Open Letter to Cllr Megan Ryan
Open Letter to Cllr Megan Ryan
Starts
Dear Megan
The Bankeyfields Residents association feel very let down by you our elected representitve over the issue of the£132,492 of 106 monies for the maintenance of the Bankeyfields open space. For the past eighteen months you have been stating at our meetings "leave it with me". Well after the last meeting our patience ran out and we have been persuing the issue ourselves. We have made a lot of progress in the last two weeks and uncovered a lot of very interesting information. At the last meeting you told us the monies were now in the council central pot for maintenance and that the open space would be maintained by the council.
On 3rd September you emailed the Residents Association Secretary to say Quote " Just to let you know that myself and Paul Hankey will be paying your area a visit next Thursday to look at grass cutting etc. It will be about 4-0-clock." Unquote.
Then today you rang the secretary to say that you had made the visit yesterday. During that conversation you told the secretary that there was no money left for maintenance.
The 106 money is to be used for the maintenance of the open space for this community not to fill in black holes in the council budget. We will use all means to get the money back to its intended purpose. I can assure you that there are a lot of very annoyed people in this community and we want answers and will get them.
I look forward to your response.
Regards Steven Barrow
Chairman Bankeyfields Residents Association.
Comments
All, I agree with Steve on
All,
I agree with Steve on this one. Lets all get together and resolve the two main issues for the two estates, these being the Adoption and the 106 monies. These are issues that effect all of us in some way!!!
We need to ask how much of our Council tax goes towards all those services we are not receiving and make sure our charges are reduced and all monies paid previously be paid back in full.
Let's get OUR money back, I am sure the 106 money contract stated that the money was only for use on the Bankeyfields openspace.
Most houses on the two estates pay band D or E council tax, why do we not get the services which some people who pay far less receive.
Richard Hawthorne
Vice Chairman Bankeyfields Residents Association
Hi All, I agree in principle
Hi All,
I agree in principle about the monies issue, and the deceit of the Council that should be working for us. From how the letter reads, so far the council are playing lip service. I have no great love for the council, particularly on how run down the city is becoming. However realistically £132,492 won’t go very far, and certainly wont provide any sort of enduring service or benefit. I would imagine £132,492 would buy a team of four landscapers for a week with some materials and tool hire etc. Maybe the money could be conceded for extra cleaning rounds to be scheduled more frequently on an ongoing basis?
The Adoption issue is a worthwhile cause, and realistically a more achievable goal – there must be a process the council follows that lays down some timescales. It would be interesting to explore where in the process this is being delayed and why. I’d imagine there are funding implications which the council don’t want the burden of right now.
Perhaps a threat to go to the local press may influence some action, but be careful to pick your fights, and not to burn bridges.
Apologies if I’m sucking eggs
MarkS
Marks I think that £132k
Marks I think that £132k would go a long way with regards to a ten year maintenance plan. Without any added interest it is £13k a year just to keep the open space in good order. I am sure there are many gardening sevice companies who would love that kind of contract.
My brother in law used to be
My brother in law used to be a gardener and charged around £300 a day per man, given that we require say 3 men approximately every 3 weeks during the summer this equals approximately 7 visits at £900 plus fuel and waste removal, say £1000, giving a total of £7000 plus additional mainenance tasks for weeding, broken fences, broken park equipment etc... I believe £13,000 should cover the costs.
Anyway, surely the amount of council tax assigned for parks given by the residents of the two estates could be placed into the account by the council, the account could even grow over the years if this were the case.
I see an argument for allowing the council to maintain the park, however this year they have had 1 visit to cut the grass and I believe £77,000 for 3 men for 1 day is a little too much.
I may be wrong but, what
I may be wrong but, what right have the council got in "putting it in their pot" when it belongs to the people?
[EDITORS NOTE :- City council have asked me to edit some posts]
This money was paid in good faith by contractors to be used in the area.
The money for this area went to Ford Green Hall according to my source in the civic.
I have said before I believe the councillors are working for the council not us, and the evidence builds up every day.
