Tonight Rutland County Council Development & Licensing Committee met at the Council Chamber at Rutland County Council.
First can I say I do wish Mr Baines was there to chair the meeting and keep some sort of order.
Also Geoff Pook head of legal services where were you? Your replacement was very vague when it came to points of law.
Also the Highways Officer seemed to cross the line more than once, he appeared to be instructing Councillor Gale on how he should make his proposal. Good candidate for a town clerk?
A Senior member of the public interrupted the meeting for some time to vent his understandable frustration. A frustration shared by many members of the public present.
Many wanting to speak but unaware of the Council rules on deputations. I think councils need to look at these rule and make the public feel more inclusive. It also has to remember not all residents use the internet. You are not keeping them informed as one lady told the chair.
Two staged deputations from the following groups did not suffice them or me.
Transition Rutland?? (who did not come over very well)
and Oakham Traders represented by a local cafe did a much better job.
Unfortunately no one represented the views of the local residents.
The meeting was interrupted a few times because some paid staff are not trained to speak at a audible level even with the use of microphones.
I have very good hearing and could not hear or understand the introduction of the deputations. So no wonder the man with hearing aids had difficulty and as others did shouted complaints. I wonder if the chamber is fitted with a loop?
A mother was present with child, the child became unsettled and a Councillor became annoyed. The meeting was halted after the mother stuffed baby in pram and stormed out. A member of staff ran after the woman and brought her back. Only for her to be asked to leave later in the meeting
I noticed one very brave Oakham Town Councillor was present, He sat amongst the Tesco staff I wondered if I should tell them he voted against, then I though I could not do that to Allen!
There was no press at the press desk!
Plenty of Tesco bigwigs taking notes and Mrs Bean speaking and answering questions on behalf of Tesco.
She was grateful to Oakham Town Council for their support of the destruction of a conservation area.
(I would like to say at this point I am not against the expansion of the store I am against the expansion of the car park and the destruction of the green land that surrounds the store)
The planning department is also grateful to Oakham Town Council for its support.
Although Rutland County Councillors appeared not to be impressed with the Town Council.
Something tells me, something seriously went wrong at Oakham Town Council. Ask the Clerk is all I will say!
Members of the public asked why there had been a change? had Cllr Lucas been given a bung by Tesco?
I can not answer that accept I do remember a Rutland County Councillor once described her as like one of her trees, as thick as two planks? I said. no he replied she blows in the wind!
After listening to the deputations we had to then listen to Mrs Bean from Tesco. One fact was correct although the public seemed not to agree if Tesco was not in South Street, Gaol Street would not have become a retail shopping street. One trader did tell me she thrives on passing trade Tesco brings so Tesco maybe able to take the credit for Gaol Street. Although I can't afford to shop in any off them and walk straight past to Tesco. This is the same reason the location was chosen for the farmers market.
Mrs Bean banded a figure that Tesco wages help contribute £48,000 to the local retail economy and the expansion would increase jobs and raise that some to around £59,000 peanuts really I am hoping Rutland County Council Chief Excutive does all her shopping in the town then on her wage alone she can match that figure. Sorry not knocking our wonderful chief she is worth every penny of £120,000 I understand the Prime Minister is cheaper can the council save more money and offer him the job.
After all that we had to endure a long presentation from the Director of Community Services.
He explained to us what the planning department would like Tesco to pay for. The exact figures were given to Councillors on a yellow sheet and were confidential as one Councillor was reminded.
106 payments is the legal term given to money offered to councils by large companies and developers and some may call it a bribe I am not not sure 106 can be used if a private resident wants to build a extension.
The meeting went on and eventually all Councillor agreed to reject both applications and refer the application to the full council and they will have to make the final decision on the 11th October I believe.
It will be interesting to see if there is a different outcome, because I am sure many of the others Councillors will have interests to declare.
