It's the same stuff they always come out with. Nothing anyone hasn't seen before. The main issue is the council granting planning permission for the big fridge separately. The council clearly think it was okay to do that, everyone involved with the club and trust believe it shouldn't have been allowed legally as the SoS specifically said the scheme couldn't be disaggregated. The trust asked the council why they allowed it to go through, the council said they'd been given legal advice to do so. The trust submitted a FOI request to the relevant department to see said legal advice and were informed it doesn't exist. Also, the club say the council specifically told them not to bid for Belle Vue last year so as to keep the price down for Yorkcourt to buy it for us, who then didn't bother and 88M swooped in and bought it so if someone from the council told me the sky was blue I'd have to go outside and check.

I've found the council's reluctance to engage with anyone over the last few years about this whole thing strange to say the least. If I had people flinging blame and accusations at me left, right and centre I would want to set the record straight and explain clearly why I'd done what I had. As the guy in The Independent said, it's very strange to find a council leader who refuses to be interviewed and to me it comes across as though there is something that somebody isn't telling us. Maybe there isn't, and if they come out and provide a reasonable explanation as to why they've done what they have I'll accept it. But I won't be holding my breath after the last few years. Looks like it's gonna end in court at some stage, and the trust and club seem pretty confident they have a case, so we'll just have to see what happens.

Also it's a bit rich for the council to claim that the building of Newcold has had no adverse effect on the building of the stadium. Yeah, because allowing the same developer to build on the same site with no contribution towards the stadium definitely doesn't have an effect.

Quote ="Clearwing"No-one disputing the council's statement?'" As some have already stated, it's nothing new from the Council and as normal there's a lot of content but they do not address the main questions. There are some good points made in this thread viewtopic.php?f=33&t=603943&start=120 After reading this measured and considered response from the Council I a more convinced than ever that they know they're in the wrong. If they weren't in the wrong or didn't know they'd fecked up they would have taken this opportunity to address the main points, especially those with legal ramifications! They don't though, they blather the reply with lots of irrelevance and and stuff from almost 20 years ago in an attempt to divert the argument and camouflage the fact that they're not addressing the real issues.

Quote ="Clearwing"No-one disputing the council's statement?'" As some have already stated, it's nothing new from the Council and as normal there's a lot of content but they do not address the main questions. There are some good points made in this thread viewtopic.php?f=33&t=603943&start=120 After reading this measured and considered response from the Council I a more convinced than ever that they know they're in the wrong. If they weren't in the wrong or didn't know they'd fecked up they would have taken this opportunity to address the main points, especially those with legal ramifications! They don't though, they blather the reply with lots of irrelevance and and stuff from almost 20 years ago in an attempt to divert the argument and camouflage the fact that they're not addressing the real issues.

No news on Sir Rodney Walker?.

Wasn't it on record that The Stadium Trust knew that the Newcold building wouldn't be included towards the trigger point but nobody objected to it?

When you say 'on record':
If you mean official minutes from meetings, WMDC seem not to have such things.
If you mean unratified proclamations from councillor box, repeated parrot fashion by his underlings, then yes.

Wrong - they do have minutes of the meeting. Extract here :-

[i"Andy stated that he had advised Sir Rodney if the Trust wanted advice on the heads of terms between Yorkcourt he would be happy to offer his advice. Andy also advised the Trust to ensure that the heads of terms were as firm as possible and that it was important to try and firm up into a legal agreement as soon as possible. However, the view of the Trust is that they will seek independent legal advice and do not require input from the Council."[/i

#TheTrustKnew

Wrong - sir Rodney knew but failed to pass on the information to anyone else. The extract from minutes is clearly not from a meeting with the trust. It's a selective quote with no context or even date and as such is meaningless.

The community trust's response viewtopic.php?f=33&t=603999

The community trust's response viewtopic.php?f=33&t=603999

You keep posting these hashtags (which you've just copied from Bigalf as you're certainly nowhere near intelligent enough to come up with something original) as if everyone isn't aware that Rodney Walker has screwed us over. TRB admits that they began to smell a rat and it seems to me that Rodney Walker was certainly pushed as opposed to jumping. You seem to think that this somehow absolves the council of all blame, when in fact they still have a lot to answer for. I say it not just as a Wakefield fan, but as someone who lives in Stanley, the decision to just idly stand by and let a developer trojan horse a massive fridge onto greenbelt land with virtually no community benefit is extremely incompetent at best and at worst very, very dodgy. Ultimately, people just want some transparency at this point which is still yet to come and just gives the impression the council have something to hide.

Also, I swear you post more about Wakefield than you do about Cas. It's very strange. You're top of the league and your stadium looks to be progressing, I don't get why you have such a chip on your shoulder when it comes to Wakefield. Most Cas fans probably couldn't care less.