To be fair to Megan, she has
To be fair to Megan, she has worked on our behalf, the first councillor to do so since the estate was built. Others such as the current Deputy Mayor, and the recently elected Cllr Khan have never once bothered to reply to a email sent.
She got involved with our group (Gordy, Steve, Mossy and myself) after we'd run a story in the Sentinel, with the support of Staffordshire Police, about the disregard of the roundabouts safety from the councils transport department. The article itself led to the eventually alterations to the John Rhodes Way/Reginald Mitchell Roundabout, which weren't exactly what we hoped for were still a change for the better (if only slightly).
When the current and newly appoints city council CEO, John van de Laarschot, took over the roll, he immediately spotted that officers were ruling the roost and not the elected representatives. From recent comments on twitter by local elected officials and in local press such as Pits N Pots and the Sentinel, the same practices still seem to be going on.
Also recent budget shortfalls running into 10s of millions of pounds has left the current city council in a wounded state, with budget shortfalls and reduced staff. Who'd not be tempted to bring that cash into the fold.
However, the issue with this money being absorbed into the councils parks budget is going over old ground. Back in 2005 Tony Cooper and Mark Gray sort legal advice when the 106 money was to be channelled into Summer Bank School and Tunstall Park, and not the Bankeyfields Open Space.
Coincidently Tunstall Park has just received funding to build a fabulous new and bigger play area. Something which I think will benefit the communities around the park. I'm keen to see where that funding has come from.
I personally hold the whole of Stoke-on-Trent City council accountable for this financial farce, and look forward to seeing what National Property Builders and future home buyers in Stoke-on-Trent think of the way they are treated. To be honest who in their right mind would want to buy a new house in this city if this is the way things pan out.
Hi everyone, There seems to
Hi everyone,
There seems to be some confusion over the 106 monies that have gone into the central pot. This happens with all 106 monies that is left for maintenance, this then ensures that maintenance of estates goes on indefinantly and not for 10 years or so, depending on what monies have been left.
The monies from your estate has not been lost and ensures that your maintenace will continue for ever, I am sure you would want it this way and not have to wonder how your maintenace would be upkept in 10 years time when the money ran out.
With regards to the adoption of the estate I have pushed on this as much as possible, as you may be aware the chief officer that was working on this took redundancy earlier this year, and though other officers have been working on the case they have had no luck, I did manage to see the new lead officer last week, which has taken some time because he was on leave for the most of August, and have asked him to pursue this matter urgently.
Just for your information our Enviromental Manager has asked our Roundabout Dept to adopt the roundabout at the bottom of your estate, as it is clear that after Taylor Wimpy were asked several times by our officers to tidy it up, they have ignored our request, so we will hopefully be adopting that soon and that will look at lot better once we have cleaned it up.
I would just like to assure residants that all services that could be expected from paying your council tax have been met, ie the emptying of your bins (and dont shout at me) apart from last winter the grit bins being filled etc. and I will pursue that on your behalf this winter.
If anyone would like to discuss this further please feel free to contact me, evenings are best.
Megan Ryan
Megan, Thank you for your
Megan, Thank you for your reply. No there is no confusion except for yourself. The money has gone into a central pot that is empty. You yourself have said that there is no money to repair the fences. The Residents association wants you our elected representitive to get our money back into an account where it can be seen and monitored. The council are not maintaining the open space to a satisfactory standard so the contract for this must be put out to proper tender. The residents association also question the legitimacy of putting any 106 monies into a central pot. Yes now we are on to a much bigger picture. I would like to suggest that you start with a little research of your own and stop believing any spiel that council officials give to you. Oh and the openspace should be maintained after the 10 years and not be uncempt as you say because we pay a lot of council tax on this estate for services we are not getting so please do not use that as a very feeble excuse.
With regard to the adoption. Your answer of someone has left post is or on holiday is not good enough. Do some research make a few phone calls , we know more than you because we have. You are waiting for people to give you answers to questions they do not want to answer.
As they say at school "Not good enough" or "Must Try Harder" .
It is now time to stand up and be counted.We will not give up on this one . The committee are comunicating daily and meeting bi weekly. We will resolve these issues with or without your help.
