• Oxford Green Energy

    Yellows Forum is DELIGHTED to announce a partnership with Oxford Green Energy, who become our sustainability partner.

    See here for more information, including a YF member discount.

OxVox reaction to CDC planning officers' advice on the stadium

It is a legal requirement that formal council meetings are open to the public.

Some of the relevant legislation...........
Public Bodies (Access to Meetings) Act 1960.
Part VA of the 1972 Act.
s. 9G of the Local Government Act 2000.
Regulations 3 and 4 of the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 (SI 2012/2089) refer to meetings being "held in public".

That does NOT include remote access only. A meeting involves participants gathering to meet face-to-face at a designated physical location and "attending" a meeting involves physically going to that location, a requirement that this meeting is to be "open to the public" or "held in public" means that members of public must be admitted in person to the place where the meeting is being held.”**

I know this as somebody had cause to be a right nuisance to Leicester City Council. :)

**subject to venue safety/capacity regulations.
 
Emilio said:
It's simple enough.

If you want to turn up to celebrate, support and congratulate those who have worked so hard to get this done - great.

If you want to rub it in FoSB faces and behave like petulant children, then probably best if you just stay at home and watch the stream online.
Click to expand...
We are better than this, as was proved when they discounted Stratfield Brake and put forward the Triangle.
 
Last edited:
Let's not get carried away, OxVox and OUSP are just heeding caution ahead of the meeting. Over the last two years we've seen the levels that the opposition will stoop, and they'll go even lower if it means further delays.

Calm heads, and success will come our way. We're Oxford UNITED.
 
Colin B said:
^^^This^^^

The only talk about limited space is from those purporting to be representing fans. I watched a CDC planning meeting online recently, presumably from the same venue, and there were members of the public present. I'm pretty sure it is a legal requirement that the public can attend these meetings.

If it does turn out that the room isn't big enough, after waiting two years for the meeting, where there was always going to be a lot of interest, then that is poor organisation from CDC. But what we're hearing today sounds to me as though OxVox and OUSP are the ones that don't want us there.
Click to expand...
I can't speak for OUSP and haven't discussed this with them but I can assure you OxVox are happy for people to come or watch from home, whatever suits them.

It's kind of odd that you would randomly accuse us of lying about it but I cut and pasted a section of document from the council that mentions it specifically. I have also spoken to Jon and the planning team and they said the same thing. I let people know because it's a long way to go and not get in.

Strange thing to get so angry about at such a positive time and I normally steer clear but the OxVox committee, many of whom you worked with, have been working incredibly hard on this and they deserve a little better.

I have cut and pasted the relevant section below


To whom it may concern,

RE: Cherwell District Council planning committee meeting, 14 August, 4pm Due to the high level of interest in this meeting and limited capacity we strongly

recommend people to watch online rather than attending in person.
To help the meeting run smoothly the council is advising members of the public of the

following important information:

Watch online

A live video feed of the meeting will be broadcast at this address. A QR code is provided below.

Arrangements for accessing the council chamber

  • The meeting starts at 4pm, entry will be from 3.30pm.
  • The council chamber is a small venue with strictly limited capacity.
page1image9056256 page1image9055872 page1image9056064 page1image9053568 page1image6885856
 
Last edited:
OUFC1983 said:
Let's not get carried away, OxVox and OUSP are just heeding caution ahead of the meeting. Over the last two years we've seen the levels that the opposition will stoop, and they'll go even lower if it means further delays.

Calm heads, and success will come our way. We're Oxford UNITED.
Click to expand...
Wouldn’t surprise me if they bussed in some paid agitators all decked out in yellow
 
Colin B said:
^^^This^^^

The only talk about limited space is from those purporting to be representing fans. I watched a CDC planning meeting online recently, presumably from the same venue, and there were members of the public present. I'm pretty sure it is a legal requirement that the public can attend these meetings.

If it does turn out that the room isn't big enough, after waiting two years for the meeting, where there was always going to be a lot of interest, then that is poor organisation from CDC. But what we're hearing today sounds to me as though OxVox and OUSP are the ones that don't want us there.
Click to expand...
But to be fair either Mawson or McLean have asked for security so maybe they need the seats……….just saying 🥴
 
Paul P said:
I can't speak for OUSP and haven't discussed this with them but I can assure you OxVox are happy for people to come or watch from home, whatever suits them.

It's kind of odd that you would randomly accuse us of lying about it but I cut and pasted a section of document from the council that mentions it specifically. I have also spoken to Jon and the planning team and they said the same thing. I let people know because it's a long way to go and not get in.

Strange thing to get so angry about at such a positive time and I normally steer clear but the OxVox committee, many of whom you worked with, have been working incredibly hard on this and they deserve a little better.

