..... was that the leader of the council sat next to Coxall at the match?

Looked like one of the SCABs. Horrible, odious men.

No matter who is sat at the ground, they have to give us six months notice before selling it and in that period we have a right to purchase under 'community right to buy'. Besides, Surely the council ain't that stupid.

I haven't a clue how this works, but would the Trusts bid have preference over a rival bid if the rival bid was greater.

Strictly speaking no but the legislation is framed such as a community bid for a local asset should be given preference over an outside bid.

Personally I welcome the appointment of Dave Jones but history tells us that property developers don't generally get involved with football clubs for philanthropic reasons.

So in effect, you end up relying on the owner of the asset to play the game and look favourably on a trusts bid, but able to decide on their own course of action and favour a rival bidder if they so choose.

Maybe Dave Jones will get a cut!

No. The council are duty bound to look favourably on a community bid. All other things being equal they have to accept it.

Don't really want to post this. But do a) the trust have anywhere near the sort of membership and b) anywhere near the sort of funds to be actually taken seriously yet?

And if not now when, next month? six months? a year?!

Perhaps I've missed it, but I don't get any sort of feeling of a snow ball effect, no momentum, no membership drive or fundraising efforts.

The trouble is, pools supporters are a fraction of their electorate. There's also those who demand the council get the best price for selling council property, it's never straightforward.

Nah, just a locker.

Theres a couple of hundred members and to be fair you're right in some respects. Up to around Feb 16 it was building up nicely but as I was doing the majority of the pushing it went quiet for a while when I took ill and had a heart bypass. It's back on track now but its been a while.

As for funds; thats not the way it works. If Pools went into administration thats the time when people would rally round and community funding would be built up. There is money in the back yes but theres no point in building up a huge war chest at this stage. Initially the Trust should be trying to build up a shareholding but that is rather dependant on the club being willing to sell some as they own 99%.

The other aspect of the Trust is to act as a protector of supporters ambitions when things are not right and to ask the relevant questions.

This is my worry. I think this council would sell the ground. I fear, as you say, the trust could only fight a rearguard action and despite any protocols, wouldn't hesitate to sell to the highest bidder. I just hope I'm wrong.

Surely, everyone wants the club to get things right in the only place that matters......the pitch.

Whoever has brought Jones in has taken a huge step in the right direction.

With regards to the ground, if the council decided to sell now, whilst there are many financial issues unresolved, then they deserve all the stick they would get when,and it wil be when, it all goes tits up.

As for fans supporting the sale, words fail me. Only here, in good old redneck Hartlepool, could any sane person support that.

At this stage surely the council would only sell on a conditional basis ie conditional on planning and the funding being in place for the whole scheme. They could also add covenants that would protect the playing of football at the ground. They could also add the provision of the right to buy back the ground under specified circumstances such as the club going into administration. Perhaps the greatest protection could come from the trust setting out the protection it would like to see rather than frustrating the process with community right to buy.

All of the proposed work is outside of the ground isn't it? Why do they need to own the ground?

the big problem is, and its unbelievably ignored by those who only see with one eye, is that if the club sell the ground to whoever owns us now, its going to put the price up nassively for anyone wanting to buy the club later, as well as being saddled with loans/debts that would also have to be paid.

And god help us if we go into administration, with no ground to fall back on.

I dont know why I am bothering to say this though, as many fans are too loved up to see it, or even care at the moment.

Because it gives them protection should they run out of money and need to sell. Just imagine what price they could put on it?

Thanks John, makes sense.

Just expand on the ACV so that everyone understands.

The Localism Act of 2011 gave communities rights to protect any building or land from property developers by applying for it to be listed as an 'Asset of Community Value'. Once approved by the local authority, the owners cannot sell teh property or land without going through the correct process.

Step 1: Any interested party must be notified. In the case of Victoria Park, this is the Trust. The proposed sale must also be advertised in local media.

Step 2: This part is crucial. this notification has been made the owners cannot do anything for six weeks. If a community group does not express an interest in purchasing within that timescale then the sale can go through without further discussion.

Should a community group express an interest then a moratorium of six months is comes into force.

A community group incidentally is quite narrowly defined. It must be one of the following:

A registered charity, a community interest company, a non profit making company limited by guarantee or finally and this is where the Trust qualifies; a Community Benefit Society.

In that six months the community group has the option of counter bidding for the asset. There is no definitive obligation for the council to sell to the community group but it must treat a community bid sympathetically. There are other tools in this box by the way; Community Asset Transfer for example.

The point is not to stop a purchase but to give a community group the time to challenge the sale and to counter bid.

I still believe if they want to sell it they will, regardless.
Have the council made a statement of intent regarding their ownership of the ground and how they see the future use and ownership of the ground?

In an ideal world yes, unfortunately............

That was then, this is now. I'd advise constant vigilance in these matters and constant requests of intent to protect the status of the ground in the public domain from those who actually make the decisions .
I want my reassurance from the pilot, not the passengers.

ACV status gives certain groups the ability to bid. It doesn't mean that the seller is obliged to accept that bid. It may prove beneficial if the club was in the hands of an administrator but that's it. The best way to protect the ground is for the Council to long lease it to the club and to place restrictions on its use which cannot then be challenged. The lease could be 125 years. It's a virtual freehold but the council retain control over how the land can be developed. They will know this. A 125 year lease wouldn't stop funding from banks or grants from football league etc. So that would do it really. If the club wanted to redevelop or say move the ground they would need the buy in of the council. I don't know why the club want the freehold of the ground other than to have free will to treat it as they like. The Trust should make representation to the Council to seek assurance that they long lease to the club only.

I don't disagree with you, but...... it's in the hands of the councillors. You need to get them to make it official, from past experience I never take notice of good intentions.
Call me old fashioned, but I like things in writing.

The lease would be in writing

Obviously......the point I'm making is I'll be happy when it's signed, till then, I'll be uneasy.