Letting property developers anywhere near a football ground’s bound to end in tears.
With a rainbow above Zampa Road and the Den at a recent home game against Reading I was hoping in was a sign of good things to come. It wasn't we lost 3-0 and now we know that Lewisham Council shafted us three days before Christmas
A dark back room or maybe 'let's do lunch
Why do I feel that there's been a shady deal in some back room down Lewisham Town Hall. That may not be the case but something feels fishy.
Millwall has to be one of the most community based club in the country and has been striving to stay like that by wanting to acquire the land that the Millwall Community Scheme Trust Lions Centre sits on and also other areas around the ground. After years of negotiating with Lewisham Council and spending 3 million pounds in fee's and the like supporting the regeneration project it appears it's money down the drain. Lewisham Council sell the land behinds Millwall's back to a property developer who of course has brought the land for one reason and one reason only, personal wealth. I have read in the local paper the South London Press that John Berylson our club chairman is appalled and bewildered at the councils decision.
John Berylson feels betrayed by Lewisham council and I have support for him. I know that there is a monetary gain for the chairman by purchasing this land from the council but I think we all know him well enough to know that, yes, he can get something back on the 30 million pound he has put into the club but also and very important to him is that the Lions Centre can stay where it is and under control of Millwall FC and also the club can have a revenue stream 365 days year from rent from being involved in the regeneration scheme which will secure the existence of the club for years to come.
I am not sure what's going to happen next apart from that we the supporters are looking to field candidates in the Borough of Lewisham May council elections and the Fan On The Board member Peter Garston has stated that he might be one of them. Below is a statement from Peter which he gave me permission to publish yesterday,
FOTB REPORT FEB 2014 (REGEN)
We have two major issues at the moment that need which will need us, the fans, to get behind the club when the time comes as both the issues threaten our club in different ways.
Firstly the regeneration which has been going on for the eight years I have been on the board.
There have been times when it seemed it was dead in the water, and others when it looked like the club it would achieve its goal of getting the finances required to secure our future for many years.
All along, Lewisham Council have been afforded hospitality and support by the club in many council driven issues such as the recent Save Lewisham Hospital campaign. We, as fans, along with the club threw our weight behind the campaign and played a key role in helping keep Lewisham A&E open.
The council publicly and privately led all at Millwall to believe that we would be key in any redevelopment, but in recent months we have noticed the council distancing themselves from us and then the final blow was them indicating their support for Renewal without any explanation or much notice.
So now we are in a position where an external property developer could hold the key to our future, given to them by the council who claims it champions community.
The only positive to come out of this is the fact that once again when we are challenged by external forces the Chairman shows his resolve and commits himself to the future of our club.
I know John Berylson very well and one thing he will not do is shirk a challenge. He will fight our corner to make sure that Millwall Football Club continues to play football at The Den for years to come.
When called upon we will need to do whatever is required to fight for our club. I hope the people of the Save Lewisham Hospital campaign return our support if needed as well.
Once I know what is needed by the club to fight the developers, I will co-ordinate all fans via the MSC, Trust, Websites and Fanzines to ensure we are there to make our voices heard.
We do not roll over easily when it comes to our club.
Well said Peter, I'm with you all the way
Millwall Supporters Club sign our petition, click on link>> www.DefendOurDen.com
For now and forever
A Wrexham fan wrote this and it is well worth a read http://wrexhamfan.wordpress.com/2014/02/16/support-millwall-fcs-cause-and-do-wrexham-fc-a-favour/?
After a period of quiet when not much seemed to be going on JB comes out with both barrels and lays down the gauntlet, we are behind you 100%
FOTB Regen Statement
The pressure of the petition has had the desired effect and meetings have been planned well done to all.
Below is the statment I promised from JB to counter balance Renewals claims
Pete FOTB
STATEMENT BY JOHN BERYLSON, CHAIRMAN OF MILLWALL FOOTBALL CLUB
17 February 2014
I am most surprised to find Renewal, a private property developer, issuing a statement apparently on behalf of Lewisham Council about Millwall’s dealings with the Council over the potential sale of land adjoining The Den. In its statement Renewal refers to correspondence and meetings between Millwall and the Council. This seems most irregular.
I have made it clear elsewhere, and I shall make it clear again here, that Millwall has been open and transparent in all its dealings with Lewisham Council. Jordana Malik, a director and spokesperson of Renewal, is quoted as being “perplexed as to why those in charge at the club are claiming they have had no knowledge of the land sale”. I’m perplexed that she should say that. Millwall has never made such a claim. Indeed we have made it clear that we were fully aware of the Council’s plans to sell the land.