I have cut and pasted the relevant section below


To whom it may concern,

RE: Cherwell District Council planning committee meeting, 14 August, 4pm Due to the high level of interest in this meeting and limited capacity we strongly

recommend people to watch online rather than attending in person.
To help the meeting run smoothly the council is advising members of the public of the

following important information:

Watch online

A live video feed of the meeting will be broadcast at this address. A QR code is provided below.

Arrangements for accessing the council chamber

  • The meeting starts at 4pm, entry will be from 3.30pm.
  • The council chamber is a small venue with strictly limited capacity.
View attachment 29971 View attachment 29972 View attachment 29973 View attachment 29974 View attachment 29975
Click to expand...
Firstly, where have I accused you of lying about anything? I haven't.

Secondly, other than referencing OxVox (and OUSP) in the post you're quoting, none of my replies have been to OxVox specifically, or quoting OxVox.

If you read back through the thread from the beginning, a number of people say "we don't want fans there acting like dickheads" or similar (including Maurice who is on your committee), and this is then followed by yourself and then OUSP talking about limited space and that it's best for fans not to turn up etc.

Despite our differences in the past Paul, it was actually OUSP's post, and it's tone that really got my back up, not yours. It really did read as a "we know best" post. I've done as much as anyone to deserve to be there on our day of reckoning, and I didn't take kindly to their post. I wouldn't dream of telling them, or you, that it's best if you don't turn up, and they shouldn't think they can tell me/us not to either. Our fans have behaved impeccably in the face of lies and slurs from the opposition, so our own supporters' organisations should show us a little more respect than to mistrust us to behave, that's what the opposition do.

My position is clear. I will turn up. If I don't get in I'll be very annoyed, but that's on me. I dislike intently some of the opposition who will be there, and have had many run ins with them, but I'm damned if I'm either going to wimp out after everything that has gone before, or be stupid enough to do something that calls the meeting into disrepute.

One last hypothesis. Imagine if no OUFC fans turned up, as they'd all taken the advice of yourselves and OUSP, and the room was full of FOSB antis. How would we feel then???

We all want the same thing, and I'm sure we'll get it. If I see you there, I'll shake your hand.
 
Colin B said:
Firstly, where have I accused you of lying about anything? I haven't.

Secondly, other than referencing OxVox (and OUSP) in the post you're quoting, none of my replies have been to OxVox specifically, or quoting OxVox.

If you read back through the thread from the beginning, a number of people say "we don't want fans there acting like dickheads" or similar (including Maurice who is on your committee), and this is then followed by yourself and then OUSP talking about limited space and that it's best for fans not to turn up etc.

Despite our differences in the past Paul, it was actually OUSP's post, and it's tone that really got my back up, not yours. It really did read as a "we know best" post. I've done as much as anyone to deserve to be there on our day of reckoning, and I didn't take kindly to their post. I wouldn't dream of telling them, or you, that it's best if you don't turn up, and they shouldn't think they can tell me/us not to either. Our fans have behaved impeccably in the face of lies and slurs from the opposition, so our own supporters' organisations should show us a little more respect than to mistrust us to behave, that's what the opposition do.

My position is clear. I will turn up. If I don't get in I'll be very annoyed, but that's on me. I dislike intently some of the opposition who will be there, and have had many run ins with them, but I'm damned if I'm either going to wimp out after everything that has gone before, or be stupid enough to do something that calls the meeting into disrepute.

One last hypothesis. Imagine if no OUFC fans turned up, as they'd all taken the advice of yourselves and OUSP, and the room was full of FOSB antis. How would we feel then???

We all want the same thing, and I'm sure we'll get it. If I see you there, I'll shake your hand.
Click to expand...
Thank you Colin, and I'd be happy to shake yours but again it's worth pointing out the facts, because they matter.

We never asked anyone not to go, I just pointed out (as shown in the email I shared part of) that we had been told from two sources that the venue was small and that there were few spare seats. You suggested we hadn't. You also suggested it was just us saying that because we didn't want supporters there. Both untrue. Here are your direct quotes.

* 'The only talk about limited space is from those purporting to be representing fans.'

* 'But what we're hearing today sounds to me as though OxVox and OUSP are the ones that don't want us there'

Also I would point out that Maurice said nothing of the sort. His quote was;

* 'At this moment in time the club and supporters do not want anyone to detrimentally affect the decision that has been made.⚽⚽💛💙💛🩵'

The 'dickhead' quote was the next poster. Again facts matter.

As for your hypothesis, I get your point, and it would be great to have some friendly faces about, but in truth the council won't count numbers or ask for affiliations. Their decision in most likely already made. That won't stop us going all out to highlight our case, but few if any will be undecided.

I can't speak for OUSP and wouldn't try. Yes we did have our differences but I have never held that against you. You have my email and my phone number and would happy respond on both if you had a question but in fairness I have not had anything from in the seven something years since.