Regards Steve
I've been following this
I've been following this investigation with much interest, and would like to thank the residents involved for doing this for the estate.
It can't be easy trying to take on the council, but would like you know that I'm behind you.
Please don't give in on this, as you have said, you are uncovering something here that has far wider implications.
WHAT HAS REDUNDANCY GOT TO DO
WHAT HAS REDUNDANCY GOT TO DO WITH FOLLOWING SOMETHING THROUGH?
THERE IS SOME CONFUSION OVER THE 106 MONEY, WHEN THE POST ABOUT THE MAINTENANCE WAS POSTED AT THE START OF SUMMER, I LOOKED AT THE OLD NEWSLETTERS AND FOUND THE BIT WHERE IT SAYS 100 PNDS FOR 10 YEARS.
THE CONFUSION COMES FROM THE COUNCIL MOVING THE MONEY TO FINANCE OTHER THINGS. WE WERE ALWAYS LED TO BELIEVED THAT ONCE THE 10 YEARS WAS UP THE COUNCIL WOULD TAKE OVER THE GRASS CUTTING AND AREA WOULD FALL INTO A GENERAL STATE OF DISREPAIR AS HAPPENS EVERYWHERE IN THIS CITY.
I'M GLAD THOUGH THAT THE ENVIRONMENT OFICER HAS REWARDED OUR PAITENACE WITH A TINY BIT OF MAINTENANCE OF THE SMALL ISLAND AT THE BOTTOM OF START OF THE ESTATE, BUT DON'T THINK THAT LETS YOU OFF THE HOOK!
WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND IS WHY THE RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION HASN'T GONE TO THE POLICE AND THE PRESS TO MAKE MORE PEOPLE AWARE OF THIS ISSUE?
Let’s give this debate a bit
Let’s give this debate a bit of momentum and put this issue out to a wider audience. Let’s get the support of the whole estate and then take our argument to council officials at the civic centre in way of a protest. Even if it means picketing the civic centre with banners demanding back the money that has gone back into the central pot. This money was set aside for the maintenance of the open-space not to fill the coffers of this dismal council. I am sure we could get the backing from the Sentinel and perhaps Central News or Midlands Today.
What is a section 106
What is a section 106 agreement ?.
The council can enter into a Section 106 agreement, otherwise known as a ‘planning obligation’, with a developer where it is necessary to provide contributions to offset negative impacts caused by construction and development. Examples of contributions range from the provision of affordable homes and new open space to funding of school places or employment training schemes.
There are some very
There are some very interesting comments on the Sentinel today regarding cost cutting from the Environmental teams budget.
http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/news/Gardeners-leave-cut-grass-save...
"I'll try again then. Part of the problem is that he cost of disposal of the grass cuttings has doubled since the council introduced the "enhanced" recycling scheme. When the new composting contract was given to Vital Earth in Derbyshire the costs shot up. The Council had the chance to separate out the parks waste so that it could continue to be cheaply recycled by Simpro but failed to think of this and so now it is contracted to go to Ashourne at twice the price.
The answer to this balls up? Don't collect the cuttings, no disposal costs.
David, Stoke"
The savings that this action will make is minimal, this is a token gesture, if they really want to make savings they are there to be made and can be done quite quickly with a pen and a copy of the data of maintenance that is required to be done annually, “allegedly”.
Each area of maintenance is budgeted for, so for examples sake if you require to save let’s say £70,000 well that’s easy, you just stop budgeting for the work you have never done for years anyway that you keep receiving funding for and stop cross subsidising other areas of work, which is a big NO NO .
An example pruning and digging over shrub beds, not in itself a job that gets done, you can see this with your own eyes, rose beds that are supposed to be mucked etc., whoops there you go when was the last time that happened? Grass edges that are budgeted to be done MANUALLY, half mooned and then edged, yep well that’s been done for years with a TOTAL weedkiller, out go the GREEN credentials there then. The above extra examples could well equate to tens of thousands of pounds budgeted for and not DONE, only used to prop up jobs and Empires.
