The Empire strikes back

Leeds City Council has allowed Royal Park School to lie empty for five years. During this time, they’ve allowed the building to fall into disrepair. Lead was stolen from the roof five months ago, and the council did nothing about it. But now that local people have intervened to save the building, Leeds City Council has moved swiftly to evict them. Legal papers have been served on the residents occupying the building requiring them to appear in court.

This isn’t just about Leeds City Council’s contempt for the people of Hyde Park and Woodhouse. If the residents who’ve taken action succeed in reclaiming and restoring the building, everybody will be able to see that the current Leeds City Council is redundant, and worse than that, an obstacle in the path of local democracy and progress. So we can be certain that the ruling coalition won’t rest until it’s done everything in its power to make the school derelict again.

For further information, please see the official Royal Park Community Consortium website.

(Photo courtesy of drgillybean)

Royal Park School jumble sale

I arrived at the school at midday, just minutes after the jumble sale had begun. Already the hall was busy with people browsing through piles of jumble. This amazing turnout at what for many people is lunchtime, shows how much this building means to local people, and how determined they are to save it. Whilst the punters browsed through piles of jumble, a small army of workmen and women worked tirelessly in the background, helping to restore the building so that it can once again become the centre of this closely knit community.

Watching all this activity, I thought about the disconnect that exists between Leeds City Council and the people of Hyde Park and Woodhouse. We pay our council tax like everyone else, but what do we get in return ? A local authority which ignores our wishes, sells off assets to developers at bargain basement prices, spends large sums of money on its own pet projects, whilst at the same time cutting services to local people.

This train of thought was ended by a friend telling me that I really must take a look at the cake stall. Laid out on a pink table cover was an array of the most delicious looking home-made cakes. People who come along here this afternoon, will be glad they did for more reasons than one.

Message from the school

The local community has taken over Royal Park School in order to repair it, and to protect it from further vandalism. They have issued the following statement :

Save Our School

Royal Park Primary School was closed in 2004 by Leeds City Council.

On its closure our community was promised that it would be retained as badly needed community space.

Then, Leeds City Council’s Asset Management took over an intact working building.

After many rejected bids from the community (some of them having considerable funding attached to them) Asset Management chose the private and highly professional company Rushbond PLC to convert the school into badly needed old age pensioners flats . . . opposite the busiest, noisiest public houses in an area of predominantly young transient population !

As with most of the council’s big ideas it was a ‘foolproof’, watertight’ plan that fell through eighteen months later.

After Royal Park Consortium (RPCC), discovered that Rushbond PLC had pulled out of the deal, RPCC again approached the Asset Management team and made another bid on behalf of the community to utilise the building, and again were rejected – on the ground that RPCC had no track record and no finances (unlike Rushbond PLC).

RPCC always intended that, once in possession of the building, we would start to apply for funding – the chicken and egg dilemma !

Leeds City Council were one of the first councils to sign up to the asset transfer scheme, headed by the government, to help communities to take responsibility for their own destinies. Leeds City Council have not yet allowed any assets to be transferred into public ownership and questions have been asked in the House of Commons.

It was pointed out many times in meetings with the Asset Management team, that the intact, well-maintained, water-tight roof was one of the many assets of the building.

Five months ago, lead was taken from the roof of the building, not stolen, but just left in heaps in the playground. Even though the police were called, and each road approaching the school is monitored by cameras, nobody has been arrested or questioned. (You have to have a mighty set of ladders to get up to the roof !). The lead was taken by the council and, by all accounts, lies in a yard somewhere !

Asset Management have spent between £10,000 and £15,000 per year on security for the building, as well as carrying insurance for public liability. On its own estimate, it would cost £1,200,000 (before the lead was taken from the roof) to rectify the damage caused during the time that Asset Management has had custody of the building.

When RPCC enquired when the roof would be fixed, they were told the matter was in hand and the damage would be made good. Yet here we are at the end of autumn, with the cold wet months of winter still to come, and the school still has no roof.

Would you let weather in through the roofs of one of your assets, why would Leeds City Council ?

The council says “The Mission of the Council is to bring the benefits of a prosperous,vibrant and attractive city to all the people of Leeds”

I’m sick and tired of my council
tax being wasted !

But are you ?

Do we stand buy and watch the iconic building at the centre of our community become derelict, pulled down and replaced with….a supermarket….more student flats ?

What should we do ? What can you do ?

