Haringey pitch application

[Football Man]

The Councillors I work with in Hackney are fairly detached from the real world too!

[petethegreek]

Originally Posted By: Rhodes

Originally Posted By: petethegreek

I'll see if I can find out next week.

Have you phoned George Kilikita yet. By coincidence I was at a meeting with the Leader of the Council and a White Hart Lane Ward Councillor last night as part of my high profile Community Police work and they asked me how I was getting on following 'my unfortunate departure' (their words not mine) from Coles Park, shall I just say we had a very interesting conversation about
'Sugar' amongst other things.

I went by Mr Kilikita's shop on Monday as I was in the area but he wasn't in. As soon as I find what's going on then I will let you know.

[Rhodes]

Originally Posted By: Football Man

The Councillors I work with in Hackney are fairly detached from the real world too!

So you work in Hackney, thanks for that.
Of course 'we' should be at Conference South level at the very least, anyone remotely interested in non league football can see that however as long as 'Sugar' remains at the helm of the Club there is no hope whatsoever of progressing.

[Horace]

Originally Posted By: Rhodes

Originally Posted By: Football Man

The Councillors I work with in Hackney are fairly detached from the real world too!

So you work in Hackney, thanks for that.
Of course 'we' should be at Conference South level at the very least, anyone remotely interested in non league football can see that however as long as 'Sugar' remains at the helm of the Club there is no hope whatsoever of progressing.

Why's that, Rhodes? Because Haringey is a populous London Borough? Surely not anything to do with the Club's record over 100 years? How many of those 100 years has Aki been Chairman?

[Rhodes]

Horace - You've actually hit the nail bang on the head, in 100 years 'we' have achieved next to nothing and that's very sad when the potential to succeed and get into the Conference, if not the football league itself, is so high. Since taking over the Chairmanship of the Club in 2004 'Sugar' has had an ideal opportunity to finally make progress and take 'us' onwards and upwards but instead 'we' have gone in the opposite direction, 'we're' clearly the Man Utd of Division 1 this season but are even making heavy weather of getting back to the Premier Division at the first time of asking, bringing Allan Fenn in hasn't helped in the slightest.

[Horace]

You are deluded, Rhodes. If no-one else was able to turn Haringey (or Wood Green, or Tufnell Park, or Edmonton or whatever) into a major club in 96 years, then why should it be Aki's responsibility to do it now? I have struggled to keep a similar (marginally more successful) club going myself - for every "Histon", there are 50 or more Haringey Boroughs. Location has little to do with success. You may as well have a go at me, or the current chairman of, say, Welwyn Garden City (similar size to Stevenage, etc, etc). (no disrespect intended to WGC!).

As for Haringey being the Manchester United of Div1, Utd are where they are because of achievement, not because they are in a big city.

[HTFCew]

Every time Rhodes comes out with this hogwash he shows his ignorance about non league. To do it once may have been a wind up, but he's said it so many times now that he really must believe it. Pity the fool.

[onekeown]

He doesn't have a Danny LaRue.....

[Rhodes]

Originally Posted By: HTFCew

but he's said it so many times now that he really must believe it

HTFCew - Of course I believe it, it was actually the only thing John Bacon and me used to have regular disagreements on as he never felt 'we' were in the same category as Barnet or Dagenham and Redbridge when infact we are, even more so infact.

[Sharming Paula]

 

Can I have some of what you're on Rhodes??

 

[Rhodes]

Paula - You had every chance to over a year or so ago, we could have been good together and some of it could have rubbed off on you

[Rhodes]

In my capacity of a stakeholder in the Haringey Allotments Forum this will interest 'Sugar' although obviously he is not going to say so:

 

We have been sent an important update about allotment tenancies from the Chair of Haringey Allotments Forum.

The Allotments Forum want all plot holders to know that the Council has just sent out a flawed tenancy agreement to plotholders on the sites it is responsible for. The Allotments Forum will be challenging/renegotiating.

All plot holders should contact their site

committees/secretaries. Any plotholder can be added to the Haringey Allotments Forum internal elist by contacting the Chair:

By agreement with the HAF chair I enclose extracts from his letter (below).

 

--------------------------------------------------

Dear All

 

A new tenancy agreement is in the process of being posted to all allotment tenants. It includes new restrictions which (if imposed retrospectively)will distress many tenants. What’s more, the terse language used in the covering letter and the tight deadline for witnessed signing and returning will cause unnecessary alarm.

We need to make sure nobody loses their tenancy because of retrospective imposition of these new restrictions or late return of the signed and witnessed document.

Tomorrow I will ask for the (a) withdrawal of the current document pending the consensus of the Forum, and ( an assurance from Recreation Services that nobody will lose their tenancy because of retrospective imposition of these new restrictions or late return of the signed and witnessed document.

I suggest everybody else does the same, and if possible send a copy to me.

Unfortunately I am away for 2 weeks from Tuesday 19th Feb, so I cannot convene a meeting before the next Forum. But it might be useful if someone else did.

The covering letter refers to ‘discussions with the Forum’, implying we had reached an accord with the Recreation Service. Although some Forum members spent a lot of time on redrafting the agreement, most of our suggestions were ignored; it was a dialogue of the deaf. ... In my view, it is a rambling badly-written document which totally misses the main point for

re-writing the agreement in the first place ­ clarifying, simplifying and streamlining the procedures for removing serial non-gardeners.