The savings that can be made in the office if they were ever to perform such a hideous exercise would bring tears to the eyes of those over protective upper management echelons, Empires would crumble, I cannot believe that all they can offer is to jeopardise the Health and Safety of the older residents of the City with such crass proposals, and these are SERVICE cuts not paper exercises, not creative accounting, and its quite clear that the Ivory Tower Departments like the Audit Division are prime candidates to carry the responsibility of this debacle, no doubt their friends the Financial staff of these departments have been and maybe are still culpable of assisting upper Management, both with the creativeness and potentially fraudulent manner under which they operate.
Lazarus, north staffs
Not a Problem on our open
Not a Problem on our open space. The council have never collected the grass cuttings. They just leave a mess behind them. But even more troubleing now that the council have axed 37 gardeners will we even get the open space cut ONE AND A HALF TIMES A YEAR. If they have less gardners.
Hi All, Sorry I'm not
Hi All,
Sorry I'm not entirely clear what the 106 issue is, and what you're trying to achieve.
Its my understanding the 106 money could pay for some one off maintenance which will be relatively short lived. The enduring cost of maintenance is then funded from the central pot which is in turn funded by council tax etc. Is that a fair summary?
Regards
MarkS.
Hiya MarkS, the 106 issue can
Hiya MarkS, the 106 issue can be found by following this link.
http://mytunstall.co.uk/forum/bankeyfields-openspace-maintenance-contrac...
Basically we feel that for all of the money that was put into the council's coffers for a certain level of maintenance isn't being met. When we first started our research we believed that out of all the monies the builders had given the council (which we gave the builders) there was £110k towards maintenance.
This figure has now been put at £132k after trying to get some answers from the council regarding the maintenance money and the park and open space build.
The more we have delved into the issue to find out what should be happening the more we have uncovered.
From the last NHW group we believed that there was £110k maintenance that was to fund the maintenance of our estate's open space and park over the next 10 years.
We are now finding that the money has gone into one big pot and we aren't getting any value from it. In fact recent conversations are now saying the council department who holds that money no longer has any budget.
So in essence, on behalf of our community, we are trying to a) get that money back so it can be used for the maintenance of the open space and
make who ever spends it be accountable.
Sorry folks this bit isn't
Sorry folks this bit isn't entirely accurate
- Cllr Megan Ryan
At the beginning of the year, the local AIT manager came out and looked at the issue of the mini roundabout icing over in the winter. Because the grids aren't next to the area that collects water from the bank run off, the water collects on the roundabout and ices over.
Nothing can be done, because the estate isn't yet adopted.
All I have been to the
All I have been to the Tunstall RA,s forum meeting tonight and it appears that we are not the only RA in the area that has issues with 106 monies. Watch this space I think the fireworks may start well before November.
Steve, you certainly lit a
Steve, you certainly lit a fire under them.
Lets hope it works and we finaly get what is rightfully ours.
Megan has promised me she would furnish me with all the details of amounts we have been connned out of.
You were spot on when you said "incompetant or corrupt" it stinks to high heaven.
The amounts are in the millions, and begs the question "where has it gone" or "where is it".
I still believe that tying up with other R/As who have been duped out of these moneys will give us strength.
Once again well done mate, their backsides are getting warm now.
Terry Thanks for your kind
Terry Thanks for your kind comments. As for Megans promise I would not hold your breath or you may turn very blue she has been promising us the same thing for over 18 months now. We ended up getting the information ourselves. It took us a few FOI requests a bit of reaserch and about three weeks
From the meeting last night
From the meeting last night it would appear that certain companies are still able to make huge profits due to the council officers inability to tender correctly.
They need to wake up and see that £4,500 for a baskeyball loop is a rediculous price. Would they accept this price if they were paying for it!!!!
BaskeyBall!? So what was it
BaskeyBall!?
So what was it a gold plated Basketball hoop? How many hoops do you get for $4,500 anyway?
Webb Monkey,Richard, this
Webb Monkey,Richard, this basketball hoop is on display at the top of Greenfield Rd on our "playing fields" which we were expected to pay £5,000 to have it surveyed to put a kiddies park on it as the council pinched the last one?
