derrycitychat.com

I lost a load of hares !

As far as I can make out, the council have received legal advice to the effect that they cannot simply pay for new greyhound facilities for the greyhound company, which is a private enterprise, without any payment in return as it would amount to state aid.

In order to get around this, the council initially suggested that the greyhound company pay rent of 45k per year in order to use the new facilities, which the greyhound company simply do not want to pay.

The council have now suggested that the facilities be made available for hire on an hourly basis, at 55 pounds per hour, so that the greyhound company simply pay for it as and when they want to hire it. This should presumably cost less than 45k a year. However, this leaves open the option of other greyhound businesses being able to rent it at other times.

I am guessing that this would be a similar arrangement to the one that DCFC will enter into with the council over the ground, ie DCFC would only rent the pitch for a market rate as anchor tenants and only as and when they need it (say 20 times a year), leaving it open to being rented by other footballing organisations (eg D and D, the IFA for certain games(?)). Theoretically it could even be used by Institute if they were ever to need it (in the same way that Pats sometimes rent Tallaght from South Dublin County Council for certain European games). In this way, DCFC, by paying a market rate are not being subsidised by a public body in a way which would fall foul of state aid rules.

My reading of this is that the greyhound company currently using the Brandywell are opposed to the per hour plan on the basis that they simply do not want any other greyhound businesses competing with them. However, publicly, they seem to be claiming that by allowing any greyhound operator to come in, dog racing in Derry might in some way be harmed.

They also seem to be relying on a letter of comfort received by the council which claims that the redevelopment of the facilities would not leave them in any worse position than they were pre redevelopment.

The journal article refers to a letter from a solicitor that has been received by the council but I am not sure who sent it or what it said. Part of me suspects the greyhound company may have been behind it. However, it may actually refer to an opinion which the council have obtained from a barrister in London on the difficulties of the council providing funding for the whole redevelopment in a way which does not fall foul of state aid rules.

davy_g wrote:

daniel wrote:Doggy men should be told to fuck off! This whole threat of a legal challenge surely must be balls to, how the fuck does that work out? The council own the facilities and are providing them, if they can pay the money, tough shit!

True, and surely in this day and age, there must be some legislation regarding health and safety issues in a sporting arena where there is the possibility of "dog poo" and the associated health hazards. Anybody know a good lawyer. A big claim regarding the "loss of eyesight", to name but one medical condition, will soon sort that out.

Agree 100%.

rodgers wrote:As far as I can make out, the council have received legal advice to the effect that they cannot simply pay for new greyhound facilities for the greyhound company, which is a private enterprise, without any payment in return as it would amount to state aid.

In order to get around this, the council initially suggested that the greyhound company pay rent of 45k per year in order to use the new facilities, which the greyhound company simply do not want to pay.

The council have now suggested that the facilities be made available for hire on an hourly basis, at 55 pounds per hour, so that the greyhound company simply pay for it as and when they want to hire it. This should presumably cost less than 45k a year. However, this leaves open the option of other greyhound businesses being able to rent it at other times.

I am guessing that this would be a similar arrangement to the one that DCFC will enter into with the council over the ground, ie DCFC would only rent the pitch for a market rate as anchor tenants and only as and when they need it (say 20 times a year), leaving it open to being rented by other footballing organisations (eg D and D, the IFA for certain games(?)). Theoretically it could even be used by Institute if they were ever to need it (in the same way that Pats sometimes rent Tallaght from South Dublin County Council for certain European games). In this way, DCFC, by paying a market rate are not being subsidised by a public body in a way which would fall foul of state aid rules.

My reading of this is that the greyhound company currently using the Brandywell are opposed to the per hour plan on the basis that they simply do not want any other greyhound businesses competing with them. However, publicly, they seem to be claiming that by allowing any greyhound operator to come in, dog racing in Derry might in some way be harmed.

They also seem to be relying on a letter of comfort received by the council which claims that the redevelopment of the facilities would not leave them in any worse position than they were pre redevelopment.

The journal article refers to a letter from a solicitor that has been received by the council but I am not sure who sent it or what it said. Part of me suspects the greyhound company may have been behind it. However, it may actually refer to an opinion which the council have obtained from a barrister in London on the difficulties of the council providing funding for the whole redevelopment in a way which does not fall foul of state aid rules.

So the Council were not aware of this up until now?

The doggie men wanted the option 3 passed at Thursday's council meeting, with a proposal from Paul Gallagher for an amended version of this to go ahead. This was voted on by entire council, Sinn Fein and the SDLP voted against this option, the independents voting for it, meaning another pointless delay.

So what seems to be the issue here is that public funding cannot be used to aid a private body in an enterprise for that private body's exclusive use. Does that then leave funding to Gaaboys eg for Casement open to a legal challenge?

micdaflic wrote:So what seems to be the issue here is that public funding cannot be used to aid a private body in an enterprise for that private body's exclusive use. Does that then leave funding to Gaaboys eg for Casement open to a legal challenge?