You can help us in a number of ways :

You can become a member of RPCC by attending one of their meetings and joining up (phone Sue for further details on 07796 784 018)
You can help to repair the building – clean it and maintain its grounds – donate food or building materials (phone Royal Park Primary School on 07910 887 294)
Arrange to become a sleeping-in watch person – help maintain building security (phone Royal Park Primary School on 07910 887 294)

Residents act to save Royal Park School

In June of this year, lead was stolen from the roof of Royal Park Primary School, allowing water to penetrate the building and damage its fabric. Already, plasterwork, paintwork, and a beautiful parquet floor have been damaged. In the face of Leeds City Council’s failure to replace the lead, or to protect the building, local residents have begun to repair the building themselves.

There’s to be a jumble sale at the school from 12 noon until 4pm on Sunday the 15th November with the proceeds going to the restoration fund. The occasion provides people with an opportunity not just to support efforts to save the school, but to see the unusually beautiful school interior with its cast iron banisters and unique first floor hall. Royal Park School is located at the junction of Queen’s Road and Royal Park Road.

Map showing the location of the school

Photos of the school

Yorkshire Evening Post article

Council vandalism

When it was decided to close Royal Park School, the ruling Labour group promised to retain the building for community use. But then in May 2004, the Lib Dems and Conservatives took power and failed to honour the pledge made that was made by their predecessors. And so the building has been allowed to lie empty for several years, and now, the council wants to demolish it.

Earlier this year, it was reported in the Yorkshire Evening Post that developers had demolished historic Elmfield Infants School in Morley. In his defence, the developer stated, “We had no other choice due to the vandalism of the building. If someone had been injured, there would have been problems for us as directors”.

The argument used by the developer to justify his action is identical to the argument being used by Leeds City Council to justify the proposed demolition of Royal Park School. What is being proposed here is legalised vandalism. Just because it’s Leeds City Council that’s instigating this and not a private developer doesn’t make it alright – it actually makes it worse. Leeds City Council should be using its resources to support the community in Hyde Park, not tearing it down.

Justice is blind

Every single complaint that has been made to the council’s Scrutiny Board about the barbeque proposal has been rejected by the Lib Dem, Conservative and BNP councillors who sit on the board. Why is this?

Scrutiny Board chair Councillor Ralph Pryke has described the opponents of the barbeque scheme as “vocal”. His Lib Dem colleague Sue Bentley used similar words a year ago when she described residents who wanted Woodhouse Moor to be included in the DPPO proposed for Hanover and Woodhouse Squares as a “vociferous group”. If those who oppose the Lib Dems are characterised by them is this way, is it equitable that they and their allies should be in control of the boards that scrutinise the workings of the council?

John Illingworth said at the most recent meeting of the Scrutiny Board, “Nemo iudex in sua causa” – No one should be the judge of his own case. And yet this is what happens every time a Scrutiny Board hears a complaint from the community about the barbeque proposal. It’s time for the overseeing of the workings of the council to be taken away from the Scrutiny Board and handed over to an independent body.

(photo courtesy of RaeA)

What’s that helicopter costing us ?

If you’re an aviation enthusiast, you don’t have to travel to the airport to indulge your passion. All that’s necessary is to spend some time in Hyde Park and Woodhouse. For as well as lying under the flight path for Yeadon Airport, there’s a very good chance you’ll get to see the police helicopter – no matter what time of the day or night. And not only will you get to see the helicopter, you’ll also get the chance to hear it. In fact, you’re far more likely to hear it than you are to see it. Anyone who’s had it hover over their home for prolonged periods in the early hours of the morning will testify to that.

I wonder if anyone at West Yorkshire Police has ever weighed the cost of such aircraft against their benefits i.e has any cost benefit analysis been carried out to determine whether we’re getting value for money. One of the costs taken into account by cost benefit analysis is the “opportunity cost”. In the case of a police helicopter, the opportunity cost might be the number of policemen you could have instead of the helicopter. To work this out, all you need to know is the annual cost of running the helicopter, and a policeman’s salary. You then divide the running cost by the salary figure to determine how many bobbies on the beat the helicopter is costing us. According to West Yorkshire Police, the helicopter they use is an MD902 Explorer, and it’s in the air annually for 1,400 hours. According to consultants Conklin & de Dekker one of these helicopters has a variable operating cost per hour of $919 (£576). That means the helicopter has an annual variable operating cost of £806,400. To arrive at the helicopter’s total cost, you’d add on fixed costs such as the salary of the three man crew. This could be around £90,000 assuming the helicopter is manned by three constables earning £30,000, but it’s likely to be much more. So if the helicopter’s annual operating cost is £900,000, that would mean that instead of the helicopter, we could have 30 experienced police constables earning £30,000 per year, 39 new recruits earning £23,000 per year, or 56 PCSO recruits earning £16,000 per year.

