Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
Fishy Forum Fishy Boards Classic Threads › Residents meeting regarding stadium
Moderators: Moderator
Users Browsing Forum
No Members and 27 Guests

Residents meeting regarding stadium

  This thread currently has 23,643 views. Print
15 Pages Prev ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next All Recommend Thread
grimsby pete
September 7, 2016, 5:02pm

Exile
Posts: 55,548
Posts Per Day: 9.83
Reputation: 81.7%
Rep Score: +126 / -28
Location: Suffolk
Approval: +17,753
Gold Stars: 221
Quoted from Perkins
Am i correct in thinking that when it comes to the final council vote, any councillor with a vested interest i.e. a season ticket holder can not vote, but someone who has an allotment can?


What if the season ticket holder has an allotment as well ?


                             Over 36 years living in Suffolk but always a mariner.
                             68 Years following the Town

                              Life member of Trust

                               First game   April 1955
                               
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 120 - 141
bax
September 7, 2016, 5:17pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 978
Posts Per Day: 0.20
Reputation: 86.94%
Rep Score: +25 / -3
Approval: +2,645
Gold Stars: 30
Quoted from barralad


It's been said before but this is the fundamental problem for the protestors. They are currently protesting (vigorously!!) against an idea fuelled by the stuff coming out from the Ministry of Disinformation that are the councillors for Park Ward. Interesting that the mayor (the other part of the triumvirate of nonsense) Mrs McGilligan-Fell is nowhere to be seen or heard on the subject. Is that because she realises her colleagues may well be jumping in the manner of Greg Rutherford to the wrong conclusions?


Nope, it's tactical and political Ian.

DeFreitas is on the planning committee. But in leading the objections now he'll be precluded from being involved. Guess who the substitute is for the Lib Dems on planning?

McGilligan-Fell.

The second she gives an opinion on it she'll be precluded from taking part. So to ensure there's a Park/Lib Dem voice she'll probably be gagged (figuratively, not literally!) until the day of the meeting.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 121 - 141
realist
September 7, 2016, 5:22pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 767
Posts Per Day: 0.15
Reputation: 38.33%
Rep Score: +5 / -18
Approval: -2,686
Gold Stars: 41
Quoted from barralad


It's been said before but this is the fundamental problem for the protestors. They are currently protesting (vigorously!!) against an idea fuelled by the stuff coming out from the Ministry of Disinformation that are the councillors for Park Ward. Interesting that the mayor (the other part of the triumvirate of nonsense) Mrs McGilligan-Fell is nowhere to be seen or heard on the subject. Is that because she realises her colleagues may well be jumping in the manner of Greg Rutherford to the wrong conclusions?


Completely rubbish Barralad.
I dont think it is the right site for the scale of development suggested. A football site on its own maybe, but not the widespread demolition of green space to fund this vanity project. Open space is a valuable resource that should not be given up lightly.
Fenty on the radio this morning said that most of the sites were suitable for a stadium but not the enabling add on.
So not thinking its the right location, being against public money being spent on it and being opposed to the corrupt and secretive dealings of some councillors are not valid reasons?

Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 122 - 141
barralad
September 7, 2016, 7:33pm
Mariners Trust
Posts: 13,792
Posts Per Day: 2.33
Reputation: 81.03%
Rep Score: +86 / -20
Approval: +9,195
Gold Stars: 121
Quoted from realist


Completely rubbish Barralad.
I dont think it is the right site for the scale of development suggested. A football site on its own maybe, but not the widespread demolition of green space to fund this vanity project. Open space is a valuable resource that should not be given up lightly.
Fenty on the radio this morning said that most of the sites were suitable for a stadium but not the enabling add on.
So not thinking its the right location, being against public money being spent on it and being opposed to the corrupt and secretive dealings of some councillors are not valid reasons?



