Redevelopment Closer Than Ever?

[Coolcat]

Love this tread. I have rejoined since leaving over a year ago and the last 3-4 pages are the same people and same comments as they were back then!
Fingers crossed for some momentum soon.

It's fascinating. Sure you won't tyre of reading it!

[therealpattcobb]

Then sell off the County Ground for housing. Pure speculation of course and if I was a big cricket fan I’d think of taking an ACV on the ground just in case.

They definitely should form a tru... oh maybe not!

[Ragdoll Cobbler]

NEWS FROM THE SUPPORTERS TRUST…

Sixfields stand and land deal

Based on recent comments made by club chairman Kelvin Thomas, we are anticipating that an agreed deal between County Developments (Northampton) Ltd/Northampton Town Football Club and West Northamptonshire Council, in respect of the sale of land to the north and east of Sixfields stadium, will be announced shortly.

To date, the Supporters Trust has not received a reply from the council to its letter dated 24 November 2023 which was shared with Trust members.

We twice chased council leader Jonathan Nunn, without receiving the courtesy of a reply to our correspondence, asking for an update on the terms of the deal, so that we can relay this information to our members at the Annual General Meeting later this month. A Freedom of Information request has also been submitted to the council asking for, amongst other information, a copy of the signed Heads of Terms between the parties to the land sale agreement.

Councillor Nunn told a full council meeting a few months ago that the deal did not require further Cabinet approval. However, we are keen to establish whether a clause in the contract – allowing a five-year option on the completion of the East Stand, otherwise club land behind the stand will be bought back by the council for £1 – remains in place.

The Trust’s consistent position throughout this long saga has been that any deal should enable the certain completion of the stand and that the former community land behind the East Stand should not be allowed to be developed for a warehouse to be built across half the area. Should this not be the case, we firmly believe the best interests of the football club are not being served.

We also consider that Councillor Nunn’s repeated failure to address correspondence from the Supporters Trust over a long period of time is completely unacceptable.

A complaint about his conduct has been lodged with the council’s Monitoring Officer and hopefully we will receive a response to our questions before the AGM and so be in a position to update members accordingly.

[Worthless Recluse]

I hung a pair of curtains for the missus this morning. Said they wouldn't fit.
Under promise, over deliver.

[guest3667]

NEWS FROM THE SUPPORTERS TRUST…

Sixfields stand and land deal

Based on recent comments made by club chairman Kelvin Thomas, we are anticipating that an agreed deal between County Developments (Northampton) Ltd/Northampton Town Football Club and West Northamptonshire Council, in respect of the sale of land to the north and east of Sixfields stadium, will be announced shortly.

To date, the Supporters Trust has not received a reply from the council to its letter dated 24 November 2023 which was shared with Trust members.

We twice chased council leader Jonathan Nunn, without receiving the courtesy of a reply to our correspondence, asking for an update on the terms of the deal, so that we can relay this information to our members at the Annual General Meeting later this month. A Freedom of Information request has also been submitted to the council asking for, amongst other information, a copy of the signed Heads of Terms between the parties to the land sale agreement.

Councillor Nunn told a full council meeting a few months ago that the deal did not require further Cabinet approval. However, we are keen to establish whether a clause in the contract – allowing a five-year option on the completion of the East Stand, otherwise club land behind the stand will be bought back by the council for £1 – remains in place.

The Trust’s consistent position throughout this long saga has been that any deal should enable the certain completion of the stand and that the former community land behind the East Stand should not be allowed to be developed for a warehouse to be built across half the area. Should this not be the case, we firmly believe the best interests of the football club are not being served.

We also consider that Councillor Nunn’s repeated failure to address correspondence from the Supporters Trust over a long period of time is completely unacceptable.

A complaint about his conduct has been lodged with the council’s Monitoring Officer and hopefully we will receive a response to our questions before the AGM and so be in a position to update members accordingly.

Councillor Nunn will be quaking in his boots!

[DavCobb]

Don't see an issue with that. Whatever those involved at the club/council think of the Trust (clearly not a lot) the council won't dodge a FOI request. I've put in a couple previously. It is supposed to be within 20 days but the organisations normally try and side step/delay them.

Nothing wrong with requesting some transparency between the club/council, especially based on previous performance. I'm sure Marvo can pull out some stats on that one! 