OxVox matters to me because I think it is massively important for fans to have independent representation. It matters because I know the people I work with care passionately about the club and deserve not to be misquoted or have insinuations made about them.

You have my number. You have my email. You sit within shouting distance of me at the stadium. Come and say hello some time. I know we may not agree on approach some times, but i'm pretty sure we both want the same result.
 
Paul P said:
Thank you Colin, and I'd be happy to shake yours but again it's worth pointing out the facts, because they matter.

We never asked anyone not to go, I just pointed out (as shown in the email I shared part of) that we had been told from two sources that the venue was small and that there were few spare seats. You suggested we hadn't. You also suggested it was just us saying that because we didn't want supporters there. Both untrue. Here are your direct quotes.

* 'The only talk about limited space is from those purporting to be representing fans.'

* 'But what we're hearing today sounds to me as though OxVox and OUSP are the ones that don't want us there'

Also I would point out that Maurice said nothing of the sort. His quote was;

* 'At this moment in time the club and supporters do not want anyone to detrimentally affect the decision that has been made.⚽⚽💛💙💛🩵'

The 'dickhead' quote was the next poster. Again facts matter.

As for your hypothesis, I get your point, and it would be great to have some friendly faces about, but in truth the council won't count numbers or ask for affiliations. Their decision in most likely already made. That won't stop us going all out to highlight our case, but few if any will be undecided.

I can't speak for OUSP and wouldn't try. Yes we did have our differences but I have never held that against you. You have my email and my phone number and would happy respond on both if you had a question but in fairness I have not had anything from in the seven something years since.

OxVox matters to me because I think it is massively important for fans to have independent representation. It matters because I know the people I work with care passionately about the club and deserve not to be misquoted or have insinuations made about them.

You have my number. You have my email. You sit within shouting distance of me at the stadium. Come and say hello some time. I know we may not agree on approach some times, but i'm pretty sure we both want the same result.
Click to expand...
Bloody hell, I remember why we fell out now! I offered you an olive branch and you come back with this, for what reason? To win the "argument"???

I could go back and go through your points one by one, as facts matter to me too, if that's the game we're in, and use context and timing to do so, (for instance I had seen nothing from CDC about space until I received an email from them this afternoon, after I posted, therefore you and OUSP were the only ones who had mentioned it at that time) or if you read my words correctly I never directly accused Maurice of the dickhead comment, but associated him with others who had made such comments, and he had used the quote above in direct reply to me, which is clearly in my mind insinuating that I am one of the people that could "detrimentally affect the decision". Is that what he thinks I am? Someone who could detrimentally affect the decision?

Anyway we're getting back to how things used to be when we clashed on the OxVox committee. It takes two people to not phone each other or talk to each other, or email each other, not only one. As I said I offered you the olive branch and in return I got a lecture. I won't make that mistake again.
 
Last edited:
It clearly stated on the CDC website that space in the council chamber is limited.
One or two on here seem hell bent on seeking revenge and retribution for tactics used to delay this application .( “I know where you live “)
Thank goodness they were not involved in the planning application stages .
We are nearly there and now is not the time to rock the ego boat .
The meeting is about securing the immediate future of Oxford United .
Not about a front row picture opportunity.
The time to celebrate is when the SoS gives the rubber stamp.
We can then all gather at junction of Frieze Way and Oxford Road and wave our banners .

Watch it online and hopefully enjoy the yes verdict .
 
Last edited:
Colin B said:
Bloody hell, I remember why we fell out now! I offered you an olive branch and you come back with this, for what reason? To win the "argument"???

I could go back and go through your points one by one, as facts matter to me too, if that's the game we're in, and use context and timing to do so, (for instance I had seen nothing from CDC about space until I received an email from them this afternoon, after I posted, therefore you and OUSP were the only ones who had mentioned it at that time) or if you read my words correctly I never directly accused Maurice of the dickhead comment, but associated him with others who had made such comments, and he had used the quote above in direct reply to me, which is clearly in my mind insinuating that I am one of the people that could "detrimentally affect the decision". Is that what he thinks I am? Someone who could detrimentally affect the decision?

Anyway we're getting back to how things used to be when we clashed on the OxVox committee. It takes two people to not phone each other or talk to each other, or email each other, not only one. As I said I offered you the olive branch and in return I got a lecture. I won't make that mistake again.
Click to expand...
It is said that as people get older they either mellow or become even more cantankerous,intransigent and angry and can seem out of control.
 
Colin B said:
I’m sorry guys, but I’ve waited a long time for this, and NOBODY will tell me how to behave and that I shouldn’t be there!

If you really think people like me don’t belong there, and need lessons on how to behave, then we will have to agree to disagree.