Oh dear! I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that you are either one of the two councillors or a blood relation. Would you please explain which part of my post is "Completely rubbish"? Unless you are privy to actualities that us mortals haven't had the advantage of seeing there are no plans. I spent a lot of my campaigning time last year reassuring residents on the Edge Avenue estate that they weren't getting a stadium in the field behind their houses. Now where do you suppose that piece of mis-information came from? It was supported by a map that had the Edge Avenue estate in its correct position but the stadium site was drawn completely out of scale. There may well be issues once the plans are drawn up. Perhaps the dynamic duo would be better waiting for those or maybe I'm being far too simplistic.
"Vanity project" seems to be a pet word for those who don't wish to see the stadium project succeed. I haven't seen the unemployment figures lately but I'd suggest that anything which will see the creation of a reasonably large number of jobs will be viewed as the wise use of said "public money".
Perhaps fortunately for you you haven't named the councillors you allege have involved themselves in "corrupt and secretive" dealings. The libel laws in this country have a nasty habit of being used in such cases. Meanwhile back in factsville it is a certainty that not every house in Park Ward received an invite to the meeting on Monday. I'll leave you to wonder why that might be. By their own admittance the Lib. Dem. councillors failed to control the meeting sufficiently well to enable those in favour of the development to be heard and we have the uninspiring sight and sound of Councillor Barfield bemoaning the fact that he thought his meeting was secret enough for him to be able to get away with talk of booby trapping the project. How dare a member of the public do the community a service by filming proceedings for the benefit of those who couldn't fit into a church hall (or even those who feared for their safety from a rabble that weren't prepared to countenance opposite arguments being presented)


The aim of argument or discussion should not be victory but progress.

Joseph Joubert.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 123 - 141
Marinerz93
September 7, 2016, 7:53pm

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 15,108
Posts Per Day: 2.58
Reputation: 88.22%
Rep Score: +89 / -11
Location: Great Grimsby
Approval: +6,292
Gold Stars: 1
To get the blue rinse brigade on side, couldn't the new stadium or other build ons allow time for ballroom dancing, meetings to moan about the youth of today, and 'it's a stitch up', a weekly competition for them to see who can make the quickest Christmas sweater?

That way defritarse and his hapless sidekick will only need a phone box for the next meetings to discuss non events.

Interesting that someone who isn't from the area is doing his utmost to stop something that will improve the Towns image, bring jobs and will benefit the community as a whole.


Supporting the Mighty Mariners for over 30 years, home town club is were the heart and soul is and it's great to be a part of it.

Jesus’ disciple Peter, picked up a fish to get the tribute money from it, Jesus left his thumb print on the fish, bless'ed is the Haddock.
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 124 - 141
ginnywings
September 7, 2016, 7:57pm

Recovering Alcoholic
Posts: 28,126
Posts Per Day: 5.05
Reputation: 73.79%
Rep Score: +88 / -32
Approval: +55,972
Gold Stars: 538
Quoted from barralad


Oh dear! I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that you are either one of the two councillors or a blood relation. Would you please explain which part of my post is "Completely rubbish"? Unless you are privy to actualities that us mortals haven't had the advantage of seeing there are no plans. I spent a lot of my campaigning time last year reassuring residents on the Edge Avenue estate that they weren't getting a stadium in the field behind their houses. Now where do you suppose that piece of mis-information came from? It was supported by a map that had the Edge Avenue estate in its correct position but the stadium site was drawn completely out of scale. There may well be issues once the plans are drawn up. Perhaps the dynamic duo would be better waiting for those or maybe I'm being far too simplistic.
"Vanity project" seems to be a pet word for those who don't wish to see the stadium project succeed. I haven't seen the unemployment figures lately but I'd suggest that anything which will see the creation of a reasonably large number of jobs will be viewed as the wise use of said "public money".
Perhaps fortunately for you you haven't named the councillors you allege have involved themselves in "corrupt and secretive" dealings. The libel laws in this country have a nasty habit of being used in such cases. Meanwhile back in factsville it is a certainty that not every house in Park Ward received an invite to the meeting on Monday. I'll leave you to wonder why that might be. By their own admittance the Lib. Dem. councillors failed to control the meeting sufficiently well to enable those in favour of the development to be heard and we have the uninspiring sight and sound of Councillor Barfield bemoaning the fact that he thought his meeting was secret enough for him to be able to get away with talk of booby trapping the project. How dare a member of the public do the community a service by filming proceedings for the benefit of those who couldn't fit into a church hall (or even those who feared for their safety from a rabble that weren't prepared to countenance opposite arguments being presented)


A most excellent post young sir.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 125 - 141
realist
September 7, 2016, 8:26pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 767
Posts Per Day: 0.15
Reputation: 38.33%
Rep Score: +5 / -18
Approval: -2,686
Gold Stars: 41
Do one ginny
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 126 - 141
ginnywings
September 7, 2016, 8:29pm

Recovering Alcoholic
Posts: 28,126
Posts Per Day: 5.05
Reputation: 73.79%
Rep Score: +88 / -32
Approval: +55,972
Gold Stars: 538
Quoted from realist
Do one ginny


Don't think i will actually.