Its taken a long time to "smell the rat". You were all warned by Bigalf on your forum about the devil in the detail but failed to take it on.

It's alot easier to talk about WT issues as a distraction from his own new stadium.

It was only 2 years ago that the Cas forum was in melt down about a new 12000 seat stadium, with corners filled in, coffee shops, restaurants owned by Cas and playing there in 2017.

These days they have to content themselves talking about a truck of sand that arrived this week and port-a-loos are expected next week and should be finished 20/21.

When did Bigalf 'warn' us all. Months after the horse had bolted? Hindsight is a wonderful gift.

He didn't, and now his little lickspittle is snidely stirring poop. The only difference being Bigalf had a modicum of intellect and
therefore didn't come across quite as foolish.

Will the trust be taking Sir Rodders to court as well as the council?

Not sure he's done anything illegal, just extremely immoral unfortunately. To be honest, it seems he's irrelevant at this point anyway. If the trusts lawyer is correct and is it indeed within the council's power to draft a new multi-party agreement and have Newcold contribute towards the trigger point then I can't see any reason whatsoever for not doing this. The only people who wouldn't benefit from this would be Yorkcourt, and they've already benefitted enough by being given all that green belt land to build on.

It was only last week that your chairman stated "At no point have I blamed the council and I'm not asking the council for money, all I am asking them for is the support to enforce what was promised five years ago. That is what we are fighting for" Here :- www.skysports.com/rugby-league/n ... e-vue-exit Now you are willing to take £2 million in council tax payers money. Need to make your mind up.

It was only last week that your chairman stated "At no point have I blamed the council and I'm not asking the council for money, all I am asking them for is the support to enforce what was promised five years ago. That is what we are fighting for" Here :- www.skysports.com/rugby-league/n ... e-vue-exit Now you are willing to take £2 million in council tax payers money. Need to make your mind up.

Quote ="Tigerade"It was only last week that your chairman stated "At no point have I blamed the council and I'm not asking the council for money, all I am asking them for is the support to enforce what was promised five years ago. That is what we are fighting for" Here :- www.skysports.com/rugby-league/n ... e-vue-exit Now you are willing to take £2 million in council tax payers money. Need to make your mind up.'" "Enforce what was promised five years ago". Eg. a stadium built by Yorkcourt once 60,000 sq m of warehousing was built with £2 million from the council, as they'd made a commitment to doing during the planning application. Very different to the way you like to imply that we're asking the council to just build a whole stadium for us. Again, the big thing is them enforcing the fact that Newcold should contribute to the trigger point and we should be roughly 75% of the way there once the expansion is completed. For example, I suspect that if the council came to the trust and said okay, we'll draft up a new multi-party agreement with Newcold contributing to the trigger point but you have to find the £2 million somewhere else that the trust would probably agree because getting Newcold to contribute is the key thing here. If I were Cas and Fev I would probably be on to the council as well asking for £2 million, although I suspect the difference is that Cas were offered £2 million towards the original Glasshoughton project which is obviously now dead as opposed to Wakefield being offered £2 million towards a development which has had planning permission passed under the assumption that the council would be contributing said £2 million. Although Fev probably have a good case that the council should give them £2 million too as I'm not particularly sure what's changed there, and again I wouldn't have a problem with them doing so as, unlike you so often love to imply, Wakefield fans aren't actually looking for special treatment.

Quote ="Tigerade"It was only last week that your chairman stated "At no point have I blamed the council and I'm not asking the council for money, all I am asking them for is the support to enforce what was promised five years ago. That is what we are fighting for" Here :- www.skysports.com/rugby-league/n ... e-vue-exit Now you are willing to take £2 million in council tax payers money. Need to make your mind up.'" "Enforce what was promised five years ago". Eg. a stadium built by Yorkcourt once 60,000 sq m of warehousing was built with £2 million from the council, as they'd made a commitment to doing during the planning application. Very different to the way you like to imply that we're asking the council to just build a whole stadium for us. Again, the big thing is them enforcing the fact that Newcold should contribute to the trigger point and we should be roughly 75% of the way there once the expansion is completed. For example, I suspect that if the council came to the trust and said okay, we'll draft up a new multi-party agreement with Newcold contributing to the trigger point but you have to find the £2 million somewhere else that the trust would probably agree because getting Newcold to contribute is the key thing here. If I were Cas and Fev I would probably be on to the council as well asking for £2 million, although I suspect the difference is that Cas were offered £2 million towards the original Glasshoughton project which is obviously now dead as opposed to Wakefield being offered £2 million towards a development which has had planning permission passed under the assumption that the council would be contributing said £2 million. Although Fev probably have a good case that the council should give them £2 million too as I'm not particularly sure what's changed there, and again I wouldn't have a problem with them doing so as, unlike you so often love to imply, Wakefield fans aren't actually looking for special treatment.