Brilliant point, not just casement park but celtic park and all those other gaa pitches dotted around the country that have received public funding through the sport ni

magspat wrote:

davy_g wrote:

daniel wrote:Doggy men should be told to fuck off! This whole threat of a legal challenge surely must be balls to, how the fuck does that work out? The council own the facilities and are providing them, if they can pay the money, tough shit!

True, and surely in this day and age, there must be some legislation regarding health and safety issues in a sporting arena where there is the possibility of "dog poo" and the associated health hazards. Anybody know a good lawyer. A big claim regarding the "loss of eyesight", to name but one medical condition, will soon sort that out.

Agree 100%.

I think you could only lose eyesight if the dogs have not had proper jags,inoculation etc and left shit where someone/child got it on their hands and then rubbed their eyes with it...

Mind you its not the only jags some dogs get at them races #justsayin

shauna wrote:

micdaflic wrote:So what seems to be the issue here is that public funding cannot be used to aid a private body in an enterprise for that private body's exclusive use. Does that then leave funding to Gaaboys eg for Casement open to a legal challenge?

Brilliant point, not just casement park but celtic park and all those other gaa pitches dotted around the country that have received public funding through the sport ni

GAA always seem to get round things because of amateur status of the sport and clubs not being privately owned companies.

micdaflic wrote:So what seems to be the issue here is that public funding cannot be used to aid a private body in an enterprise for that private body's exclusive use. Does that then leave funding to Gaaboys eg for Casement open to a legal challenge?

Casement, Ravenhill and Windsor all got exemptions from State Aid legislation. Lifford was partly state funded yet no-one challenged it from this side of border although dog men from Derry legally could have.

digital wrote:

micdaflic wrote:So what seems to be the issue here is that public funding cannot be used to aid a private body in an enterprise for that private body's exclusive use. Does that then leave funding to Gaaboys eg for Casement open to a legal challenge?

Casement, Ravenhill and Windsor all got exemptions from State Aid legislation. Lifford was partly state funded yet no-one challenged it from this side of border although dog men from Derry legally could have.

What have those three got in common? Answers in an email to all the Derry MLA's.

davy_g wrote:

digital wrote:

micdaflic wrote:So what seems to be the issue here is that public funding cannot be used to aid a private body in an enterprise for that private body's exclusive use. Does that then leave funding to Gaaboys eg for Casement open to a legal challenge?

Casement, Ravenhill and Windsor all got exemptions from State Aid legislation. Lifford was partly state funded yet no-one challenged it from this side of border although dog men from Derry legally could have.

What have those three got in common? Answers in an email to all the Derry MLA's.

It might be problem if Gaa got public funding and refused access to other codes, would this stand up to a legal challenge? Eg if DCFC asked to use Celtic park due to ground redevelopment.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/34965576
£36 m for oval and other Football ground improvements from culture arts and leisure dept.! Can we bid for any?

danny hale wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/34965576
£36 m for oval and other Football ground improvements from culture arts and leisure dept.! Can we bid for any?

It seems we can.....

http://www.derrydaily.net/2015/11/30/mc ... cal-clubs/

£10m of the 36m is earmarked for Glentoran, before any consultation. And then there's more consultation.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport ... 47721.html

http://www.londonderrysentinel.co.uk/ne ... z3t04FkVhx

Glentoran own their own stadium so they don't need to go through the red tape of consultations that we do.

Can the Club please make sure someone at the Council fills out a feckin application form to try and get some of that money!

It has happened before in the past when nobody at the Council filled in a form and then we wondered why we didn't get anything

Can someone/whoever fills out the App form. make it a Belfast address...like a dole drop. we cant fail then.

KEVK wrote:Glentoran own their own stadium so they don't need to go through the red tape of consultations that we do.

Can the Club please make sure someone at the Council fills out a feckin application form to try and get some of that money!

It has happened before in the past when nobody at the Council filled in a form and then we wondered why we didn't get anything

Glens are looking to relocate and intend to build a new stadium.

Any chance of simply putting this thread out of its misery? The mere title of it infuriates me.

pmac wrote:

KEVK wrote:Glentoran own their own stadium so they don't need to go through the red tape of consultations that we do.

Can the Club please make sure someone at the Council fills out a feckin application form to try and get some of that money!

It has happened before in the past when nobody at the Council filled in a form and then we wondered why we didn't get anything

Glens are looking to relocate and intend to build a new stadium.

I'm sure if we re-located to somewhere and owned the land, then we wouldn't have to go through all this red tape.

At this stage, I would rather see the club start from scratch in a field with a basic pitch and setup and build it up over time

No consultations, no doggy men, no politicians, no councillors, no The Honourable the Irish Society, no hoods outside, no D&D football to share with