In 2011 Spurs led by Chairman Daniel Levy initiated a wave of legal challenges to seek a Judicial review of Newham’s Council’s £40m loan as part of a West Ham bid for the former Olympic Stadium with the aim of derailing the Hammers occupancy of the London Stadium which he had lost out on.
As each legal challenge was rejected by the courts they started a new one challenging the loan in a different way until finally, they were permitted a hearing in August 2011. Spurs later offered to withdraw their legal challenge if West Ham agreed to drop allegations of criminal conduct against them over phone hacking of Karren Brady but the Hammers refused.
In December 2013: Three investigators pleaded guilty of illegally obtaining Karren Brady’s phone records during the initial battle for the stadium. The lead investigator worked for accountants PKF, who were engaged by Spurs. The company and Spurs both denied any knowledge of illegal activities.
At a high court hearing in 2011 lawyers for Karren Brady and West Ham won an order requiring accountants PKF, hired by Spurs to conduct “due diligence” on the first bidding process for the Olympic Stadium, to hand over “unlawfully obtained” copies of Brady’s itemised phone bills.
In 2013 Richard Forrest pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing to obtaining personal data contrary to the Data Protection Act 1998 was fined £10,000. Lee Stewart was fined £13,250 after admitting the same charge. Howard Hill employed Spurs accountants was given a £100,000 fine.
Spurs finally agreed to withdraw their legal challenges after the initial tender process collapsed after a complaint by Architect Steve Lawrence to the European commission over potential state aid. The legal challenges were seen by many as attempts to get more political leverage to get planning and funding to redevelop White Hart Lane.
In September 2011 the then London mayor Boris Johnson frustrated at Spurs legal threats and game playing threatened to withdraw an offer of £17 million of public support to Tottenham’s new stadium development if Spurs did not commit to their stadium project in the next three weeks.
In February 2012 Spurs were permitted to go back on an obligation of £16m of funding for the community as part of its new stadium project.
The section 106 money was to be used by Haringey council for social housing, school places and other road and transport links but the club said the commitment was not viable and were allowed remove it. The new section 106 agreement doesn’t specify a set amount but instead makes promises of things including free match tickets and free shuttle buses.
At the time of the first removal of section 106 money Richard Wilson, leader of Haringey Liberal Democrats, said the council was so “desperate” to get the club’s investment it had not stood up for residents and council taxpayers. He said “not a single affordable home” will now be built and yet there are 3,000 people on council waiting lists.
In 2012 Haringey Council also agreed to fund Spurs with £5m towards a podium outside the stadium and a further £2.5m for what they called heritage improvements.
Fast forward four years and in February 2016 the then London Mayor Boris Johnson agreed on a £18m investment in infrastructure around the Stadium project from a £28m fund for the Tottenham area. £8.5m on improvements to High road adjacent to the new stadium and £3.5m to improve Tottenham Hale Station to allow for increased footfall. Haringey Council also offered an additional £9m to help improve Tottenham Hale station.
Source: https://www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/mayoral/mayor-approves-spurs-stadium-plans
UPDATE
Tottenham Hotspur says the claims by a blog written by ‘Haringey Defend Council Housing’ over the weekend are factually incorrect and outdated.
They claim the presentation in question is from 5 years ago and the proposal for an additional £30.5m to fund the podium area outside their Stadium was later withdrawn.
Original claims from Blog: https://haringeydefendcouncilhousingblog.wordpress.com/2017/07/14/haringey-council-to-give-30-5-million-housing-funding-to-spurs-for-its-new-stadium/
2012 Presentation: https://haringeydefendcouncilhousingblog.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/audit-presentation-19th-april-2017-jw.pdf
Harrrigey Council released a press statement over the weekend denying the existence of the £30m of funding.
Haringey Press Statement: http://www.haringey.gov.uk/news/response-stories-funding-given-tottenham-hotspur-football-club
Post note:
Subtracting the claimed £30.5m from the equation by my calculation Spurs will benefit by £45m of committed public funding for infrastructure around the stadium.
I still believe questions need to be asked about this tax payer funding. I understand that Arsenal paid £60m in section 106 when they built the Emirates Stadium but documents publicly show Spurs have made some community promises including Free match tickets and shuttle buses.
The section 106 documents can be found at http://www.haringey.gov.uk/planning-and-building-control/planning/major-projects-and-regeneration/tottenham-hotspur-football-club-stadium-development
Architect Steve Lawrence who scuppered the first West Ham bid for the London Stadium over a complaint over state aid to the European Commission as said in relation to Spurs “I’ve raised this issue with the Commission, the Mayor’s office & others – it’s essential that the same rules apply to all clubs, across Europe, State aid rules will continue to apply after Brexit & clubs which accept subsidies must ensure they meet the rules of fairness ??”
Adding that: “Each user of publicly subsidised infrastructure must pay a market rate”