STST Notes From Monday's Open Meeting

[GarySTFC]

Notes of an Open Meeting with Slough Borough Council (SBC), Slough Town Supporters Trust (STST), a Representative from Slough Town Football Club (STFC) and other interested Parties held on 19th July 2004

 

The meeting opened at approximately 7pm with an introduction from Cllr Stokes (Liberal, Haymill) who proceeded to describe that he had received a number of calls from supposed football supporters who had been both abusive and constructive with their multitude of calls.

 

Cllr Stokes (Liberal, Haymill) continued to discuss previous events that he had been involved with, regarding the football club, which had included attempting to find a new home for the club. The recommended site, in Colnbrook was rejected by Labour councillors at the time.

 

Figures were quoted regarding the current use of office space within Slough (approximately 1.5 million square feet), which has caused the majority of development land within Slough to now be unavailable.

 

Cllr Stokes (Liberal, Haymill) continued to talk, back on the subject of STFC, regarding the fact it is not a financially viable company as it stands presently. He indicated that by making the club more successful, the debt would also increase proportionately. It is currently losing approximately £150,000 per annum, a difference which until recently was being made up by chairman, Mr Martyn Deaner.

 

Four options were then put forwards by Cllr Stokes (Lib Dem, Haymill):

1. Advertise for a new wealthy benefactor

2. Amalgamate with another local club

3. STST take on the running of the club.

4. Return to Wexham Park

 

Of these points, the topic of AFC Wimbledon was raised in relation to point three above, and Cllr Stokes (Liberal, Haymill) mistakenly quoted on their three successive promotions, and also that Slough Borough Council would appeal to local employers and press for funds for the club. To appeal to local business, the club would have to have a viable business plan in place to make this suitable for local business to put in money.

 

The return to Wexham Park was also discussed further by Cllr Stokes (Liberal, Haymill). Is Alan Thorne interested in long term commercial development? As Wexham Park is Green Belt land, it could not be developed and may well sit dormant for a number of years.

 

Cllr Stokes (Liberal, Haymill) reiterated the point that the feasibility study has not been stopped, but gave the following three main reasons as to why the stadium should not go ahead in Britwell:

 

1. Britwell does not want the stadium

2. No commercial development wanted by local residents

3. Club would fold if backer walked away.

 

If option three was to happen and the stadium had been built, there would be two dormant stadiums in Slough, something not beneficial to anyone.

 

Cllr Stokes (Liberal, Haymill) then allowed questions from supporters attending the meeting.

 

STFC supporter Ian Lathey questioned the point regarding Britwell residents not wanting the ground and asked how that had been determined?

 

Cllr Janik (Independent, Britwell) responded that a neutral survey had been conducted in the area and proceeded to read out the questions contained within the sent questionnaire: 83% had responded ‘no’ to a stadium; 95% ‘no’ to offices; and 90% ‘no’ to housing.

 

Ian Lathey then asked for a figure for the number of responses to the questionnaire delivered by the IBR, and Cllr Janik (Independant, Britwell) responded that they had received 585 responses.

 

Cllr Shine (Independent, Britwell) then introduced himself to the room and discussed his involvement in distributing the survey which was conducted in Britwell and also the information that had been given to them regarding the proposed development of which he stated that ¼ of Kennedy Park (KP) would be taken up by the stadium and another ¼ by housing.

 

Cllr Shine (Independant, Britwell) also questioned what the regeneration would do for the community in Britwell. He also stated that Britwell was crying out for a floodlit area for people to use. Again, the issue surrounding the business of the football club being financially viable was brought up.

 

Cllr Stokes (Liberal, Haymill) then commented that if SBC were to help the club financially it would inevitably lead to increased taxing of the Borough as a whole, and that STFC have been previously backed financially by SBC.

 

Richard Hayward (STST) then queried why he had received no copy of the questionnaire despite living on the Britwell Estate.

 

Cllr Shine (Independant, Britwell) responded by stating that the IBR can only work in their own ward and that 1,000 copies of the questionnaire had been printed and distributed in the surrounding Haymill area on green paper so they could be differentiated from the Britwell responses.

 

Slough Town FC secretary Mr Roy Merryweather was then allowed to address the room. He passed comment on the fact that Slough Town FC supporters had been misled repeatedly regarding the meeting that was taking place. He continued and discussed that with the right facilities on site, there is every chance that the club could be financially viable.

 

Cllr Stokes (Liberal, Haymill) responded that despite this claim, many clubs could not survive on operating income alone.

 

Chris Sliski (Secretary of STST) then began to pass comment on a number of the issues raised within the meeting. He stressed the point that the supporters were attending the meeting to help secure a future for the club and were attending to discuss issues surrounding the football club, not to become involved in the political aspect.