[TVOR]

NEWS FROM THE SUPPORTERS TRUST…

Sixfields stand and land deal

Based on recent comments made by club chairman Kelvin Thomas, we are anticipating that an agreed deal between County Developments (Northampton) Ltd/Northampton Town Football Club and West Northamptonshire Council, in respect of the sale of land to the north and east of Sixfields stadium, will be announced shortly.

To date, the Supporters Trust has not received a reply from the council to its letter dated 24 November 2023 which was shared with Trust members.

We twice chased council leader Jonathan Nunn, without receiving the courtesy of a reply to our correspondence, asking for an update on the terms of the deal, so that we can relay this information to our members at the Annual General Meeting later this month. A Freedom of Information request has also been submitted to the council asking for, amongst other information, a copy of the signed Heads of Terms between the parties to the land sale agreement.

Councillor Nunn told a full council meeting a few months ago that the deal did not require further Cabinet approval. However, we are keen to establish whether a clause in the contract – allowing a five-year option on the completion of the East Stand, otherwise club land behind the stand will be bought back by the council for £1 – remains in place.

The Trust’s consistent position throughout this long saga has been that any deal should enable the certain completion of the stand and that the former community land behind the East Stand should not be allowed to be developed for a warehouse to be built across half the area. Should this not be the case, we firmly believe the best interests of the football club are not being served.

We also consider that Councillor Nunn’s repeated failure to address correspondence from the Supporters Trust over a long period of time is completely unacceptable.

A complaint about his conduct has been lodged with the council’s Monitoring Officer and hopefully we will receive a response to our questions before the AGM and so be in a position to update members accordingly.

Its almost as if their prior conduct is coming back to bite them. At least they shared this letter with their membership

[Tabasco Kid]

NEWS FROM THE SUPPORTERS TRUST…

Sixfields stand and land deal

Based on recent comments made by club chairman Kelvin Thomas, we are anticipating that an agreed deal between County Developments (Northampton) Ltd/Northampton Town Football Club and West Northamptonshire Council, in respect of the sale of land to the north and east of Sixfields stadium, will be announced shortly.

To date, the Supporters Trust has not received a reply from the council to its letter dated 24 November 2023 which was shared with Trust members.

We twice chased council leader Jonathan Nunn, without receiving the courtesy of a reply to our correspondence, asking for an update on the terms of the deal, so that we can relay this information to our members at the Annual General Meeting later this month. A Freedom of Information request has also been submitted to the council asking for, amongst other information, a copy of the signed Heads of Terms between the parties to the land sale agreement.

Councillor Nunn told a full council meeting a few months ago that the deal did not require further Cabinet approval. However, we are keen to establish whether a clause in the contract – allowing a five-year option on the completion of the East Stand, otherwise club land behind the stand will be bought back by the council for £1 – remains in place.

The Trust’s consistent position throughout this long saga has been that any deal should enable the certain completion of the stand and that the former community land behind the East Stand should not be allowed to be developed for a warehouse to be built across half the area. Should this not be the case, we firmly believe the best interests of the football club are not being served.

We also consider that Councillor Nunn’s repeated failure to address correspondence from the Supporters Trust over a long period of time is completely unacceptable.

A complaint about his conduct has been lodged with the council’s Monitoring Officer and hopefully we will receive a response to our questions before the AGM and so be in a position to update members accordingly.

The level of hypocrisy contained in this statement, is both eye opening, and sadly expectable.

[Another Pedj]

NEWS FROM THE SUPPORTERS TRUST…

Sixfields stand and land deal

Based on recent comments made by club chairman Kelvin Thomas, we are anticipating that an agreed deal between County Developments (Northampton) Ltd/Northampton Town Football Club and West Northamptonshire Council, in respect of the sale of land to the north and east of Sixfields stadium, will be announced shortly.

To date, the Supporters Trust has not received a reply from the council to its letter dated 24 November 2023 which was shared with Trust members.

We twice chased council leader Jonathan Nunn, without receiving the courtesy of a reply to our correspondence, asking for an update on the terms of the deal, so that we can relay this information to our members at the Annual General Meeting later this month. A Freedom of Information request has also been submitted to the council asking for, amongst other information, a copy of the signed Heads of Terms between the parties to the land sale agreement.

Councillor Nunn told a full council meeting a few months ago that the deal did not require further Cabinet approval. However, we are keen to establish whether a clause in the contract – allowing a five-year option on the completion of the East Stand, otherwise club land behind the stand will be bought back by the council for £1 – remains in place.

