AT last night’s Kirklees Council meeting, a Supporters Association delegation reviewed the issue of the football club’s shares in the Stadium and asked the following questions:
Does the new financial restructuring deal for the Council require a revised Collaboration Agreement – ie: is a new collaboration agreement (to replace the old one of 2004) fundamental to completion?
Are the February 2010 agreement and a new collaboration agreement totally and completely linked?
Does that mean there was no deal to be done until the new collaboration agreement was in place, despite one of the parties saying they were ready to transfer the shares all the time up to December 23, 2011?
If the stadium rental formula in the new collaboration agreement could not be agreed, does that mean that the new collaboration agreement could not be signed?
Surely this means that the rental formula and the collaboration agreement were also totally and completely linked?
Did the Council support Sir John Harman’s proposal to break the deadlock by arbitration?
Did the Council understand that this was the “final attempt” to complete the February 2010 deal?
Did the Council’s officers try to convince both parties to accept arbitration and were you disappointed that the arbitration proposal was turned down?
Had the Council, as a KSDL shareholder, ever been told that the 15/13 rent adjustment was a “temporary” measure?
The key question: do you support a return to the intended 40/40/20 ratio, for the £2 paid?
We then asked what was the way forward from here with the following:
What are the Council’s hopes and wishes?
What is your proposal or plan?
Will the Council commit to improve the transparency of KSDL and lift the veil of secrecy over it, and reveal details of the Council’s deals and financial support to KSDL? That way at least everyone would know the risks faced at a time when we face cuts everywhere else.
Look out for the council’s response and our verdict in a further column tomorrow.