Thats for one basketball hoop, and a tarmac d shape for it to sit in.
God knows what a full court would cost, Millions?
This is just an example of council waste in the way it conducts its tendering process.
A job gets given to a contractor, who subs it out to another contractor, who subs it out ect, ect and they all have to be paid, you get the drift, so the end cost is rediculous.
The three councillors were awarded £150,000 ward budget to spend on the ward.
Now they want it back as they say they "lent it" to the Memorial Garden?
Am I being dim here to think this is wrong or what.
Steve did you get a copy of the ward budgets for 07/08- 08/09/-09/10 ??
As for the 106 money I will make their lives a misery till I get it, and you can bet your last penny on that.
Between us we should either get it or put them in Cheddleton.
Webb Monkey,Richard, this
Webb Monkey,Richard, this basketball hoop is on display at the top of Greenfield Rd on our "playing fields" which we were expected to pay £5,000 to have it surveyed to put a kiddies park on it as the council pinched the last one?
Thats for one basketball hoop, and a tarmac d shape for it to sit in.
God knows what a full court would cost, Millions?
This is just an example of council waste in the way it conducts its tendering process.
A job gets given to a contractor, who subs it out to another contractor, who subs it out ect, ect and they all have to be paid, you get the drift, so the end cost is rediculous.
The three councillors were awarded £150,000 ward budget to spend on the ward.
Now they want it back as they say they "lent it" to the Memorial Garden?
Am I being dim here to think this is wrong or what.
Steve did you get a copy of the ward budgets for 07/08- 08/09/-09/10 ??
As for the 106 money I will make their lives a misery till I get it, and you can bet your last penny on that.
Between us we should either get it or put them in Cheddleton.
Apolagies everyone the cost
Apolagies everyone the cost of the basketball hoop was £2985.00
Igot carried away.
Maybe the other £2015 was for
Maybe the other £2015 was for the inclusion of the ball, and you'd dismissed that from your original calculations
.
For confirmation I gave Steve
For confirmation I gave Steve a copy of the ward budgets for the last three years.
It makes very interesting reading.
Maybe you will publish it W/M.
It raises a few questions notably
1/ how £4,000 dissappears from 07/08
2/ how Sandy road footpath reconstruction cost £44,947.73 in 08/09, and £45,849.09 in 09/10.
That must be some footpath to cost £94,796.82.
A litter picker costing £18,403.89 in 08/09 and £21,950.92 in 09/10.
I'm going for that job.
Returning to the original
Returning to the original post, Steve stuck to his guns over the 106 money.
There was an attempt to divert the conversation away from the money by a accusation of "this is a political argument not a local one" ?
Which took me back a bit, but he was like a dog with a bone.
Well done mate.
Hiya Terry Do you know who
Hiya Terry
Do you know who said that? I think that's quite a serious accusation as this issue is far from political. It's about people paying more money for their houses for a particular use and then not see the value of that money.
That's not political, that's a local residents issue. It's got nothing to do with red, blue, yellow or stripy and everything to do with accountability and what's right.
Nice one Steve, doubly nice one for entering an arena which your new to, and sticking up for your neighbourhood, and not let the issues that matter be swept away by a few people's contempt.
Webb Monkey the comment came
Webb Monkey the comment came from my right hand side and I missed who said it, but it was very clear.
The good thing was it did not put Steve off his attack.
The council, and its employee's are doing their best to avoid this subject.
I've been scouting around our
I've been scouting around our city councils website, and came across a useful reminder to all what the role of a councillor is.
Your role
As a councillor, you would have the opportunity to make a significant difference
for your constituents, which could be very rewarding.
Your primary role would be to represent the City’s interests, your ward and the
individual citizens who live within it by:
• Holding surgeries and resolving issues for your constituents;
• Representing the community and developing links with community groups
and incorporating these links into your role on the Council.
As well as being a local champion, you would have other duties which will be
explained to you following the election.
Council which is responsible for most dayto-
day decisions.
The Cabinet is made up of the Leader (of the Council), who is appointed
by the City Council, and up to nine Cabinet Members appointed by the
Leader. When major decisions are to be discussed or made, these are
published in the Cabinet’s Forward Plan in so far as they can be
anticipated.
