From: sheilaoliver
Sent: 02 August 2007 06:33
Cc: Fiona Blatcher
Subject: Irregularities at Stockport Council

Dear Mr Khan

Please provide a reply to this email within 10 working days, as per the Council’s own rules. I have not once had a reply from you and other council taxpayers are having the same problem with you. I object to paying your salary if you don’t every respond!

I shall copy this email to the District Auditor to make her aware of the looming problems.

1) Please let me know why the public consultation regarding the Harcourt Street school application did not present the public with any traffic reports, although these had been in the Council’s possession for quite a while. Documents seen last October under the FOIA stress that traffic was the major concern. Now, at planning decision time council taxpayers are having to spend tens of thousands of pounds more on extra traffic measures which take even more of their public open space away totally without consultation. This should never have been allowed to happen.

2) Why has the Council failed to advertise the loss of open space as it is required to do under the Local Government Act 1972?

3) Why has Councillor Carter, Executive member for Finance and who is normally uniquely amongst the Executive members helpful and responsive to members of the public, failed to reply to my question regarding the burgeoning costs of this school – it has almost doubled in six months to £8.5 million and not all costs have yet been included as the consultants admit.

4) Why did planning officer Jim Seymour repeatedly tell the decision making Tame Valley Area Committee last Monday that it had been advertised as a departure from the UDP when he knew this to be a lie?

5) I am terribly worried regarding Councillor Weldon, Executive member for Children and Young People. When I asked him last Monday evening about the spiralling costs of this scheme, he merely smirked and said the Council was “awash with money for Education”. It is frightening that someone in his position should take that attitude to millions of pounds of taxpayers/council taxpayers’ money.

6) The agreement to take such vast amounts of public open space without proper consultation in an area sadly lacking in this facility and in a less affluent area where it is sorely needed is yet another damning indictment of this Council. I note the District Auditor has previously express concern regarding public open space.

7) Of the capital receipt from the sale of the vastly more suitable Fir Tree site of £1.2 million over half has now been eaten up by the demands of Sport England. This whole matter no longer makes financial sense and I am extremely worried about all this.

I look forward to hearing from you and suggest the decision-making planning meeting of 23rd August is postponed until these issues regarding huge amounts of public money and vital public open space have been explored in an honest manner.

Yours sincerely

Sheila Oliver