Royal Sutton Coldfield Town Council Councillors are refusing to answer legitimate questions from residents and the Conservative social media platforms are deleting any comments relating to residents concerns
We will never know what Angus said and because I replied to Penny Harper’s comment they deleted it. This is censorship and shows that the conservatives are trying to manipulate social media to their own advantage. I have supported the conservatives all my adult life but this brand of conservatism is not one I wish to be associated with – refusing to engage because you do not like the questions suggests you have something to hide.
Dominic McDonough (Andrew Mitchells Agent) letter in last week’s Observer appears to be a deliberate attempt to smear the hard-working non-conservative town councillors. For Dominic’s information (he was not here at the time) these are the people who worked tirelessly to establish the town council in the first place. SCCA (Sutton Coldfield Conservative Association) campaigned against it and were defeated in the referendum.
It can indeed be described as a ‘Cash Cow’ but only if your project or need fits the conservative political agenda. When it comes to a crisis the conservatives appear obsessed with attacking Birmingham City Council. Frail, elderly residents and disabled people were left to struggle on their own during the ‘Bin Strike.’ This was a time when we hoped the Town Council would step up and show some leadership – what did they do? Spend the whole time scoring political points and running a petition for a council tax rebate which stood no chance of succeeding.
In May the town will have a chance to make it views on the performance of this council known, be aware the next council will serve for 4 years, some residents resent being forced to pay the precept and would like to see it removed from their Council Tax bills altogether.
A balanced council where everyone’s voice is equal, and decisions are made in public by consensus after debate is what the town needs to restore trust. The conservative ‘One Party State’ needs to change and all groups be included.
Boldmere Futures Partnership were desperate to save the Christmas Lights Festival and made a last-ditch appeal to Sutton Coldfield Town Council for help! They hoped the ‘Amenities Committee’ would be sympathetic – faint hope I am afraid – the response was more akin to that of Mr. Bumble in Oliver Twist.
We now know from the statement by Simon Ward in the Observer that ‘Boldmere Futures Partnership’ did not follow due process – always the last refuge of a bureaucrat who has made a poor decision.
Statements like “I am deeply uncomfortable with the overall cost of the Boldmere Christmas Event” suggests he had sight of the application prior to the Amenities Committee Meeting and the decision was already made before it took place. Sorry to say that this is another example of poor governance where decisions are made in private and then announced in public.
He also asserts that BCC should provide the extra funding – why? Vesey residents fund roughly a quarter of the Council’s income yet decisions are made to the detriment of the ward and the larger town by non-Vesey Councillors. The Vesey Councillors are marginalised and the ‘two’ conservative Vesey Councillors either have no say or have forgotten their duty to the residents and are too busy trying to climb the ‘Greasy Pole.’
Royal Sutton Coldfield Town Council was prepared to subsidise the ‘Concert in the Park’ to the tune of £25 per head (£6.25 of which came from Vesey residents) but refuses £1 per head for the Boldmere Christmas Festival to keep people safe!
There is a growing demand for an urgent review of the council’s structures and procedures many of which are not fit for purpose. Several Councillors should be considering their positions over this fiasco.
Printed by the Royal Sutton Observer on their letters page 10/11/2017
Will a petition calling for a Council Tax refund help resolve the dispute – no. Could the Town Council take a lead in looking at alternative ways to handle the collection of refuse and recycling – possibly. It could definitely initiate a programme to support residents who are unable to take their rubbish to the tip. Time to step up and show some leadership I suggest.
At tonight’s Amenities Committee Bob Churn gave his report which indicated that a seven piece playground could go on Mossy Bank subject to BCC Planning Approval or Boldmere Gate subject to approval by Natural England. Boldmere Gate also has the potential to accommodate a much more ambitious plan subject to funding. Two Residents of Cofield Road/Warden Road voiced their objections to Mossy Bank due to Traffic, Parking, Anti-Social Behaviour and that there was not adequate oversight of the site which gives rise to child safety concerns. No resident objected to Boldmere Gate which could be approached on a phased basis starting with the seven piece unit and possibly attract funding from other sources for further development. At one point the committee nearly signed off on a motion to just pursue Mossy Bank, fortunately an amendment to the motion was passed by 4 votes to 2 that Boldmere residents should be consulted on both sites before a feasibility study was commissioned.
There is also the possibility that part of the Boldmere Adult Education site could be utilised. Projects of this nature should be community driven – unfortunately some committee members seem to have lost sight of this and that they are there to represent residents.
Attended the A.C.L.S meeting in the Town Hall tonight to hear the presentation by the Landscape Practice Group. It was apparent that Fir Tree Grove was likely to be ruled out as a possible location once all the regulatory and technical issues were evaluated – however, it deserved to be considered as part of the initial feasibility study along with Boldmere Gate and Mosse Bank so that the reasons why it was unsuitable could be independently established and explained to the Vesey residents. Instead, what looked like a pre-agreed decision, was voted through for no good reason in my view.
It was encouraging to hear that the initial consultation, once a site has been determined, would included the local schools to ascertain what type of equipment and activities the children would like to see on the site – after-all they are the ones who will use it. So often we wrongly assume as adults we know best!
Great to see that this project is firmly on the Town Council Agenda – it is long overdue. The families with school aged children in my area (Stonehouse Road) are very pleased and looking forward to being consulted on their preferred location. It is important that all views are considered together with the logistics of running such an activity – there is more involved than the pure asset transfer. The capitol budget of £50,000 looks a little light and there appears to be no figures for the annual running costs in the papers I have seen. Also, I am sure parents would want some input in to the design of the playground once the location is agreed.
Delighted to see that the Town Council Planning Committee has now sanctioned a work group to look at the benefits available from adopting a neighbourhood plan along the lines of that implemented by Lichfield City Council. It is disappointing that it is restricting itself to current Town and City Councillors plus BCC Officers, I would have liked to have seen a couple of independent planning experts included but at least it is a step in the right direction.