The Trust’s consistent position throughout this long saga has been that any deal should enable the certain completion of the stand and that the former community land behind the East Stand should not be allowed to be developed for a warehouse to be built across half the area. Should this not be the case, we firmly believe the best interests of the football club are not being served.

We also consider that Councillor Nunn’s repeated failure to address correspondence from the Supporters Trust over a long period of time is completely unacceptable.

A complaint about his conduct has been lodged with the council’s Monitoring Officer and hopefully we will receive a response to our questions before the AGM and so be in a position to update members accordingly.

Substitute council with trust and trust with members..

[Terryfenwickatemyhamster]

They have a right to request what they like. But I doubt it will add anything to their lack of relevance. How can they be surprised that they have run out of people who can be bothered with them 

This years winner of the unequivocal lack of insight award, goes to the TRUST BOARD. For its part in... Can we just be part of something, even anything pleeeeeeeeaaaaase.

[BackOfTheNet]

My old neighbour used to have a Yorkshire Terrier. Every time you went into the back garden it was there, yap yap yapping at you through the fence. In the end you just zoned it out.

I suspect that's how the council feel right now. You can't be a consistent pain in the backside and throw accusations around over a considerable period of time and still expect a civil response.

When you fail to get one, you can't really be surprised or outraged without showing an extraordinary lack of self awareness,  and when your response is to start throwing in formal FOIs and official complaints then all you are doing is compounding the problem and making sure the relationship is utterly beyond repair. Yap yap yap.

They can request all they like. My guess is anything they get back will be redacted to buggery!

[DavCobb]

My guess is anything they get back will be redacted to buggery!

I'd hope not, unless there is commercial sensitivity or the term 'pinky promise', either of which would sound some alarm bells. A Head of Terms agreement between a council and chosen partner should be as transparent as they come. You'd hope they've learnt that lesson!

[Melbourne Cobbler]

The level of hypocrisy contained in this statement, is both eye opening, and sadly expectable.

A fair few members have submitted a freedom of information request to the Trust Board. It’s not gone as well as we’d hoped.

[DavCobb]

A fair few members have submitted a freedom of information request to the Trust Board. It’s not gone as well as we’d hoped.

I won't go all 'subject matter expert' because I'm not and others will get their guide book out....but I'm not sure a FOI request really applies to a ramshackle supporters trust.
We know they like to throw out GDPR, which is a bit different.

[Melbourne Cobbler]

I won't go all 'subject matter expert' because I'm not and others will get their guide book out....but I'm not sure a FOI request really applies to a ramshackle supporters trust.
We know they like to throw out GDPR, which is a bit different.

That’s a relief, I thought they were just ignoring me whilst giving me the finger.

[BackOfTheNet]

.
We know they like to throw out GDPR, which is a bit different.

And I don't think they have that entirely right either. Yes, they absolutely have responsibilities as a data controller but it's a bit open to interpretation in how they can use the data they have, because there's a whole piece around what the subject of the data can "reasonably expect" you to do with it.

As what's essentially a members club you could argue that it would be "reasonable" for them to reach out to their members to confirm their details and to ask if it's OK to contact them in future. Frankly, even if it wasn't, with the numbers involved the ICO wouldn't be that bothered and the worst they'd get if reported would be a slap on the wrist!

[Tabasco Kid]

A fair few members have submitted a freedom of information request to the Trust Board. It’s not gone as well as we’d hoped.

I was under the impression that a FOI request could only be issued to a public body, not a private members clique.
Also, from previous experience, I believe that the requirement to respond is exactly that. Not to issue a reply, but to respond. There is a big difference. So, if the response is to say "no comment" in Sir Humphrey style, then they have fullfilled their requirment. At least thats what a large telecom company did to me.

[Observing]

That’s a relief, I thought they were just ignoring me whilst giving me the finger.

Where can you get the finger from?

Asking for a friend.

[Melbourne Cobbler]

I was under the impression that a FOI request could only be issued to a public body, not a private members clique.
Also, from previous experience, I believe that the requirement to respond is exactly that. Not to issue a reply, but to respond. There is a big difference. So, if the response is to say "no comment" in Sir Humphrey style, then they have fullfilled their requirment. At least thats what a large telecom company did to me.

We were hoping they wouldn’t know that.

[Melbourne Cobbler]

Where can you get the finger from?

Asking for a friend.

I can come as a hole package with the fist, according to a friend.