chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Yes, on CWR this afternoon.
"council officers have met with representatives of the football club in the past to explore issues around stadium locations ... I won't give details as to where they are"
Yes, on CWR this afternoon.When did this happen? Radio interview?
"the city solicitor went on the councils behalf. She did that because she has the legal authority should SISU have of withdrawn their court action she has the authority to accept that"Also, the council's internal legal team and their counsel for the JR are two completely different groups of people.
Something I guess. I wonder how far in the past he was referring to.Yes, on CWR this afternoon.
"council officers have met with representatives of the football club in the past to explore issues around stadium locations ... I won't give details as to where they are"
Guess the councils responses to FOI requests insisting it had never happened must have been another one of those miscommunications.Something I guess. I wonder how far in the past he was referring to.
Its almost unbelievable.. but at the same time utterly believableGuess the councils responses to FOI requests insisting it had never happened must have been another one of those miscommunications.
Guess the councils responses to FOI requests insisting it had never happened must have been another one of those miscommunications.
Hold on, weren't FOI requests about planning applications and not preliminary meetings?
The requests asked whether any discussions, meetings or correspondence had taken place between the Councils/Police forces and Coventry City Football Club, its owners, agents or anyone acting on their behalf relating to the development of a football stadium and/or any facilities relating to the business of a Football Club.
I'm sure sisu are sat pissing themselves at duggins letting that slip still.Hold on, weren't FOI requests about planning applications and not preliminary meetings?There have definitely been no applications except some stuff about the Butts, you can search a database for them. I think there was a Cov Tel story with some info about Cov/CCFC working togethr on Butts.
Even if they do not wish to disclose where the sites were why can't SISU release a list of dates when those meetings took place labelling the sites anonumously (e.g. site A, site B etc.), be interesting to see if any were recently or they go back a few years. I don't see why CCC could object.
It would be interesting if sisu had actually been meeting with the council within the last 4 years then to try and sort some land?Sky Blue Trust - Trust Freedom of Information (FoI) Requests Results
OK, that was Dec 2014, 4 years have passed since, if there are no subsequent requsts then CJ can a fresh set of requests be made please?
Precise.. and if the trust have stopped this line of enquiry why would they?It would be interesting if sisu had actually been meeting with the council within the last 4 years then to try and sort some land?
Do you really think it's likely this has all happened since we've been back at the Ricoh rather than during the time period the club was openly talking about looking for a new stadium site and engaging professionals to undertake the work?OK, that was Dec 2014, 4 years have passed since, if there are no subsequent requsts then CJ can a fresh set of requests be made please?
The way he talks about it makes it seem like it was "in the past".Precise.. and if the trust have stopped this line of enquiry why would they?
Although to be fair SISU have been bigging up no new stadium for a while now, maybe they were misled by that attitude.
Just out of interest other than people getting some satisfaction from Duggins being voted out, how would it change anything for the better for CCFC? Both parties at the council unanimously backed everything so far in the dispute and losing 18 seats out of 54 wont change that. It isnt one person making the decisions. Not to mention the date of the elections is after the EFL vote
No, the FOI requests asked about discussions specifically. They didn't need to ask about applications as that is publicly available.Hold on, weren't FOI requests about planning applications and not preliminary meetings?There have definitely been no applications except some stuff about the Butts, you can search a database for them. I think there was a Cov Tel story with some info about Cov/CCFC working togethr on Butts.
Even if they do not wish to disclose where the sites were why can't SISU release a list of dates when those meetings took place labelling the sites anonumously (e.g. site A, site B etc.), be interesting to see if any were recently or they go back a few years. I don't see why CCC could object.
My fear is that this is now boiling down to a clash of personalities with CCC
Balloon fight?It isn't just now, it's been going on for the last 10 years.
Its almost as if you don't read the whole thread and points before postingAll the above suggestions and ideas are fine but isn’t a very important point being missed there’s five weeks to go before this EGM and I suspect there will need to be more than words as to sisu plans to satisfy the EFL and its members. Imo it needs Sepalla to officially cancel the legals, Wasps then to offer reasonable terms for renting us the Ricoh for a minimum of two years and then sisu and the council to seriously get their heads together in locating a suitable site and also sisu to publicly outline their plan, costs etc. A lot of this should be basically done in the previous conversations we know have happened. There are alsorts of hurdles to get over, planning, objections from the nimbys etc.
I feel wasps could be the ones that push the council to talk. If you think about it they can see a resolution that they would be happy with, it’s the council refusing to move! If they put an offer down it puts pressure on the council, especially if we accept the deal as well!!How about wasps agree terms before the legals are dropped? Once dropped, everything is signed off. Why the insistence on them being dropped first?
I’ll tell you why, Sepalla has publicly said she will stop the legals if.... Anytime now there is to be an appeal at the highest court in the land I’m not sure how she can explain and justify to the judges there about using the reason she is there as a bargaining chip. If the legals were cancelled I think it could put her in a good position to acquire the suitable land she is after.How about wasps agree terms before the legals are dropped? Once dropped, everything is signed off. Why the insistence on them being dropped first?
We shouldn’t need FOI if we had journalists, the trust, supporters groups asking the same set of questions to the parties involved, you can see from the observer ones how Duggins ducked the questions, press him again on why he didn’t feel it was worth attending to discuss other parts of sorting out a deal and not just hide behind the legal argument being dropped.
Could the supporters trust not create a set of questions that we as fans can then e-mail/send in the post to many different individuals to make their working life such a mess that they actually have to get round the table in the end to remove us as a nuisance.
All politicians in the city
Wasps and any wasps related company
The council direct
SISU and other inter related parties
CCFC
Could we not fund raise to keep asking them for FOI information, companies hate that, it’s so time consuming to provide, we don’t actually have to ask for info about this, we could just have 1,000 fans write into the council for FOI on different matters and they would be screwed in dealing with it.
I know it’s probably too much to ask but the pen has always been mightier than the sword and we have not made the most of this, would be far more effective than sit ins, walks, chanting on TV.
Do these organizations really want to deal with constant nuisance of having to respond to their constituents, supporters, individuals? I know Wasps are really worried about the legacy for a future fan base being marred by angry city fans of the club did move or fold.
I don’t know how this could be galvanized or structured but it’s why I joined the trust on day 1 with lifetime membership as I thought they could be the body to drive this forward.
Well, they can stop bothering if they consider you vexatious.Could we not fund raise to keep asking them for FOI information, companies hate that, it’s so time consuming to provide, we don’t actually have to ask for info about this, we could just have 1,000 fans write into the council for FOI on different matters and they would be screwed in dealing with it.
Well, they can stop bothering if they consider you vexatious.
Or... they could employ plenty more compliance managers at the expense of other jobs.
Said it before, will say it again, FOI is a waste of time as it only shows what's recorded, and informal chats won't be. FOI's also an excuse for journalists not to do actual journalism, talk to people, build relationships, find out the proper story. Why do that when you can bang off a few requests in your lunchtime which, while not really providing the story, will provide a story.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?