 

Commenting on the points raised earlier by Cllr Stokes (Liberal, Haymill) in relation to possible solutions for the club, Chris Sliski (STST) raised the following points:

 

1. A new wealthy benefactor: Why would one want to become involved with Slough Town FC given that the previous chairman had been forced to desert the club following on from treatment from SBC?

2. By merging the club with another, it is effectively killing off STFC.

3. Cllr Stokes (Lib Dem, Haymill) referred to AFC Wimbledon in his earlier proposal for one of the solutions for STFC. Chris Sliski referred to the huge fan base that is at the disposal of AFC Wimbledon, and also the fact that it would not resolve the existing problem, that STFC currently has no ground.

4. A return to Wexham Park: Still not an option as there is nothing to suggest that Alan Thorne would allow for the Landlord and Tenancy Act for the club for a minimum of seven years.

 

No ground means no other form of income. He finished with an outright question to the council of “What are you going to do for STFC?”

 

Cllr Stokes (Liberal, Haymill) then returned to political issues, quoting information regarding office space within the borough which had now deprived Slough of any development land. The four options put forward earlier, and consequently dismissed each with an individual reason by Chris Sliski, were not the only options, merely opening suggestions as discussions continued to move forwards.

 

Chris Sliski then responded regarding the feasibility study stating that it should be allowed to finish. A 92-page document, the first milestone document from the study, had been prepared and was readily available. Cllr Stokes (Lib Dem, Haymill) eventually admitted that he had not reviewed the documentation which had been prepared by the company which had been carrying out the study on behalf of Mr Deaner.

 

Mr Merryweather then proceeded to provide some background to the situation Mr Deaner has found himself in. Mr Deaner has backed the club for the past six years on the proviso that each year the council would be providing suitable locations for development within the borough.

 

As a result of a number of broken and empty promises, Mr Deaner has been driven away from the club after being led astray by comments made in the local press by Cllr Stokes (Lib Dem, Haymill) shortly after being elected as Council Leader – a statement regarding stopping the feasibility study which he later went on to publicly deny making.

 

Mr Merryweather also assessed the four options put forward by Cllr Stokes (Liberal, Haymill) in his opening statement. He again reiterated the point about the supporters desire not to merge with any other club. Advertising for a new benefactor is also a ‘no-go’ with the season only 3 weeks away with preparations to continue in the meantime.

 

If SBC could confirm that other areas of land would be readily available within 2 years, Mr Merryweather was convinced that he would be able to persuade Mr Deaner to continue his investment on the proviso that a suitable location to develop would be found.

 

Should the club actually get its own home within the borough, then many FA grants were available which could amount to many hundreds of thousands of pounds which would benefit the club and the surrounding local community.

 

Cllr Stokes (Liberal, Haymill) request then allowed councillors attending the meeting to put forward their questions. Cllr Swindlehurst, (Labour, Cippenham Green) began to talk regarding the previous cabinet’s involvement with the club and also their desire to see the club’s long term future secured. Many options had been reviewed, but the only option available ended up being the regeneration of the Britwell and Northborough areas due to the grants available with the higher percentage of private owners.

 

Cllr Stokes (Liberal, Haymill) again quoted about other available sites which have been rejected previously including Colnbrook and also the site on the Bath Road where the retail park currently stands..

 

Martin McCabe (STST) then raised the issue regarding the questionnaire submitted by the IBR in Britwell and the area of the stadium development being Brown Field land.

 

Cllr Janik (Independant, Britwell) responded with more information regarding previous political aspects of the Labour Rose publication which he claims was the first time residents had heard of any study.

 

Cllr Shine (Independant, Britwell) also added that the information that had been given to the IBR only suggested the development of the Britwell area and Kennedy Park generally, not the specific areas of Kennedy Park.

 

Martin McCabe (STST) then queried why the study could not be completed first to determine if the land was even suitable for development, then questionnaires could be raised in accordance with the findings of the study. The stadium option could well be a financially viable option given the return findings of the study.

 

Cllr Janik (Independant, Britwell) then continued to refer to the Labour Rose leaflet regarding the development, to which Cllr Stokes (Liberal, Haymill) added that the leaflet had been distributed before ward councillors were aware of the study taking place.

 

Chris Sliski (STST) then queried the IBR on where they planned to build many of the amenities outlined in their election manifesto, as it had been previously suggested by councillors that the developments they would like to see in Britwell, would take place on Kennedy Park.

 

Cllr Stokes (Liberal, Haymill) then continued to outline the area in Britwell would not sustain a ‘Vauxhall Conference’ - standard ground, often referring to a 6-10,000 allseat stadium, but it became clear after questioning from Chris Sliski (STST) that the milestone document had not been read by Cllr Stokes (Lib Dem, Haymill). The information had also not been reviewed by the Britwell Councillors.