The most serious flaws I’ve noticed are:-

· Para 4 (number of allotments a tenant may hold) ­ we agreed there should

be a maximum size such as 250sq metres, but that it should not be

retrospective; the current wording is so complex as to be incomprehensible

· Para 5 (entitlement restricted to Haringey residents) ­ not agreed; we agreed to a higher reasonable rent for non-Haringey tenants, not a loss of

entitlement

· Para 6 (indemnity) ­ not agreed and unenforceable anyway

· Para 8 (termination) ­ not as agreed, TOTALLY MISSES MAIN POINT OF RE-WRITING TENANCY AGREEMENT - CLARIFYING, SIMPLIFYING AND STREAMLINING THE PROCEDURES FOR REMOVING SERIAL NON-GARDENERS; WHAT HAPPENED TO THE “2 STRIKES AND YOU’RE OUT” PROPOSAL WE THOUGHT HAD BEEN AGREED

· Para 9 (break clause) ­ never agreed, always opposed

· Para 10 (tenant’s covenants) ­ not as agreed, particularly the absence of chickens and rabbits from discretionary livestock; we expected there to be more guidance about cultivation, if necessary in a separate appendix which were not included

· Para 12 (liability) ­ never agreed and unenforceable anyway

 

[Doug]

Someone help me please!!!

 

HBFC are interested in the allotments because ........

[Wader]

Originally Posted By: Rhodes

Paula - You had every chance to over a year or so ago, we could have been good together and some of it could have rubbed off on you

Whilst reading this again through tears of laughter all I could visualise was Paula digging an allotment whilst a chocolate brown suited Rhodes threw rotten veg over the Haringey Borough FC fence, all to the theme tune of 'Minder'.

Oh Paula! What have you missed out on here?

[Football Man]

Originally Posted By: Rhodes

In my capacity of a stakeholder in the Haringey Allotments Forum this will interest 'Sugar' although obviously he is not going to say so:

We have been sent an important update about allotment tenancies from the Chair of Haringey Allotments Forum.
The Allotments Forum want all plot holders to know that the Council has just sent out a flawed tenancy agreement to plotholders on the sites it is responsible for. The Allotments Forum will be challenging/renegotiating.
All plot holders should contact their site
committees/secretaries. Any plotholder can be added to the Haringey Allotments Forum internal elist by contacting the Chair:
By agreement with the HAF chair I enclose extracts from his letter (below).

--------------------------------------------------
Dear All

A new tenancy agreement is in the process of being posted to all allotment tenants. It includes new restrictions which (if imposed retrospectively)will distress many tenants. What’s more, the terse language used in the covering letter and the tight deadline for witnessed signing and returning will cause unnecessary alarm.
We need to make sure nobody loses their tenancy because of retrospective imposition of these new restrictions or late return of the signed and witnessed document.
Tomorrow I will ask for the (a) withdrawal of the current document pending the consensus of the Forum, and ( an assurance from Recreation Services that nobody will lose their tenancy because of retrospective imposition of these new restrictions or late return of the signed and witnessed document.
I suggest everybody else does the same, and if possible send a copy to me.
Unfortunately I am away for 2 weeks from Tuesday 19th Feb, so I cannot convene a meeting before the next Forum. But it might be useful if someone else did.
The covering letter refers to ‘discussions with the Forum’, implying we had reached an accord with the Recreation Service. Although some Forum members spent a lot of time on redrafting the agreement, most of our suggestions were ignored; it was a dialogue of the deaf. ... In my view, it is a rambling badly-written document which totally misses the main point for
re-writing the agreement in the first place ­ clarifying, simplifying and streamlining the procedures for removing serial non-gardeners.
The most serious flaws I’ve noticed are:-
· Para 4 (number of allotments a tenant may hold) ­ we agreed there should
be a maximum size such as 250sq metres, but that it should not be
retrospective; the current wording is so complex as to be incomprehensible
· Para 5 (entitlement restricted to Haringey residents) ­ not agreed; we agreed to a higher reasonable rent for non-Haringey tenants, not a loss of
entitlement
· Para 6 (indemnity) ­ not agreed and unenforceable anyway
· Para 8 (termination) ­ not as agreed, TOTALLY MISSES MAIN POINT OF RE-WRITING TENANCY AGREEMENT - CLARIFYING, SIMPLIFYING AND STREAMLINING THE PROCEDURES FOR REMOVING SERIAL NON-GARDENERS; WHAT HAPPENED TO THE “2 STRIKES AND YOU’RE OUT” PROPOSAL WE THOUGHT HAD BEEN AGREED
· Para 9 (break clause) ­ never agreed, always opposed
· Para 10 (tenant’s covenants) ­ not as agreed, particularly the absence of chickens and rabbits from discretionary livestock; we expected there to be more guidance about cultivation, if necessary in a separate appendix which were not included
· Para 12 (liability) ­ never agreed and unenforceable anyway

Originally Posted By: Rhodes

why post it on here as it has nothing to do with football let along the SSML, there are plenty of Websites and Forums

[Greg_Dyke]

I am eagerly awaiting the breaking news

[Rhodes]

Originally Posted By: Doug

Someone help me please!!!
HBFC are interested in the allotments because ........

Greg Dyke - Right, lets rock and roll then.
As is blatantly obvious, Haringey Council are doing their utmost to squeeze allotment leaseholders so as they can no longer afford their prized plots any longer and will ultimately be forced to surrender them. Coles Park is surrounded by a vast area of allotments on two sides which are worth millions in land value, if 'Sugar', as I suspect he has his watchful eye on, were to surrender the Club's remaining lease back to the Council, having first negotiated an alternative venue in the Borough for 'us' to play, then he will be looking to put a cool 2 million in his back pocket with that land (Coles Park and allotments) being worth upwards of 80 million.

[Doug]

You really are deranged.

 

We are going to put down an enormously expensive synthetic surface, knock down and rebuild our stand at a monstrous cost and then.....we will move!!!!!

[Football Man]

Doug - You forgot to mention the new floodlights, expanded car park and the proposed new clubhouse.

[Doug]

Sorry FM Silly me, i was laughing too much at the time and my train of thought went.