That’s why our lawyers wrote to the Council on 25 September 2013 challenging the decision to sell the land to Renewal, and why our property advisers wrote to the Council on 7 November formally confirming the Club’s wish to be permitted to bid for the land. On 13 November the Council responded refusing to provide Millwall with the information we required in order to make our bid. We were told that the Council had secured the best deal for the land even though Renewal was the only permitted bidder. We made one final attempt on 6 December when our lawyers wrote again to the Council asking them to stop the sale. But the Council ignored us again and exchanged contracts with Renewal for the sale of the three parcels of land on 20 December. They informed us three days later.
I read that the Club “failed to provide any meaningful detailed evidence of its proposals”. This is of course nonsense. Millwall commissioned architects to draw up plans for the area around The Den as long ago as 2006 - before any sale of the freeholds materialised and before planning permission for the whole area had been granted. In order to ensure that our plans were fully in keeping with the overall agreed scheme for the Surrey Canal Triangle, we commissioned leading architects Mackay and Partners last year to review our existing plans and refine them into a revised proposal for the development of the three areas of land adjoining the stadium.
Those plans were presented to the Council on 15 August 2013 in as much detail as could reasonably be expected at that stage. It was made clear that the plans fitted with the outline planning permission, that Chestnut Hill Ventures (Millwall's largest shareholder) had more than enough money to carry out the development without recourse to any third party funding and that the Club could offer legally binding guarantees that the development would be completed within an agreed timescale.
What other business case could the Council possibly have wanted at that stage?
If the Council had deigned to consider the Club's plans, the next stage would have been to refine the business case in conjunction with the Council and its advisers but there was no point in doing that – given the considerable further costs involved – if the Council wasn't prepared to play ball.
Renewal said on 5 February that they had never even been shown our plans, yet they seem to be full of opinions about them.
Chestnut Hill Ventures is not a property developer. That’s why, in order to strengthen the Club’s finances, we have engaged top professional advisors who have managed property developments of this size. We are attacked for not submitting planning applications and not acquiring land. We aren’t interested in acquiring land other than the areas adjoining The Den. Once the Council made it clear that those areas were to be sold, we formally asked to be allowed to bid for them. We had no need of planning permission because it had already been granted for the whole area.
We have invested more than £3 million in helping that whole process and in our own plans, as well as in protecting the interests of the Club.
Assurances are being given about our community scheme. But the Council and Renewal don’t seem to understand the nature of its funding and how it operates. Although the Council and Renewal can match our offer of a new home and new sports facilities, only we can guarantee the financial support and access to the Football League funding on which it depends. Furthermore, the viability of the Millwall Community Scheme is not just about its funding. It’s also about its direct links to the Club and our resources – the provision of coaching staff, player involvement, the use of our facilities and tickets for our matches. We are very concerned about its long term future.
Finally, I will reiterate the point that is behind all of this. Chestnut Hill Ventures has supported Millwall for the last seven years since I became Chairman and I have expressed my personal commitment to the Club, and to its home at The Den, many times. I am a huge fan and I have the most expensive season ticket! In the long term, Millwall Football Club needs to be a viable commercial enterprise, and that means that it needs non-football income that is stable and secure.
We always assumed that we would be left to develop the land adjoining our stadium. The Council has said that we are at the heart of the community and core to their strategic plans for the Borough. So in good faith we have played our part, and incurred substantial costs, in supporting the overall plans for this urban regeneration. We haven’t been greedy. We have offered the Council a stake in our proposed developments.
As things stand, we have been excluded from the benefits of the Surrey Canal Triangle development. Our stadium is shown at the core of the plans and we are expected to carry on staging football matches and investing more money in The Den. Meanwhile, the Council does deals with a private property developer and expects us to stand on the touchline and cheer.
That’s not my style. I don’t want a fight with anybody, but I shall stand up and be counted for Millwall Football Club.
John Berylson
Chairman
15/3/14
Default FOTB REGEN MEETING FRIDAY
The meeting between the club and the Council took place on
Friday 14 March as planned. Both John Berylson and
Demos Kouvaris flew to London to be present, such is the
importance that they attach to this matter. The Council
wished to focus the meeting on the future status of the
leases held by Millwall on the two areas of land adjoining
the Den that the Council wishes to hand over to Renewal.
We made it clear that we did not wish to relinquish these
leases and that we remained keen to be permitted to develop
the land ourselves within the overall regeneration plan for
the Surrey Canal Triangle.
No offer was made by the Council to Millwall Football Club
regards the leases, but sadly the Council threatened to seek
compulsory purchase orders to reclaim the land for Renewal if
it could not reach an agreement with Millwall.
The council and Millwall agreed to have another meeting to
discuss further, the date to be confirmed
Obviously the above is an overview, I am aware of the clubs
stance and long term plan, I cannot go public at the moment,
all I can say at this time is that the club are trying to get
the best for Millwall which in turn means the long term
future of the club and that’s what we the fans want.