In a letter to the Yorkshire Evening Post published earlier this year, Lib Dem councillor Martin Hamilton said that banning barbeques would divert the police away from other priorities. If spending just short of £1 million every year to keep a helicopter in the air is a police priority, then some people might say it’s time their priorities were re-evaluated.

References

West Yorkshire Police helicopter operating details
Conklin & de Dekker helicopter variable operating costs
Police pay scales

(Photo courtesy of Ulleskelf)

Councillors fear knock on effect on other parks

At this morning’s Scrutiny Board meeting, an application was heard from councillors John Illingworth and Linda Rhodes-Clayton for a reconsideration of the Executive Board decision to proceed with a barbeque area on Woodhouse Moor. During the course of the meeting, Councillor Mick Lyons asked, “If this is a trial, is it going to happen all over?”

This produced the following response from the councillor with responsibility for Parks and Countryside :

John Procter (Con) Mick Lyons is right. A few years ago disposable barbeques weren’t available. They’re an emerging phenomenon – cheap and easy. Parks were to cater for people who didn’t have gardens. Young people in the flats that have been built in the city centre want to go and have a barbeque. Other areas with city centre parks also have problems with barbeques – we’re at the start of something. When large numbers of our constituents are demanding something, we’ve got to listen. How did we think we could stop this ?

As a result of Councillor Procter’s statement, Labour councillors expressed concern for the city’s other parks :

Brian Selby (Lab) John Procter says “this is an emerging issue.” Looking at the flats that have gone up in Roundhay, there should be a trial at Roundhay Park, and at Temple Newsam. This seems to be happening because students enjoy it. Is this why Woodhouse Moor has been allowed to go ? Are we saying it’s too difficult with so many students ? Isn’t this the law of taking the line of least resistance ?

Tom Murray (Lab) It’s worrying that John Procter said that this is an emerging problem which could affect all our parks. So our policy at this stage should be that we will enforce our current byelaws. I’ve heard from residents about the trial that they would like. It embraces all the things that John Procter’s trial does. We’re talking about education, signage, and education. We could market it as “Parks for picnics.” Looking at this picture, I don’t see any criminals. Enforcement would be easy. The message would be “We have parks for picnics, not parks for barbeques”.

Unofficial minutes of the Scrutiny Board meeting 16.9.09

(Photo courtesy of Simon Grubb)

It’s official – barbecuing on the Moor isn’t Green !

At a meeting earlier today of the full council, the leader of the Green Party, Councillor David Blackburn made the following statement with regard to the council’s proposal to establish a dedicated barbeque area on Woodhouse Moor :

“I cannot agree with this scheme. Parks are not for having barbeques and it should be stopped.”

Councillor Blackburn and his colleagues have an excellent track record on environmental issues. In 2007, they left the ruling Lib Dem/Conservative coalition over their opposition to the council’s proposal to build an incinerator to dispose of the city’s rubbish. Their courageous stance on the incinerator proposal helped to persuade the council to abandon its plans and to choose a waste recycling system instead. It’s to be hoped that their clearly expressed opposition to the barbeque scheme will also be heeded.

The lowest ebb is the turn of the tide

A few weeks ago, the Executive Board went ahead and approved the Lib Dem scheme to establish barbeque areas on Woodhouse Moor. Their decision was not a surprise. At every preceding forum where the issue has been discussed, Lib Dem and Conservative councillors have voted to a man in favour of the scheme. There was no reason to suppose that the Executive Board would be the exception. Even so, their decision was a blow to local people. A further blow came this week with the suppression by Lib Dem councillors of key messages that local people had sent to the council’s area committee protesting against the barbeque proposal.

But now, just as it seemed that the voice of protest had been silenced, fresh voices of dissent have begun to be raised in other parts of the city. Councillors in other wards who are free to speak their own minds are speaking out against the barbeque scheme, recognising that the attack on Woodhouse Moor, is also an attack on every park on the city.

Reflecting on all of this, reminds me of the closing lines of Longfellow’s poem “Loss and Gain” :

Defeat may be victory in disguise;
The lowest ebb is the turn of the tide.

Photo courtesy of mr * p