See you there!
Click to expand...
I honestly don’t think it’s meaning the way that’s being interpreted. All anyone is saying, whether that be supporter groups or CDC directly, is that there is very limited space so there needs to be a sense of realism in terms of available seating etc…

In other words an advance warning that not everyone is going to get seats in the main venue or the overflow. So if 500 fans turned up for example then the vast majority will be disappointed and maybe annoyed they haven’t got in, hence the notifications issued about the situation. That’s fair enough.

I haven’t seen anything referring to any individuals personally or actually telling people not to go, it’s simply been notice that there is a very limited amount of people who will gain entry, presumably first come first served.

Re behaviours it’s obvious that anyone attending needs to be sensible and nothing has been said that should upset anyone, just emphasising the point that it’s not a football game basically and is a council meeting.

I genuinely haven’t taken any offence at anything that any party has said re attendance, of course no one can stop anyone attending, or trying to attend, it’s just simply expectations about entry may not be what some of us want to hear as it would be great to be in the main room, that seems unlikely for the vast majority, but is understandable.
 
Bloody hell, what an embarrassment this thread has become, we should be jumping for joy, instead we’re bickering between each other.

If you want to turn up, turn up, but don’t be shocked if you’re turned away, it really is no more complicated than that 🙄
 
Chippy said:
I honestly don’t think it’s meaning the way that’s being interpreted. All anyone is saying, whether that be supporter groups or CDC directly, is that there is very limited space so there needs to be a sense of realism in terms of available seating etc…

In other words an advance warning that not everyone is going to get seats in the main venue or the overflow. So if 500 fans turned up for example then the vast majority will be disappointed and maybe annoyed they haven’t got in, hence the notifications issued about the situation. That’s fair enough.

I haven’t seen anything referring to any individuals personally or actually telling people not to go, it’s simply been notice that there is a very limited amount of people who will gain entry, presumably first come first served.

Re behaviours it’s obvious that anyone attending needs to be sensible and nothing has been said that should upset anyone, just emphasising the point that it’s not a football game basically and is a council meeting.

I genuinely haven’t taken any offence at anything that any party has said re attendance, of course no one can stop anyone attending, or trying to attend, it’s just simply expectations about entry may not be what some of us want to hear as it would be great to be in the main room, that seems unlikely for the vast majority, but is understandable.
Click to expand...

I have never visited the chamber in Banbury but I have in other towns / cities and I get that space will be very limited once you get all the council employed staff, the agent representatives and speakers for and against the Application.

It's nowhere near the size of a crown court where they can accommodate a large audience.

We need to give Cherwell the benefit of the doubt that they will go with the recommendation in this meeting.
 
Colin B said:
Bloody hell, I remember why we fell out now! I offered you an olive branch and you come back with this, for what reason? To win the "argument"???

I could go back and go through your points one by one, as facts matter to me too, if that's the game we're in, and use context and timing to do so, (for instance I had seen nothing from CDC about space until I received an email from them this afternoon, after I posted, therefore you and OUSP were the only ones who had mentioned it at that time) or if you read my words correctly I never directly accused Maurice of the dickhead comment, but associated him with others who had made such comments, and he had used the quote above in direct reply to me, which is clearly in my mind insinuating that I am one of the people that could "detrimentally affect the decision". Is that what he thinks I am? Someone who could detrimentally affect the decision?

Anyway we're getting back to how things used to be when we clashed on the OxVox committee. It takes two people to not phone each other or talk to each other, or email each other, not only one. As I said I offered you the olive branch and in return I got a lecture. I won't make that mistake again.
Click to expand...
No Colin, I was not insinuating that you could have a detrimental effect on the outcome but hey, if you think I was, then that is your opinion.
 
  • React
Reactions: fb3
Maurice Earp said:
No Colin, I was not insinuating that you could have a detrimental effect on the outcome but hey, if you think I was, then that is your opinion.
Click to expand...
And Colin, Yes I am on the Oxvox committee, but as a committee member I am able express my own thoughts. Sorry if you are offended by free speech.
 
Maurice Earp said:
And Colin, Yes I am on the Oxvox committee, but as a committee member I am able express my own thoughts. Sorry if you are offended by free speech.
Click to expand...
I'm only offended by free speech if it's sullying my character Maurice, and given that you directly quoted me in your comment, how else was supposed to interpret it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar Threads

OxVox
OxVox AGM rescheduled - next Wednesday, 11 Sept, at Court Place Farm
Replies
7
Views
1K
Trevor L
T
Steve Gilbert
OxVox AGM
Replies
26
Views
4K
Steve Gilbert
Steve Gilbert
OxVox
OxVox website outage
Replies
6
Views
794
LowerSouth
LowerSouth
SteMerritt
General OxVox Update 01/02/2024
2
Replies
49
Views
5K
Golden Dr Otto
Golden Dr Otto
OxVox
OxVox Updates
2
Replies
33
Views
6K
ZeroTheHero
ZeroTheHero
Back
Top Bottom