Post by martinfrench on Aug 11, 2022 13:58:17 GMT
With the Community Club Zoom meeting on 15 August, I asked former BTCFC Board Director, Steve Williams, for his succinct thoughts on the issue of a permanent replacement for the Camrose.
He said:
Indicating that the views are very much my own, I would say that the day to day running of the club seeking to gain promotion coupled with securing a permanent replacement for the Camrose is frankly highly demanding for the Board and its supporters. Sadly, the Camrose has been lost – though its vital to learn the lesson that only united and focussed action of all stakeholders will be successful..
There are now two, difficult strategic options for the club’s permanent home:
- 1. Opt for an enhanced Winklebury (upgraded by Basron funds) and hope the Hants FA move out allowing more BTCFC control (though HFA would still probably be the landlord receiving hire fees)
- 2. Continue to treat Winklebury as a temporary home until a permanent home is found; and agree permissible, early (as is possible) with Council and Basron that the Basron mitigations/spend at Winklebury for loss of the Camrose (larger stands, clubhouse, plus sums for of loss grass pitch and mini Astros etc) should be commuted to a cash sum (possibly up to £800k) held for up to 5 years for developing a new stadium on Council owned land.
Option 1 would not immediately meet the club's aspirations, give the degree of autonomy the club seeks, provide the quality of facility or necessarily remove the league lock.
Option 2 would require no immediate improvement in Winklebury facilities but instead build funds starting with Basron money, with grants potentially available, for a new ground. The problem is the Council have previously, consistently and vehemently ruled out any Council owned land or finance. Nor did they act on the impressive BTCFC plans for a community sports hub at the Camrose. In the absence of any clear, public statement, there can be no confidence that the Council position in more challenging financial times has changed. How will the club's action to produce a new business plan alter things?
The leaders of the opposition parties on the Council have proposed the Leisure Park should be a sports hub and the permanent home for the club; and Manydown has apparently been mentioned by the Council. But the club needs definite commitments and early action to switch Basron spend to a new site. In addition, the reality is under any scenario the club will be required to generate substantial funds of its own. Is it too late for a vibrant, high profile local and national campaign capitalising on the Camrose scandal and the fact that the protections against property speculation on sports facilities is inadequate? Such a campaign is I believe essential to raise funds and apply pressure to the Council and other stakeholders.
He said:
Indicating that the views are very much my own, I would say that the day to day running of the club seeking to gain promotion coupled with securing a permanent replacement for the Camrose is frankly highly demanding for the Board and its supporters. Sadly, the Camrose has been lost – though its vital to learn the lesson that only united and focussed action of all stakeholders will be successful..
There are now two, difficult strategic options for the club’s permanent home:
- 1. Opt for an enhanced Winklebury (upgraded by Basron funds) and hope the Hants FA move out allowing more BTCFC control (though HFA would still probably be the landlord receiving hire fees)
- 2. Continue to treat Winklebury as a temporary home until a permanent home is found; and agree permissible, early (as is possible) with Council and Basron that the Basron mitigations/spend at Winklebury for loss of the Camrose (larger stands, clubhouse, plus sums for of loss grass pitch and mini Astros etc) should be commuted to a cash sum (possibly up to £800k) held for up to 5 years for developing a new stadium on Council owned land.
Option 1 would not immediately meet the club's aspirations, give the degree of autonomy the club seeks, provide the quality of facility or necessarily remove the league lock.
Option 2 would require no immediate improvement in Winklebury facilities but instead build funds starting with Basron money, with grants potentially available, for a new ground. The problem is the Council have previously, consistently and vehemently ruled out any Council owned land or finance. Nor did they act on the impressive BTCFC plans for a community sports hub at the Camrose. In the absence of any clear, public statement, there can be no confidence that the Council position in more challenging financial times has changed. How will the club's action to produce a new business plan alter things?
The leaders of the opposition parties on the Council have proposed the Leisure Park should be a sports hub and the permanent home for the club; and Manydown has apparently been mentioned by the Council. But the club needs definite commitments and early action to switch Basron spend to a new site. In addition, the reality is under any scenario the club will be required to generate substantial funds of its own. Is it too late for a vibrant, high profile local and national campaign capitalising on the Camrose scandal and the fact that the protections against property speculation on sports facilities is inadequate? Such a campaign is I believe essential to raise funds and apply pressure to the Council and other stakeholders.