Tigerade you are such a one eyed div it's not that unbelievable I guess.

Totally agree with this. What I don't understand is how WMDC can offer this when they are closing sporting facilities like swimming pools and golf - they haven't got £6 million spare to spend.

Supporter of clubs with less potential than us will hope we don't get the community stadium build.
Up the Trin
Love this Club
Love this City

What I don't understand when taking the above into account, is that there's a development at Newmarket that's signed and sealed by the S of S on certain conditions being fullfilled by the developer. Which WMDC could really push and get behind if they wanted and who knows, maybe attract new businesses to the area at Newmarket, which would have the added bonus of extra jobs being available. If they did that, there's basically a big sports facility and Community Stadium, at virtually no cost to them and yet they hardly seem interested.


Maybe the difference between the Newarket develoment is, that it's a proper Communinty Facility that isn't going to be handed over to Trinity for free for them to then own as an assett afterwards, we'll just be tennants. Unlike the potential Cas stadium. Plus like I mentioned above, the Stadium is just part of a wider sports facilities. Which if it ever gets completed to plans, is meant to have a load of all weather pitches etc that can be used by the Community for a number of other sports through the year.

The agreement the trust, fronted up by Rodney Walker signed with the developer of Newmarket, that they would build Wakefield a new stadium to play out of, when a certain amount of units had been built and occupied, adding up to 60,000sqm in total.

The problem is the trigger point hasn't been reached, even taking the Newcold eye saw into account, a lot more units will have to be built to reach that trigger point, and I don't think Newcold will be added to the s106. According to the Met, Sir Rodney knew and didn't object to this, so it seems he has some hard questions to answer .

The point is the trigger point will never be met if WMDC continue to allow future applications to sit outside of the UU. They had the power to not grant the Newcold application, they chose to approve it and allow it to not contribute to the enabling development. They can not or will not say why they did this. They've even refused a FOI request. They have something to hide. This goes beyond sports facilities and the more exposure this gets the more uncomfortable certain officials will be getting.

Id love to be proved wrong but unfortunately I don't think a new stadium will come from this action, however if shady dealings have been going on then it's only right those who have benefited are punished.

Praise indeed!! Cheers!

That's the thing, the Newcold is getting extened & doubled in size to abbout 44,600m2. Just imagine if all of it counted towards said trigger point, we would only be 15,400m2 off and imo when more of the site gets developed, like it is currently, I believe more will get built.
Like others have said, why wasn't it part of the trigger point in the first place by WMDC. WMDC and Yorkcort know that they only got the land because of the 15,000 signatures and the promise of decent sporting facilities for the Community, so why not enforce it. Even at this point there's no reason they can't add it to the S106 in the form of a multi-party agreement, although I doubt they will.
Also they're passing the buck a bit saying they told Rodders (although he comes out of this looking shady tbh). It should be in their own interests to have this part of the trigger point & get this development up and running properly. Ateotd they're meant to be working for the Community to enforce what was promised.

Rodney Walker is a sideline issue thrown in by WMDC to distract attention away from the truth. Rodney may have some questions to answer and he certainly seems to have acted in an immoral manner.

The quoting of "No Objections" is also irrelevant as it too is a distraction from the WMDCs possibly illegal failure to enforce the SOSs ruling. There's also some very suspicious and questionable anomalies surrounding the timing, wording and transparency of WMDCs planning documents pertaining to the Newcold build.

The main question is why did WMDC choose to allow the Newcold build to fall outside the UU (which IS a S106) when they have a legal obligation to to enforce The SoSs ruling.

That ruling stated that the land involved would only be lifted out of the Green Belt on the express provision that the developer built Community Sports facilities and a Community Stadium once 60,000sqm of warehousing was built out.

The SoSs Officer clearly ruled that this was a legal condition and that the land in question could not be disaggregated. What that means is that the ruling is on the land and not any particular planning application. Therefore any planning application is subject to this condition and it is the legal obligation of the ruling Planning Authority (WMDC) to ensure its enforcement!

There seems to be no logical reason whatsoever for WMDC not to enforce the SoSs ruling, indeed they have brought suspicion and possible legal action against themselves by not enforcing it.

The subsequent intransigence, evasiveness and failure to answer the charge against them further increases a feeling of complete distrust in WMDC and in particular its Leader, Peter Box.

Obtuse statements that the WMDC did not sign the UU and it therefore has nothing to do with them, that WMDC are not beneficiaries of the UU which they clearly are and that they are not responsible for enforcing a planning application ruling for a huge development IN WAKEFIELD are so crazy and illogical as to invite suspicion.

Refusing Freedom of Information requests and eventually admitting that legal advice fundamental to their position hasn't been kept on record is at best incompetent and at worst. . . we'll make your own mind up!