stated at the Council meeting that one of the first things he did was agree with Stokes that they should remove the Stadium from any plans. I've been completely misled by my councillors (Dhillon, Long and Pond) who said one thing, and did another.

 

Some Lib Dem councillors seemed unhappy with the proposal, but that did not stop them voting for it. Keep up the pressure, some of them may have a grain of honour in them yet.

[brighton_rebel]

Well, that was fun wasn't it? These are some of thoughts on last nights meeting - although i apologise if i've missed anything cos i had to go at 9.40 to get my train...

 

Councillor Stokes started off by outlining the four options the new council have come up with for the club, all of which he said had been rejected the night before by the supporters trust.

These options were

* merger

* supporters trust run the club

* consider returning to Wexham Park

* Advertise for aC millionaire benefactor

 

What then followed was lots of bickering and blaming by various councillors, with eventually a wishy-washy motion passed which in essence means nothing.

 

My first thoughts are that the council are trying to say they are bending over backwards to help us and we are just saying no to everything. Well, let's work with the one councillor who said he was willing to chat to the Thornes about going back to Wexham Park - even tho the council seem to be forgetting about Ryman League rules that say we have to have seven year secure tenure.

 

We seriously need to build bridges with the Britwell councillors, especially the two that are heavily involved in youth footie on the estate. How can they not support a community football club with community facilties for everyone? Because they reckon they are having a massive ground forced onto them, Kennedy Park is being privatised, there's gonna be a hotel and office complex - oh, and they hate the local Labour Party.

 

After Deaner's fax was rejected by Stokes last night i reckon he will walk away. Stokes said the council couldn't wouldn't give the club £150,000 a year - even tho in his fax all he asked was for compensation if the council walk away from plans again.

 

What me and Chris Silski spoke to Stokes before the meeting we asked would he support a stadium on the landfill site if it was owned by the council, run by the Trust and for the whole community he said yes. Then in his written reply to Deaners fax he said the feasibility study would continue and would include "the possibility of a 1,500-2,000 seat community football club with clubhouse." This is what we want isn't it? 2,000 seats is conference standard?

 

I'm going to write to Stokes to try and clarify this, in the meantime people should write to their councillors especially if you live in Britwell, infact better still, go and see them. The Trust should contact the councillor who wants to speak to the Thornes.

All is not yet lost. Let's keep on fighting

 

Brighton Rebel

 

 

 

[BFR]

The Councillor who repeated that he would be willing to contact the Thornes was Cllr MacIsaac (sic according to SBC website) who is an Independent representing Wexham Lea.

[Matt]

Quote:

brighton_rebel said:
the council seem to be forgetting about Ryman League rules that say we have to have seven year secure tenure.

I think what they're getting at is that we should try to go back to Wexham Park (very unlikely) for however long the Thornes will allow us, but drop out of the Ryman League altogether and start the 2005/6 season virtually from scratch in the Combined Counties League or equivalent - a league with more lenient rules on stadia. It strikes me that this is their aim, they have no idea as to the urgency of the situation (season starts in 2/3 weeks??) And no idea as to the very, very, very, slim likelihood that Thorne would want STFC back for any length of time - we all know he's probably happy to sit on land that's worth tens of millions to commercial developers when the boundaries change and Wexham Park can be built on.

Quote:

brighton_rebel said:
Then in his written reply to Deaners fax he said the feasibility study would continue and would include "the possibility of a 1,500-2,000 seat community football club with clubhouse." This is what we want isn't it? 2,000 seats is conference standard?

Actually only 1,000 seats according to Gary, or if I understood him correctly, the promise of 1,000 seats to be installed within the first 3 years of Conference football. A ground with 1,000 seats, with a capacity of 3-4,000 altogether, would be ideal for STFC as a starting base.

[Tom]

Does that mean Deaner still has an interest in the club?

[brighton_rebel]

Matt,

Most of us know the situation with the Thornes and Wexham Park doesn't look much of a starter - i just think the Trust should at least go along with it, and support the councillor otherwise the ruling group will throw their hands in the air and say they tried everything they could, but the supporters weren't interested.

 

Brighton Rebel

[Matt]

I'd agree BR, we need to at least try. If there's any way at all we could get back there for seven years, I'd welcome it with open arms, much like everyone else I'm sure. But then we'd need to persuade the council that Wexham Park is not a long-term option and we will need a new ground - but if the Britwell scheme goes ahead and something is built there, that land would be unavailable to build on. And would Martyn Deaner resume his interest in supporting the club financially if we went back to WP with no immediate plans for a new stadium? And where would any new stadium go?

[Matt]

Plus at Wexham Park, in all likeliness we wouldn't get any cut of the bar and food takings - would the club be viable without someone like Deaner pumping money in? Probably not, but we don't have many options.

[GarySTFC]

So my understanding of the current state of affairs is:

 

- MD is no longer actively involved at the club, just as a supporter

- The rent has been paid for us to play at Stag Meadow by Martyn

- The council talk of their concern, but cannot find a viable solution

- The running of the football club is currently down to the council as per the recent statement from MD

 

Regarding ground criteria, I have the following information:

 

"The club's stadium must meet a minimum operational capacity of 4,000, including a Main Stand with at least 500 seats. It must be possible for spectators to view the match, either standing or seated, for the full length of all 4 sides of the playing area. Other configurations may be accepted at the Conference Board's discretion. There are a raft of other detailed requirements (e.g. specification of changing rooms, number of turnstiles, etc).

 

A Conference club is deemed to be seeking promotion to the Football League, so rules are in place regarding achieving FL Admission Critera - and a club can be ejected from the Conference if it does not provide plans by 1st April for meeting those requirements. Basically, it's 5,000 capacity including 1,000 seats.

 

Ground Capacity:

Three levels of requirement are defined:

 

Qualification

criteria - 4000 capacity with ability to reach 5000

500 seats with ability to reach 1000

 

Admission

criteria - 5000 capacity

1000 seats with ability to reach 2000

 

Membership

criteria 5000 capacity

2000 seats

 

The Qualification Criteria present the level required for promotion. Any club that believes it will be in a position to qualify for promotion from the Conference must submit, by 1st March in that season, evidence that it can comply with the Qualification Criteria.

 

The Admission Criteria is a level that must be achieved by 1st May of the club's first season in the Football League. Any club not meeting the required level by 1st March will need to demonstrate to the League's satisfaction that it can comply by 30th April. Failure in this instance would lead to loss of all points and therefore automatic relegation back to the Conference.

 

The Membership Criteria is the full requirement to remain in the league. A newly-promoted Conference side has until 31st May at the end of their 3rd season in the League to achieve this requirement."

 

I think looking at the Conference/FL quality ground is a touch beyond us right now and something which would be suitable for Conf South division would be much more appropriate (i.e. up to 4k capacity with 500 seats) which I do believe is achieveable.

[PJ-STFC]

I see no problem with aiming for a Conf South capacity ground - provided that the overall site allows for the expansion to the FL capacity criteria in the future.

 

PJ <img src="/images/graemlins/chat.gif" alt="" />