Opinions are for everyone, even you.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 127 - 141
Marinerz93
September 7, 2016, 8:36pm

Barley Wine Drinker
Posts: 15,108
Posts Per Day: 2.58
Reputation: 88.22%
Rep Score: +89 / -11
Location: Great Grimsby
Approval: +6,292
Gold Stars: 1
Quoted from realist
Do one ginny


You have lost Defritarse, go boil your head muppet.





Supporting the Mighty Mariners for over 30 years, home town club is were the heart and soul is and it's great to be a part of it.

Jesus’ disciple Peter, picked up a fish to get the tribute money from it, Jesus left his thumb print on the fish, bless'ed is the Haddock.
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 128 - 141
realist
September 7, 2016, 8:42pm
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 767
Posts Per Day: 0.15
Reputation: 38.33%
Rep Score: +5 / -18
Approval: -2,686
Gold Stars: 41
Quoted from barralad


Oh dear! I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that you are either one of the two councillors or a blood relation. Would you please explain which part of my post is "Completely rubbish"? Unless you are privy to actualities that us mortals haven't had the advantage of seeing there are no plans. I spent a lot of my campaigning time last year reassuring residents on the Edge Avenue estate that they weren't getting a stadium in the field behind their houses. Now where do you suppose that piece of mis-information came from? It was supported by a map that had the Edge Avenue estate in its correct position but the stadium site was drawn completely out of scale. There may well be issues once the plans are drawn up. Perhaps the dynamic duo would be better waiting for those or maybe I'm being far too simplistic.
"Vanity project" seems to be a pet word for those who don't wish to see the stadium project succeed. I haven't seen the unemployment figures lately but I'd suggest that anything which will see the creation of a reasonably large number of jobs will be viewed as the wise use of said "public money".
Perhaps fortunately for you you haven't named the councillors you allege have involved themselves in "corrupt and secretive" dealings. The libel laws in this country have a nasty habit of being used in such cases. Meanwhile back in factsville it is a certainty that not every house in Park Ward received an invite to the meeting on Monday. I'll leave you to wonder why that might be. By their own admittance the Lib. Dem. councillors failed to control the meeting sufficiently well to enable those in favour of the development to be heard and we have the uninspiring sight and sound of Councillor Barfield bemoaning the fact that he thought his meeting was secret enough for him to be able to get away with talk of booby trapping the project. How dare a member of the public do the community a service by filming proceedings for the benefit of those who couldn't fit into a church hall (or even those who feared for their safety from a rabble that weren't prepared to countenance opposite arguments being presented)


"There are no plans" is not really correct. Without any plans a suitability study could not have been conducted. Whilst these will be draft and possibly subje t to large changes as it develops it is reasonable to assume that the boundary of the develoment as marked on the plan in the study is fairly accurate. From this you can see the scale of whatever development might be submitted. So if it is good enough for the council to vote on it is certainly good enough for me to form an opinion.
Your next point about my alegations about councillors integrity. Why did Fenty say on radio Humberside some time ago that it was a done deal?
Why are these rumours of undehand deals continually circulating about letting the ground go ahead. I challenged a prominent councillor about this whose reaction was to stare at his feet looking very uneasy and did not answer?
Why did a one party cabinet with no representations from ward councillors take a few minutes to approve such a one sided document that has such a wide ranging effect?
Until these are answered I cannot support such a project.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 129 - 141
15 Pages Prev ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next All Recommend Thread
Print

Fishy Forum Fishy Boards Classic Threads › Residents meeting regarding stadium

Thread Rating

There have been 1 votes for this thread.
 

Back to top of page

This is not an official forum of Grimsby Town Football Club, the opinions expressed are those of the individual authors. If you see an offensive post then click "Report" on the relevant post. Posts will be deleted at the discretion of the moderators whose decision is final. Posts should abide by the Forum Rules. IP addresses of contributors together with dates and times of access are stored. The opinions and viewpoints expressed by contributors to The Fishy are their own and not necessarily those of The Fishy. The Fishy makes no claims that information dispersed through this forum is accurate or reliable. Also The Fishy cannot be held liable for any statements made by contributors of The Fishy.