Gunpowder Plod organisers to pay for Knavesmire clear-up (From York Press)

Boring...boring !!

From the article: "Now Rate Race managing director Jim Mee has reiterated that, as soon as the damage to the cycle path was discovered, the firm had offered to complete the minor reinstatement works and cover the cost in full."

So they 'offered'? It wasn't in any agreement they signed with the Council that clean up/damage to the area must be paid for? I hope this is just Mr Mee trying to squeeze a bit of positivity out rather than being wholly true.

If the Council agreed to such a massive event for NO RENT and with NO PENALTY COST for damage then we really need to know who agreed to such a ridiculous & one-sided agreement so she/he can be held responsible.

The Council can't be relying on the 'goodwill' (or in this case shame) of a company to reimburse the council.

If Mr Mee claim of him 'offering' to pay is not wholly true then the Council should say so and blast Mr Mee for the attempt at misleading the people of York for a bit of positive headlines.

"The first sentence explains every thing,what more do people want."

M.Lucas wrote:
From the article: "Now Rate Race managing director Jim Mee has reiterated that, as soon as the damage to the cycle path was discovered, the firm had offered to complete the minor reinstatement works and cover the cost in full."

So they 'offered'? It wasn't in any agreement they signed with the Council that clean up/damage to the area must be paid for? I hope this is just Mr Mee trying to squeeze a bit of positivity out rather than being wholly true.

If the Council agreed to such a massive event for NO RENT and with NO PENALTY COST for damage then we really need to know who agreed to such a ridiculous & one-sided agreement so she/he can be held responsible.

The Council can't be relying on the 'goodwill' (or in this case shame) of a company to reimburse the council.

If Mr Mee claim of him 'offering' to pay is not wholly true then the Council should say so and blast Mr Mee for the attempt at misleading the people of York for a bit of positive headlines.

Yep, couldn't agree more.
Mr Mee needs all the positive publicity he can get. I just hope if he attempts this stunt again that people boycott in their thousands. York people please remember this come November next year.

CHISSY1 wrote:
"The first sentence explains every thing,what more do people want."

The issue was that CofY council allowed the event to take place without a bond being in place or without any proof that Rat Race had any insurance to repair damage to public property.

No mention in his 'offer' of the cost of repairing the grass in addition to the track. Since CYC staff have been doing the repair work to both, I trust that the council will be billing the company for the staff time involved, not just the price of the materials used?

WayneCarr wrote:
Mr Mee needs all the positive publicity he can get. I just hope if he attempts this stunt again that people boycott in their thousands. York people please remember this come November next year.”

Gives a whole new meaning to "Remember remember, the fifth of November, treason and Gunpowder Plod"

you would have to presume, surely, that they won t be allowed to run it next year,mind you,this is ycc.

Big Bad Wolf wrote:

CHISSY1 wrote:
"The first sentence explains every thing,what more do people want."

The issue was that CofY council allowed the event to take place without a bond being in place or without any proof that Rat Race had any insurance to repair damage to public property.

Precisely, moreover why did they get the site for 'free'? It's seems highly irregular at face value and should perhaps be scrutinised in the public domain.

greenmonkey wrote:
No mention in his 'offer' of the cost of repairing the grass in addition to the track. Since CYC staff have been doing the repair work to both, I trust that the council will be billing the company for the staff time involved, not just the price of the materials used?

You noticed this as well.... The headline says that Rat Race are going to pay for the Knavesmire clear-up but the quote from Rat Race's director only mentions paying for the repairs to the cycle track, not a complete clear-up of their mess.

bob the builder wrote:

Big Bad Wolf wrote:

CHISSY1 wrote: "The first sentence explains every thing,what more do people want."

The issue was that CofY council allowed the event to take place without a bond being in place or without any proof that Rat Race had any insurance to repair damage to public property.

Precisely, moreover why did they get the site for 'free'? It's seems highly irregular at face value and should perhaps be scrutinised in the public domain.

The article that wasn't published in the online Press only the paper version said that Rat Race were given the site rent free "to ensure a successful and viable event" for future years, according to Sonja Crisp.

Ooops!

Has everyone got short memories? I remember when small events were held across the city raising money for charities and clubs. People complained that the Council never ran a Guy Fawkes event, then they did and it cost thousands of pounds of tax payers money, I remember hundreds of people booing in Georges Field.

They then let a company use some land that was not been otherwise used for an event. It was massive, it was massively attended and did not meet expectations but cost the tax payer nothing.

So what we need is an event to bring business into the city, entertain the locals, celebrate a local terrorist, set fire to thousands of pounds of gunpowder, staff the event, hope that the security and people do not damage the grass after months of rain.

When some grass and a path was damaged the organisers have volunteered to meet the cost and people are still moaning.

Good people of York, stop moaning and tell us what you want, who should pay!

It was not massive at all. Many people missed the fireworks due to the shambolic organising of this event. It was a disgrace. If you pay good money, you expect something good in return. The people of York want a quality organised event, not some sham laden with false promises. These posts are not people moaning...they expect their hard earned money being used wisely in the form of Council Tax.

WayneCarr wrote:
It was not massive at all. Many people missed the fireworks due to the shambolic organising of this event. It was a disgrace. If you pay good money, you expect something good in return. The people of York want a quality organised event, not some sham laden with false promises. These posts are not people moaning...they expect their hard earned money being used wisely in the form of Council Tax.

I agree, the plod event was not massive. The fireworks were billed as the biggest York had ever seen - absolute tosh - the display was mostly boring. The evidence is available for all to see on YouTube. You could also check out the video for Kaboom on YouTube, now that was a great display

WayneCarr wrote:
It was not massive at all. Many people missed the fireworks due to the shambolic organising of this event. It was a disgrace. If you pay good money, you expect something good in return. The people of York want a quality organised event, not some sham laden with false promises. These posts are not people moaning...they expect their hard earned money being used wisely in the form of Council Tax.

So your point is you would like the council to set fire to your council tax money by running a firework display?

That is just silly.

eeoodares wrote:

WayneCarr wrote:
It was not massive at all. Many people missed the fireworks due to the shambolic organising of this event. It was a disgrace. If you pay good money, you expect something good in return. The people of York want a quality organised event, not some sham laden with false promises. These posts are not people moaning...they expect their hard earned money being used wisely in the form of Council Tax.

So your point is you would like the council to set fire to your council tax money by running a firework display?

That is just silly.

Not my point at all. You don't mind paying for a private display as long as it is value for money. The Council Tax I quoted was about not running the risk of giving the venue both rent and bond free. Council tax payers may have had to pay out for any damage caused by the event. Not silly, just covering any risks involved.