BarcelonaElena Fort (Barcelona, 1970) is facing her second term as Barça manager. This lawyer specializing in town planning law talks about the Espai Barça and the modification of the statutes when two days are left before the Barça assembly of delegates is held.
The president defined it as the most important assembly in recent years.
– At least it is essential and relevant to mark the future lines of the club. And perhaps it is the most relevant of modern decades. There is a lot of talk about amending the statutes, although it is only a one-time reform. I think the most essential point is that of Espai Barça. Because not only must it be the fundamental pillar of the club’s recovery, but it must also lay the foundations for Barça’s future.
Is it really so urgent to make Espai Barça?
– It is very worrying as an entity to see that a team like Levante, with the budget it has, has a field that is better than ours. Or the Athletic Club. It’s another level and another budget, I know. But we are far behind in terms of facilities.
In the 2014 referendum it was called 600 million. Bartholomew said 815 a year ago now. And you raise the maximum funding to 1.5 billion.
– It is not that we have raised the price, but that we have made an exercise in absolute transparency. The project had many shortcomings. It was amazing. For example, markers were not expected. At the technology level alone, the differential was 100 million. And other things, like sustainability. The bottom line is that the costs were not real. This is clearly seen when compared to other stages. Wembley, which has fewer spectators, cost 1.2 billion. Also that of Tottenham. The one in Madrid is around 900. Therefore, it is clear that a new Camp Nou and a new Palace with 600 million could not be built. It was impossible.
When they said they would modify the project everyone was expecting a raise, but I don’t know if like this one.
– We didn’t expect it either, honestly. It would have been easier to do the same as them [la junta de Bartomeu]: lower the price so people don’t get scared. But we would not tell the truth. In fact, I have the feeling that if they took so long to make the Espai Barça it was because they didn’t know how to do it to explain to people that the costs would be much higher than they had been told.
This week we learned that 21 matches were played at the Camp Nou at risk to the fans, and that the board had been aware of problems at the stadium since 2012. What do you think?
– We can talk about numbers, but that of the stadium is the most unworthy. It says it all, of its management. For me it is the situation that has most impacted me since I joined the club. I had a shock, when I read it. We immediately ordered it fixed. If you had to stop paying salaries, let them stop paying. But the Camp Nou could not have pathologies that even endangered the club workers who are usually in the stadium.
They want to start work next summer. Are the project over yet?
– It has to be finished polishing, especially on the part of the Palace, because we were surprised that it had only done a basic project. As for the stadium, we essentially keep what has been done. The Nikken people are important people. Clearly they have done a good job. Of course, we have made a key change inside to prevent 12,500 members from having to move from first to third tier. For us it was a red line.
No one will have to move, then?
– A work of this nature can always lead to some discomfort, it is very difficult to stay at zero, we are aware of it. But we wanted to minimize it as much as possible. Between this and the pathology report we came to the conclusion that it was best to act on the third tier, which will be new and, incidentally, will allow more space to be placed.hospitality.
What sense does it make to increase the capacity to 105,000 spectators when the Camp Nou was not filled with 99,000?
– We must also think that we have 12,000 people on the waiting list. That in some specific matches it will not be filled? It’s obvious. But we must look to the future. The Superliga, or whatever format, must take us to a new dimension of football.
If the entire stadium is covered, the differences between grandstand and side will disappear. Will this raise the price?
– We haven’t thought about it, honestly. We will do this once the field is finished. In any case, our policy is not to indiscriminately increase season tickets. They can be adjusted, but the partner does not have to pay for the broken dishes.
What happened to William T. Mannarelli, the top executive of Espai Barça?
– That his work was valued and it was decided not to continue.
Do they suspect mismanagement or that they have committed any negligence?
– In the meetings of the Espai Barça team we detected things that we did not like and now it will be the turn of the forensic. But until we have the result we will not make any assessment.
But he knows more than he says …
– We do things responsibly. A Barça manager cannot make accusations of things he thinks or thinks. It must be a third party, a neutral person, who makes the assessments.
They are very cautious when it comes to managing the past. Some even accuse them of not wanting to take responsibility.
– The management of the previous board was disastrous. But the actions to be taken cannot be a matter of desire or not. We have to put that aside.
But what does the body ask of it?
– This is precisely what it is about, not letting yourself be carried away by personal issues. We have already said, and we repeat it, that when we have all things closed and clear we will make the decisions that touch. If it has to be done, we will do it. But okay. Not like they did to us.
On the modification of the statutes. Doesn’t it seem excessive to you that every Barça manager has retouched them, even if it’s a little?
– I don’t think so. It is necessary that all legal rules are updated. In addition, we make specific changes that do not affect the structure of the statutes. Although we think they could be rethought, because they are based on an old club structure and not the 21st century.
In what sense?
– Electoral processes, for example. The way to vote, the organization of assemblies … This is a time-consuming issue. A process of reflection could be done between all the partners to talk about it. Now, if it did, it would be long-term, not imminent.
Some opinion groups are calling for a vote against temporarily repealing Article 67, which regulates debt. How do you see it?
– I have had conversations with members of these groups and they have confessed to me that they were not aware of the consequences. Now this article is impossible to fulfill. Impossible means impossible. Therefore, if not temporarily repealed, this club is doomed to new elections. This would mean instability, which is the complete opposite of what Barça need right now. We were chosen for a period of five years, and what we ask is that they trust us.
They say it would mean giving them a blank check.
– We have a guarantee of 125 million. We are playing our heritage there! There are already parallel regulations governing club expenses. Frankly, I am very surprised that it has raised so many doubts.
In the end the vote will not be joint.
– We do not want to generate any controversy. We will vote on the statutes point by point or by blocks, whichever people feel most comfortable with. We have nothing to fear from doing it this way. If a joint vote had been raised it was for a matter of timing, nothing more. But in this particular article, it will be separated.
.
