Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2013 15:05:31 GMT
It would be difficult to remove Saj as a councillor before May 2015, but I suspect that his days as a cabinet member may be numbered.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2013 20:48:12 GMT
The county council have totally rejected my FOI request for the (spurious) reason that it would damage the commercial interests of the contractors to St. James' City Farm. If that were so, then no-one would be able to view planning applications that show how a building would be constructed if it mentioned any building contractor.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2013 22:40:41 GMT
The Citizen website has the story about the new planning application. It's not on the planning website yet, so perhaps it has only just been submitted.
|
|
|
Post by Joe K on Dec 28, 2013 11:00:52 GMT
Yet curiously, to put it mildly, after publishing this story, on the site yesterday, which you replied to, along with Richard Burton, Fresh plans for £60k riding centre in Barton and Tredworththey now publish this, Horse riding arena plans emerge for St james City FarmHow annoying is it to find out that after you've taken the trouble to comment,you have to do so all over again, or it'll look like no-one is interested in the issue? You can be pretty sure that they won't mention it once on Twitter, though...
|
|
|
Post by Joe K on Dec 28, 2013 12:48:09 GMT
I realise now that there's one difference between the articles, Kay. Your comments and mine have been removed from the latest one...
|
|
|
Post by Joe K on Dec 28, 2013 13:09:50 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Joe K on Dec 28, 2013 14:57:50 GMT
By the way, judge for yourself if Usman Bhamia is a complete fool or not. He invalidated himself, as I recall, from voting on the B&Q site planning application because he'd commented on it beforehand, and now he's done it again. Is he actively trying to avoid any responsibility for the subsequent decision, or masking another reason he might be ruled out?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2013 17:20:14 GMT
I hadn't even seen the second one till I read about it here. I certainly hadn't commented on it. I wonder why your comment was removed. The moderators are very twitchy, but I thought that they now allowed comments about councillors. They certainly still allow some derogatory comments aimed at our MP.
|
|
|
Post by Joe K on Dec 29, 2013 19:16:08 GMT
No, what I mean is that in the first article, they include the comments by us from previous articles, i.e.
but the next day's version is the same but without our comments.
They certainly allow lots of remarks about Graham, but I suspect Paul James gets off easier...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2013 23:00:15 GMT
Ah, I misunderstood. The second article is less complete.
I'm going to employ a planning expert to fight the application and possibly challenge the sell-off. Set a thief to catch a thief, as it were. I wonder where I should look for someone suitable.
|
|
|
Post by Joe K on Dec 30, 2013 16:21:28 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Joe K on Dec 31, 2013 13:50:44 GMT
This is the full extent of Eddie's 'lot of support' on Twitter:
Sofab Sports @sofabsports 29 Dec @softdata this is an awesome project i hope it gets all the support it deserves #inclusion #socent
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2013 16:31:56 GMT
Funnily enough, I don't remember Eddie supporting that other local social enterprise project that is supposed to help the disadvantaged - Gloucestershire Gateway.
|
|
|
Post by Joe K on Jan 1, 2014 11:15:55 GMT
I guess Eddie would be less keen on the riding arena if it was combined with a library...
No, I'm being unfair, he'd be fine with it as long as it was run by volunteers, he'd just have no truck with the notion of such a set-up being unsustainable, and ultimately doomed, without council involvement.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2014 16:04:00 GMT
The second application has been validated, but there are still no documents available to view on the council's website. The description of the site is still a lie - "Currently used as animal grazing space and exercising paddock for a variety of large animals." Oh yeah? Half of the area has never been fenced off, and the paddock has never been used for 'exercising' animals. It is clear that the council is determined to blatantly lie its way through this application to get what it wants.
|
|