Interventions by Associate members.
Thought a new football field was not needed, because he thinks that the current football field wouldn’t get full if it weren’t for all those people with passes or who have been invited. His right to speak was withdrawn for not keeping to the agenda.
Asked how the draft and the project had been drawn up without a financial plan being done beforehand.
Wants a new football field but not at any price, thereby informing that she will vote NO. She asked why a referendum to be voted on by all members hasn’t been organized. She thinks that the votes of the people at the meeting are not enough when it comes to voting on such a transcendental issue. She has the feeling that a vote in favour would be like signing a blank cheque. She doesn’t like the agreement reached between BBK, Biscay’s Provincial Government and club because she believes that the Club will lose its patrimony.
César García Rubiera
Says yes to the new football field and yes to its location but does not agree with the project being devised by the one company, nor understands why there aren’t any other football field alternatives. He would’ve liked that the 34,000 club members had the same opportunity to vote.
Thinks that a multipurpose football field would be better.
His greatest concern comes from the fact that the new company may have some articles of association which the Club members won’t be able to control, and that the members won’t have the chance to take part in the decision making.
Said he was going to vote YES and made a suggestion about the construction of the new football field. He would like to know how come it won’t cost the club anything. He also asked what would happen if Athletic were to become a public limited company one day.
Juan Luis Anta
Would like to know how the football field will be paid for and what the rush is.
Doubts as to whether it will turn out right in the end. He would like to know how it will be financed and has a few suggestions about the seating, the arch, the locker rooms…
Is more worried about the way the work is to be carried out than the project itself. She thought that the members should have been given this information earlier. Later, she raised various accounts related issues. She also wants to know what would happen if the three Basque Saving Banks were to merge. She suggests that Athletic’s patrimony be protected. She expects that the documents and/or bids concerning the tendering of the construction work will be as clear as crystal. She is against the VIP boxes and the security cameras. And asks for a social club at the new football field.
Doesn’t want to wait another 20 years to have the opportunity of having a new football field, which is why he’s going to say YES to the new stadium, because he thinks that San Mamés is obsolete.
Is sad to say that the explanations given to date have not been able to change his mind. He believes that the timing of the project’s presentation is terrible. He doesn’t understand why the members don’t have the budget for the new football field in writing. He also thinks that a referendum to be voted on by all the members should be organized.
Jose María Landa
Believes that this is the cornerstone of the Club’s future. And asks for the voting to be conducted by the raising of hands.
Thinks that a bigger football field than the current one is needed and affirms that he is going to vote YES without a doubt and that he has the backing of the 9 members he represents. And asks for a Supporters’ Club Association at the new football field.
Thinks that this is a unique opportunity.
Joseba Andoni Likona
Affirms that he didn’t know anything about the economic issue and thinks that the property valuation of the current San Mamés is a joke. He’d like to know how much the new football field is going to cost the Club.
Would like to know if the cost of urbanizing the surroundings is to be included in the cost of the football field. He believes that there should have been a referendum.
Afterwards, Juan Carlos Ercoreca responded to the questions raised by the intervening members: the financial plan, cost, possible patrimonial loss, BBK’s role, etc.
Later, Fede Arruti explained why ACXT was chosen as project designer instead of a public tender being carried out.
Finally Ana Urkijo explained why a referendum had not been conducted and answered some of the issues raised by the members, such as voting by a show of hands, etc.
In favour: 547