If these major decisions are to be discussed with council officers at a
meeting of the Cabinet, this will generally be open for the public to
attend except where personal or confidential matters are
being discussed. The Cabinet has to make decisions
which are in line with the city council’s overall policies
and budget. If it wishes to make a decision which is
outside the Budget or Policy Framework, this may
be referred to Full Council as a whole to decide.
Regulatory Committees (and Sub-Committees/Panels)
Legislation relating to decision-making in local government provides for
certain functions to be undertaken by non-executive committees. These
bodies are known as Regulatory Committees.
There are also a number of sub-committees and panels of these
committees. The committees are made up of councillors and, in some
cases, co-opted members, all of whom are appointed by City Council.
The Constitution includes
The Constitution includes protocols for members and also sets out the terms
of reference of the council’s committees, panels and Cabinet. This document
also includes the procedures for committees and panels.
Every authority is required to adopt a code of conduct that sets out rules
governing the behaviour of its members. All elected, co-opted and
independent members of local authorities, including parish councils, fire,
police and national parks authorities, are covered by the code.
The code of conduct covers areas of individual behaviour such as members
not abusing their position. There are rules governing disclosure of interest
and withdrawal from meetings where members have relevant interests.
Councillors are also required to record on the public register their
financial and other interests.
You will sign up to observe the code of conduct and will
also be required to complete a criminal records
bureau check.
Allowances/support for
Allowances/support for members
There is no salary for being a councillor but you will be entitled to an
allowance to reimburse you for time and expenses incurred on city council
business. This is paid monthly.
The level of allowances is recommended by an independent panel and
includes a formula for inflationary increases. Every councillor is entitled to
a basic allowance of £10,000 (2009-2010), £11,000 (2010-2011) and
£12,000 (2011-2012). Some councillors are also given an additional
allowance for carrying out some special responsibilities such as being a
chair of a committee. Travel in the city boundary is paid at a flat rate on a
monthly basis. £500 is paid to those living within four miles of the Civic
Centre or £600 for those living over four miles away.
The full scheme is available on the city council’s website - Constitution -
Part 6 (Members’ Allowance Scheme).
The council also provides other kinds of support, such as stationery and
business supplies and Information, Communication and Technology (ICT)
support as required.
The Member Support Team also provide on-going day to day support to all
councillors throughout their term of office.
ICT
of a councillor’ Every day,
of a councillor’
Every day, every week is different – due in part of the cycle of meetings.
Presently, Full Council meets approximately every six weeks. Cabinet,
Overview and Scrutiny Committees and committee work on different cycles
because of the nature of their business. Also, you may be involved in a
working group undertaking a scrutiny review, e.g. transport services in the
city – this may meet once a month.
Other duties include:
• Checking e-mails, dealing with casework and corresponding with
residents each day;
• Attending meetings in the ward and holding a ‘surgery’ which allows
residents to raise issues face to face at a set time and place;
• Communicating with residents via the telephone or mail;
• Research and preparation for meetings;
• Attending council meetings (from Full Council to task and finish groups
for an overview and scrutiny committee, learning and development
sessions or briefing meetings with officers).
Sandyford RA defo owed some
Sandyford RA defo owed some 106 monies there still waiting for gate so the can access some of there open space (not that you'd really want to use it) hope they join in your fight for correction allocation of 106 monies
•°o.OO.o° » http://iannorris68.wordpress.com/ « °o.OO.o°•
http://www.thisisstaffordshir
http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/news/Panel-probe-Brit-cash-spent/ar...
Does this sound familiar?
Sounds like its common practice in the Civic Centre, and of course no-one is to blame.
Is it me are should there be more people having their collars felt????
I think this one is close to
I think this one is close to the bone as well, in terms of dodgy tendering practices.
Last months news about 6 Council/Regen staff suspended and one arrest.
The Chief Exec has also gone from being one of the most vocal men in the city, to being one of the quietest, why's that. They not paying him enough?
The financial department are
The financial department are a shambles Be it 106 money, sports money or tendering contracts.