 

Cllr Shine (Independant, Britwell) asked regarding the proposed site if it would be secured, and if so, would this allow for people to access the site outside of footballing hours?

 

Cllr David MacIsaac (Independent, Wexham Lea) began to raise some points regarding the football club, as the meeting began to lose focus with Councillors from various parties attempting to shout each other down. As Cllr Stokes (Liberal, Haymill) called an adjournment, Cllr MacIsaac was allowed to finish giving time to review the points he made (outlined below).

 

Upon returning from the short break, Cllr MacIsaac (Independant, Wexham Lea) reiterated points made shortly before the adjournment regarding the football club and potential ways forward:

 

1. Is there the possibility of a smaller stadium or an alternative site?

2. The council were legally bound by the contract for the feasibility study so it had to continue

3. Should contact be made with Alan Thorne with a view of a return to Wexham Park?

 

Mr Merryweather provided a response to Cllr MacIsaac (Independent, Wexham Lea) regarding the issues raised. In reference to Alan Thorne, Mr Merryweather stated that whilst Alan Thorne had helped STFC continually during his time as chairman, he also walked away from the club leaving it with no players and no ground. All plans submitted, up to 80 different submissions, were to South Bucks and were all rejected. The issue of securing the agreement with the Landlord and Tenancy Act would also prevent the club from returning to Wexham Park following the purchase of the freehold on Wexham Park by Alan Thorne.

 

Mr Merryweather also commented on the possible return of Mr Deaner if the right assurances were made regarding the continuation, and completion, of the current study. An estimated personal expenditure of £250,000 will be spent by Mr Deaner on the study alone.

 

Cllr MacIsaac (Independent, Wexham Lea) responded by asking if Mr Deaner would continue funding the club if assurances could not be fulfilled.

 

Cllr Rob Anderson (Labour, Farnham) then took an opportunity to address the room and stated that Mr Deaner had been driven away by the comments made in the press by Cllr Stokes (Liberal, Haymill). Contracts had been signed between SBC and Mr Deaner regarding the study, but this would only allow Mr Deaner to have the funds of the study refunded if another individual was selected to complete any suitable developments suggested from the completion of the study.

 

The first milestone report of the study had been drafted, and the study, if allowed to complete, may show that the area of land in question (Kennedy Park) may not have the recommendation to build a football stadium on the land. All that was being requested was to allow the study to complete and show the results which will then provide a footing to move forwards. The study was begun with a view of developing a community stadium.

 

There is private investment available to the area through Mr Deaner. If the council turned down Mr Deaner to do any development which the study approved, the council would be required to refund the full costs of the study, an estimated £250,000. If, on the other hand, the study showed that the land was not suitable for any development, then the council would not be required to refund the money.

 

Cllr Anderson (Labour, Farnham) then referred back to an earlier point regarding approaching Slough Estates for development land. The land in question which was being eyed for the football stadium was in fact Slough Estates land.

 

Mr Merryweather added that if the stadium was built on the Kennedy Park site, the stadium would be the property of Slough Borough Council.

 

Cllr Stokes (Liberal, Haymill) then provided Cllr Howard (Conservative, Cippenham Green) to speak regarding expansion theories and locations. He stated that the Stoke Road site had been turned down by the club. This was met with statements that the site had never been offered to STFC.

 

Mr Merryweather then added that several options needed to be put forward in an effort to try and convince Mr Deaner that there would be a future for him at the club.

 

Cllr Shine (Independant, Britwell) then commented that in America, there were a number of schools or campuses that had stadia attached to them, a scheme which had worked well in that country. Could there be potential to develop a school with a stadium leased to STFC developed within Britwell?

 

Cllr Stokes (Liberal, Haymill) then reiterated his point that the feasibility study is to continue and has not been stopped in any form. He also stated that the cabinet was open and available for meetings with Mr Deaner at any time to discuss the future of the football club.

 

It was stated that if allowed to be developed, the facilities at Kennedy Park would be shared facilities and available to all.

 

Mr Merryweather queried whether SBC were fully committed to Mr Deaner.

 

Cllr Stokes (Liberal, Haymill) requested the requirements for football grounds at the current level so he could gauge the requirements that were needed for a development as he had continually referred throughout the meeting to a 6-10,000 seater stadium, which he believed would not be sustainable at the KP site in Britwell.

 

Cllr Stokes (Liberal, Haymill) continued that SBC would be happy to continue discussions with Mr Deaner and he also apologised for the late decision to hold a public meeting.

 

The meeting closed at 21:33.