Re: Fight for justice - Club Statement : Tue Nov 07, 2017 9:39 pm  

Prince Buster wrote:

This council has held total control over the City for 0ver 40 years. No one has ever dared to question their motives or intention as they have always hidden behind the Labour Party flag.

We are all aware of the stench of Newmarket because it affects us all. However this may only be the tip of the iceberg, what has gone on in all those years with other developers that we no nothing about ??

In my opinion legal action is needed. I also believe that strong representation should be made to the government to put this inept council under special measures. They did the same with Rotherham and Doncaster and in my eyes this lot are no better. I would also like auditors and forensic accountants employed to examine all their past records as I have lost all trust in their honesty and credibility.

Impunity is corrosive to society. Wrongdoing needs challenging. If we end up with nowt at the end but some heads on a stick, if they're the right heads I guess I'll be happy enough

Re: Fight for justice - Club Statement : Tue Nov 07, 2017 9:40 pm  

"...our priority is to try and get a community stadium delivered for the people of this district.

...ultimately the people who will lose the most is the fans and residents, and that is the most upsetting part of this situation."

Well at least the deputy leader has a future in stand-up comedy if she loses her job.

"These are triggers that were imposed on Wakefield Council by the Secretary of State – triggers that the Council did not and would not have agreed to."

To me, this is the crux of the matter. Can/does the SoS agree the s106 or should that have been the LPA's job?
AFAIK, The SoS stated that he would be willing to accept a UU as the case was not complex, but who actually accepts it?

Re: Fight for justice - Club Statement : Tue Nov 07, 2017 9:51 pm  

coco the fullback wrote:

"...our priority is to try and get a community stadium delivered for the people of this district.

...ultimately the people who will lose the most is the fans and residents, and that is the most upsetting part of this situation."

Well at least the deputy leader has a future in stand-up comedy if she loses her job.

"These are triggers that were imposed on Wakefield Council by the Secretary of State – triggers that the Council did not and would not have agreed to."

To me, this is the crux of the matter. Can/does the SoS agree the s106 or should that have been the LPA's job?
AFAIK, The SoS stated that he would be willing to accept a UU as the case was not complex, but who actually accepts it?

Well it was WMDC who negotiated the five town parks s106. The report as to why that project should be considered very special circumstances and allowed to be built on green belt also makes interesting reading in relation to the commentary around the need for a new stadium for cas.

Re: Fight for justice - Club Statement : Tue Nov 07, 2017 9:53 pm  

Scarlet Pimpernell wrote:

I admire your blind faith and I hope the gamble because that is what it is comes off. To lose will financially destroy our great club because the costs and those of the council and 88M if involved will be astronomical especially when QC’s are involved.
The bit I don’t understand is on what grounds do we think we can win. We can state how badly we have been treated but the fact is the development was subject to certain conditions which have currently not been reached.
We have now due to recent statements virtually ensured if we leave without an agreement in place to return will quickly find the ground probably levelled and other use agreed. This means we will be homeless because we cannot stay at Dewsbury for more than one season.
Why would the council who we continue to berate allow us to share with Castleford.
We walked out of this deal I just hope we have a plan b if we lose.

Perhaps I'm reading it wrong but why would the council not allow it, as once (if) the Cas ground is built it's theirs for a quid and nothing to do with the council

Re: Fight for justice - Club Statement : Tue Nov 07, 2017 9:54 pm  

musson wrote: Just reading the statement from the council and this is seems to be the main council come back Quote from the daily star Does any one have access to the document that says we do have to be provided a 99 year lease at a peppercorn yearly rental It's being talked about a lot and has being one of the fundamental behind the hole stadium from the off The documents can be found here, if you download the PDF and then search for "peppercorn rent" it pops up a few times to say that it was agreed that the developer would charge a peppercorn rent to the trust http://cominoweb.wakefield.gov.uk/Plann ... wdocs=true

musson wrote: Just reading the statement from the council and this is seems to be the main council come back Quote from the daily star Does any one have access to the document that says we do have to be provided a 99 year lease at a peppercorn yearly rental It's being talked about a lot and has being one of the fundamental behind the hole stadium from the off The documents can be found here, if you download the PDF and then search for "peppercorn rent" it pops up a few times to say that it was agreed that the developer would charge a peppercorn rent to the trust http://cominoweb.wakefield.gov.uk/Plann ... wdocs=true

Re: Fight for justice - Club Statement : Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:00 pm  

Do York Court even own the land on Newmarket? Got told Caddicks interested in it

Re: Fight for justice - Club Statement : Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:06 pm  

Tricky2309 wrote: Well it was WMDC who negotiated the five town parks s106. The report as to why that project should be considered very special circumstances and allowed to be built on green belt also makes interesting reading in relation to the commentary around the need for a new stadium for cas. http://cominoweb.wakefield.gov.uk/Plann ... nt=obj.pdf Pages 52 and 53 make interesting reading given what the council have gone on record saying about trinity and what we have asked for

Tricky2309 wrote: Well it was WMDC who negotiated the five town parks s106. The report as to why that project should be considered very special circumstances and allowed to be built on green belt also makes interesting reading in relation to the commentary around the need for a new stadium for cas. http://cominoweb.wakefield.gov.uk/Plann ... nt=obj.pdf Pages 52 and 53 make interesting reading given what the council have gone on record saying about trinity and what we have asked for

Re: Fight for justice - Club Statement : Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:21 pm  

Just an example of where it talks about the peppercorn rent is here, funnily enough in the Proof of Evidence of Sir Rodney Walker pdf.-

5. Funding and Delivery of the Stadium
5.1 The Trust has been working closely with Yorkcourt Properties Limited on the
development of the stadium project. The reasons for the selection of this site are
dealt with by Mr Francis. Yorkcourt Properties Limited has agreed to provide the
land for the stadium which would be on the basis of a long lease to the Trust at a
peppercorn rent. The lease would be of a stadium built to a standard to
accommodate Rugby Super League and of the adjacent facilities comprising the two
3G pitches and the changing facilities/stand adjacent to those. That latter area would
have the flexibility to be developed for much wider purposes at a later date as
explained by John Dennis.

Re: Fight for justice - Club Statement : Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:28 pm  

Would it not be useful to write to Mr Corbyn about this? I am well aware of the views some of our lovely forum members have on Mr Corbyn but before they all start going Daily Mail on me, hear me out.

Considering Corbyn's staunchly "loony" left political stance - meaning he generally gives a poop about the environment and is fairly anti-corporate benefits over community and the environment, do we not think he would be a little interested to know about what is happening under the Labour council of Wakefield? I'm sure this issue could be brought to his attention and I will be writing to him myself to bring this to his attention if possible. Labour led counselor screws taxpayer by letting developer build on green belt land without giving the community their promised community stadium. Could be a shout? Especially now the numpties in Labour who are part of this benevolent, self-serving shamozzle are getting reigned in by the left side of Labour.

Re: Fight for justice - Club Statement : Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:35 pm  

Prince Buster wrote:

Now then snowy old lad, I wonder where Box now ranks on the harris hole meter in relation to Thatcher. must be round about.

He's her love child. The one that they kept in the attic.