It needs a complete clear out of management, and someone who will not "pass the buck" everytime something goes wrong.
We need accountability not excuses.
Accountants, not muppetts
Accountants, not muppetts
Webb Monkey, spot on but
Webb Monkey, spot on but don't hold your breadth with this lot in charge as they are past masters in making things dissappear.
Gonzo and Miss Piggy are well at home with this lot.
Hi Terry Sorry about the
Hi Terry
Sorry about the delay in getting back to you but I was ill last week and didnt get down to The Civic as I thought I would.
Anyway the information that you requested is as follows; The 106 money from the former Clanyway Brickworks is a total of £406,868.60.
It breaksdown to £240,000.00 to The Highway Scheme of that area,
£41,868.60 Ecology Payment, which was towards the management of Whitfield Valley,
£45,000.00 to Education, primarily towards provision of education at Hollywall Lane
and £80,000.00 Commuted Maintenance Sum, to go to the maintenace of a public open space which is to be put in by the developers.
This information is also on The Council web site in the planning dept.
I have passed on to web monkey the details of a funding seminar which you may be interested in, it is tomorrow at the Potteries Museum and open to everyone who would like funding for projects in there area, it would be ideal for you to make a start on your play area,
Megan
Megan, is that a typo in the
Megan, is that a typo in the poster as it says it's the 6th October not the 7th. The 6th is today I'm afraid.
Do you know when the next funding fair would be as there is only two hours left on this one?
I've just checked with the
I've just checked with the museum, it was today.
Gutted, I'm off tomorrow on a rare day off, I could have popped over.
WM I don,t belive it our
WM I don,t belive it our councilor late with information again, wrong date, surprise surprise. So what are the chances of an accurate report on how our 106 monies have been spent. Perhaps Dan the media man might help us after all he does belive in correct communication does he not ?????.
Megan, the clanway public
Megan, the clanway public open space is already in place, sadly residents still witing for the gtes to be installed so they can access but only been waiting 12-18mths. have highways recieved the £240,000? what has the £80,000 maintenace for the above open space been spent on, Plot 6 has not been touched for years and is far from usable open space.
•°o.OO.o° » http://iannorris68.wordpress.com/ « °o.OO.o°•
Council Warning Just a note
Council Warning
Just a note to all who have posted.
I've been asked by Dan Barton head of PR for Stoke City Council to remove some comments as they imply the council have done something illegal.
Dan states that "I welcome robust debate and crticism of the council but I am concerned this allegation [edited] is serious so I would ask that you remove the post."
Megan, thank you for your
Megan, thank you for your reply.
I am upset because of the length of time it has taken to get this information from the City Councillors.
Credit were credits due Thank you again.
Webb Monkey, I hope I have been upsetting those in Stoke, its time somebody got a responce from them, and it boosts the sites referances as they are watching you.
So a good result all round.
Have you read this it may
Have you read this it may shed some light on Park Maintence
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/cost_of_park_waste_disposal
About of Green Waste from collected form Parks, Gardens and verges, has reduce by over 50% this year, maybe there not cutting as often or just not collecting it?
Tonnes disposed of per year 2008 =2,354,060.00 2009 = 2,469,290.00 2010 = 976,920.00
or due to cost increasing by 35%
From £26.01 per tonne in 2008 to £35.20 per tonne in 2010
•°o.OO.o° » http://iannorris68.wordpress.com/ « °o.OO.o°•
My question to Dan Barton
My question to Dan Barton head of PR for Stoke council is this “did you take the time to read every post regarding the 106 monies or were you just alerted to the post that questioned the council’s actions. If you did indeed read all the posts what words would you choose to best describe the council’s actions, let me guess I bet they would be along the lines of, abracadabra, hocus pocus, sim sala bim and shazam. At the end of the day all what the council is doing here is robbing Peter to pay Paul or misappropriation of funds. This post is just the thoughts of one resident off the estate who is sick and tired of the way the local council has conducted itself over the past few years and feels that they should be held accountable for all their actions whether they are good or bad.
bj-dj61 well posted mate. I
bj-dj61 well posted mate.
