To clarify my above point, the Section 106 agreement states that Castleford will get freehold of the stadium land for £1 upon practical completion of the stadium.

And to answer Bren's point above the community stadium, you are correct in that it is not having extra pitches like Newmarket, however, it will be used for community purposes, again covered in the S106:

"within 3 months of such completion, Castleford will make available the Stadium for community uses including the work and activities of the Castleford Tigers Community Trust to promote sport development, health, social skills and life-long learning and employment opportunites for local people'.

So yes, it isn't going to be owned by the community in the way that Newmarket was, however, it will still be able to be used by the community, and for community purposes and activities outside of Castleford Tigers via our charitable arm.

Well I'm not sure that's entirely true, S106 monies can definately go to and individual or private company in the case of a compulsory purchase order (I know from personal experience), I believe the main reason for registering the trust as a charity will be for other tax benefits along with availability of several funding streams, but just like you said in you previous post "I'm no tax expert" either

Let me make this clear I have no gripe or complaint about Cas getting a stadium. What really disgusts me is the double standards of Box and his lackies.

Fully has just outlined what is going on at Cas. Then look at the totally contrasting way that Wakefield council have reacted to the NM development.

At Cas they have got behind the project to make it deliver all kinds of benefits.

At Newmarket they have stepped back, washed their hands of it totally and basically allowed the developer to do as he pleases.

All I ask from Box is parity with Cas

Good post squire.

That's exactly my position too - it's easy to interpret the attitude of WT fans as being oppositional to Cas getting their new stadium, and that may well be the case for some - but it's definitely not mine. I'm very much behind the Cas development - it's good for the game, the area and the club; and it shows what a determined LA can do when they get behind something and get the right people around the table to deliver a meaningful project. What's unacceptable however, is the total difference in Box' attitude to a similar project on this side of the district - and perhaps the fact that Cas have got an honest broker involved in Lateral, whereas we've got Yorkcourt, who have proven to be bent as a nine bob note.

One point however - despite Fully's best Comical Ali efforts, it is *not* a Community Stadium; a few dance lessons and community outreach work doesn't fulfil that criteria; it's an asset being gifted to a private company for their sole use and benefit.

Totally agree. Also ours will be a community stadium!

Love the optimism.

Hmm, not entirely sure on WMDC being the ones behind getting all of the benefits. I think it's a multi-party effort in that any potential obstacles, Lateral have tried to offered something as a way of compromising. It just so happens it gives WMDC another reason to back the plans.

For example, they were looking to open another M&S store at J32 so rather than losing the town centre one (as M&S intended shutting it anyway), they have subsidised the refurb of it and also rental costs for a few more years in order to keep it there and for the town centre benefit.

I don't see how this is any different in using the carrot of sports facilities such as 3G/4G pitches, etc, plus new road infrastructure as a means to getting planning permission for Newmarket? As I said, both stadiums have been used as extra weight to secure planning permission for relevant developments.

In relation to the first paragraph, I can't argue with that. I agree that it seems Cas have landed lucky with the partners they have involved. On the second point, that wasn't me saying I agree or that it is, just what it says in the S106 to justify the 'community element'.

However, in terms of the argument about community benefit, I guess it lies in how you see it. I can't see much difference in terms of functionality of the stadium with exception to ownership. Both stadiums will be open to other teams who want to share and use the facilities (at a rental cost) in the local community, both will have conference facilities, and both will be open for charitable work, outreach programmes. I don't see how they differ in that regard into the scope of what they offer to the community. Please do correct me if I've missed something that Newmarket will offer - it'd be great to understand your views on why you think there is such a material difference in offering.

What I suspect your argument is, is with the ownership model. With the Trust owning it (who is on the Trust from the local community aside from Wakefield Trinity members by the way?), I suppose you could argue that Trinity will have pay rent and so the Trust would have/will benefit from that should it go ahead, along with any other people using the facilities, which in turn will have a knock on effect in the scope of their work, dance lessons, outreach work, etc, you mention. I fully accept that as a point. And although it isn't guaranteed like it would be for your Trust, there's nothing stopping Cas from passing on the benefit of increased revenues to their charitable arm too to do something similar (again, I accept this isn't likely and can never be guaranteed without some sort of contractual, ringfenced agreement).

Where there is an arguable benefit in terms of community is the additional extras separate to the stadium in the pitches, which would be open to public usage daily and weekly. That's not the 'Community Stadium' though really - and they could exist with or without a stadium (be a bit pointless though I guess!)

But let's be fair, the Trust was only selected as the benefactors because YC didn't have the cash and neither did you as a club. The Trust was used to obtain money from WMDC (£2m) and the additional revenues from grants and such like. If the funding was there, there'd be no need to gift it to the Trust - it would have been given straight to Trinity to own without the need to pay rent, a la Lateral and Cas.

Well first of all lets deal with the £2M . It did not take long for the council to worm their way out of that one and I am certain that will never materialise.

Secondly I can definitely say right from the outset the council stated that 106 PLANNING GAIN MUST NOT GO TO A PRIVATE COMPANY, ITS ILLEGAL.

That is the main reason the trust was formed as there was no way in law a stadium could legally be delivered from the NM planning gain,other than it being gifted to a trust.

If we were told a load of Ballcocks back then, so be it .
If it was ballcocks, maybe they did not want the stadium to get into the hands of Ted, who knows ?

Sandal Cat may confirm the legalities.

So,both stadiums are up and running. ..
It's February and pitches are a bit heavy.
Case decide to save their privately owned pitch and play their academy games at Newmarket. They can do this, subject to rent and availability, because it's a community facility. The money goes to the community trust.
The local soccer team want to use the privately owned stadium at cas for their big cup game. Cas tell them to do one / set the rent to whatever they want and pocket the profits.
Any team in the district would be allowed to use the community stadium. Trinity would just be anchor tenants.

I had always thought that any benefits accruing from planning gain had to go to the public sector or community benefit. If I'm reading the Five Towns Park correctly Llateral have either gifted the stadium to Castleford Tigers Ltd for £1 (or whatever the privated company is called) without any pressure being applied by the Local Authority beacuse in my experience that what Developers do because they are all philanpropists. Or because the community is going to be allowed in the stadium its classed as a Community Stadium and therefore its accepable in planning terms.

However Castleford have pulled this off well done to them. I only wish someone was assisting the Wakefield & District Community Trust in the same way.

Why don't you and cas just share a stadium

Why don't the two Hull clubs share ? Its a non starter at Glasshoughton as that's in Castleford who would own the ground and Trinity would be poor relations.
On hindsight a venue between the two ie. Normanton should have been the answer , but that ship has now sailed.
People really ought to do their homework before throwing out flippant statements.