I believe you have put in words what we all feel.
For too long we have been treated as mugs by the "officers of the council", over this issue and they only have themselves to blame if people get angry.
I have never been one to bow down in a fight.
Mr Barton if you wellcome "robust debate" then I'm sure we can organise a meeting and "debate robustly" with you.
Hows about it people?
Well Said BJ i feel that if
Well Said BJ i feel that if Dan had bothered looking into the issue within the council rather than issue
ing threats he would be posting an apology not a threat.......
Gordy
I've just finished reading a
I've just finished reading a very informative article by Mike Rawlins, from Talk About Local, Pits N Pot and 6townsradio.co.uk.
It's an article that discusses the role of Council press officers and their dealing with hyperlocal sites and bloggers off the back of a conference on Thursday which Mike was a guest speaker (I just hope that he had his phone on silent when I was trying to call him for advice about the subject of Dan's email, however ironic the circumstances would have been).
Entitled Dead badgers - (A Post About Council Press & Communication Offices) (if you read the article, you will see why it's called that).
But my point about this article is, that the Press Office don't normally take any note of sites like this, so in a way its a good thing that they are taking note of what's been said, and as a PR department I hope thatt they will start to look into the matter themselves either to head us off or to work on damage limitation.
Because this post is being watched can I ask you all to stick to the facts, a choice of wording could save us all from a lot of bother (for my sake)
according to planning
according to planning bankiefields still has £77,408.30 in the pot of HENs
•°o.OO.o° » http://iannorris68.wordpress.com/ « °o.OO.o°•
W/M just been to the R/As
W/M just been to the R/As Forum.
I put in two questions.
1/ why has the c/c invested all those millions (approximately 37 million) in the Labour Government HBO account when it would be better served invested in the city.
2/ Why has The City, council head of legal services allowed the finance department to brake the law by taking the 106 money and using it for other purposes than specified by the contract.
The first inkling I got that I was not going to get any joy that night was all the questions sent in had been lumped together.
Then ten questions were asked of the CEO Jon Van der Laarshot all pretty tame.
There was a question and answer session after with "two Questions asked by A Salih and another person I did not know.
I raised my hand to ask one of my questions just to be told that question time was over, and the CEO walked out closely followed by me.
I was determined I would get some sort of an answer to my questions.
I managed to waylay him in the corridor and asked my questions.
I showed him my paperwork from the Sentinel and the District auditor and got his interest.
He was surprised about the invested money and we discussed this at length.
We also covered the 106 money owed to us Bankeyfields, and Goldenhill and Sandyford, and he said this has been poorly handled by the council in the past.
He agreed it cannot go into a central pot as the regulations governing this state this.
He has put me onto a Hardy Bhogal, and Brian Davies who have been assigned to this problem.
Will be pestering them first thing in the morning.
Will let you know how I get on.
Can't thank you enough Terry
Can't thank you enough Terry for following this through.
Mr Bhogal? That name rings a bell, isn't he of ex Re-Gen fame?
Anyway it's good to get his agreement that the money can't go into a central pot and that he's aware of regulations, and that he's set staff to look at this.
During last weeks Ask the leader, Pervez gave the same drivel of an answer as Cllr Ryan and the FOI's, so this alone is a great way forward.
Look forward to your updates
Do my eyes decieve me ? Matt
Do my eyes decieve me ?
Matt is that you openly criticsising our counlillor ?.
Terry well done Mate. I was begininig to think we would never get any where with this one, err well not quite we still have a few irons in the fire.
Been trying most of the
Been trying most of the morning to get through to the city council but phones constantly engaged.
Anybody else have the same problem?
They aren't still in "lockdown" ?????
There has been an issue with
There has been an issue with the telephone system at SCC today. The automated system has been down so calls have had to all be picked up manually. The amount of people that have been calling about un-collected bins has caused up to 50% of the calls and is stopping important calls from getting through.
Thank you ccna99 will try
Thank you ccna99 will try again on Monday.
I will be asking H Bhogal and Brian Davis a lot of questions and will report back.
Yes W/M he was part (and still is I think)part of re gen.
Post new comment