Coun James Alexander warns of councils ‘going bust’

York Press: City of York Council leader James Alexander during the question-and-answer session in the offices of The Press City of York Council leader James Alexander during the question-and-answer session in the offices of The Press

MANY councils will face bankruptcy within three years and York must take urgent action to avoid becoming a casualty, the city’s council leader has warned.

Coun James Alexander voiced his fears about the future of local democracy during a live online discussion on The Press’s website yesterday, in which he fielded questions about City of York Council’s budget for the next two years.

Its proposals for 2013/14 and 2014/15 will emerge on Monday ahead of the February 28 budget meeting. Coun Alexander confirmed council tax bills in York would rise next year, but said the increase was necessary to stave off problems further down the line.

He said he believed councils which accepted a council tax “freeze grant” from the Government would store up crippling funding difficulties for future years, describing the offer as a “buy now, pay later option” which would threaten some authorities’ futures and lead to others having to outsource virtually all their services to private companies.

“More and more councils will face bankruptcy and I suspect this will occur in 2015/16, when many will be hit with the paying back of two council tax freezes,” said Coun Alexander.

“I have expressed this view to national politicians and the reaction I receive is that I am right, but action is not going to be taken to resolve the situation.

“I believe this will increase the cost to the taxpayer, as the Government will have to take charge of collapsed councils.

“In York, we are taking tough decisions now and investing for the future to ensure York is not among this list of teetering councils.”

Coun Alexander said raising council tax for 2012/13 and next year would mean the city avoiding about £4 million of extra service cuts or higher bills in future, and would allow more care funding.

"He said the £11 million the council must save to balance its books in 2014/15 could not be solely met through “efficiency savings”, and he believed the current funding system for councils was “not sustainable”.

Coun Alexander also defended the controversial removal of York litter bins, saying the council could not afford to keep funding those which were “underused” and there was no indication litter had increased.

He said he hoped funding for ward committees, which was cut this year, could ultimately rise again, and there were no plans for any libraries, children’s centres or leisure facilities to close over the next two years.

The council was still considering how to save money on garden waste collections, including possibly charging for the service.

Read Coun Alexander’s full online interview>>

Comments (30)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:59am Wed 30 Jan 13

sparkseffect says...

It's alright, James, you can always ask for an advance of pay, can't you?
It's alright, James, you can always ask for an advance of pay, can't you? sparkseffect
  • Score: 0

11:11am Wed 30 Jan 13

BL2 says...

Can't he just use has vanity fund?!
Can't he just use has vanity fund?! BL2
  • Score: 0

11:46am Wed 30 Jan 13

voiceofnormalpeople says...

imagine the extra money this council would have if it hadn't been wasting money on cycle paths and bus lanes down boroughbridge road.
imagine the extra money this council would have if it hadn't been wasting money on cycle paths and bus lanes down boroughbridge road. voiceofnormalpeople
  • Score: 0

12:01pm Wed 30 Jan 13

Keeet Lemon says...

Haha he could not even manage his personal finances....pot n kettle!
Haha he could not even manage his personal finances....pot n kettle! Keeet Lemon
  • Score: 0

12:05pm Wed 30 Jan 13

Pete the Brickie says...



"He said the £11 million the council must save to balance its books in 2014/15 could not be solely met through “efficiency savings



I struggle to imagine how someone who can't manage his own bank account can predict that with any accuracy? There'd be no more money under any government, but I'd bet my bottom dollar our council leader would be spending more time trying to find the neccessary savings and less twittering and facetiming if Brown had got in again.
[quote] "He said the £11 million the council must save to balance its books in 2014/15 could not be solely met through “efficiency savings [/quote] I struggle to imagine how someone who can't manage his own bank account can predict that with any accuracy? There'd be no more money under any government, but I'd bet my bottom dollar our council leader would be spending more time trying to find the neccessary savings and less twittering and facetiming if Brown had got in again. Pete the Brickie
  • Score: 0

12:18pm Wed 30 Jan 13

m dee says...

Here is a few ideas for the council to make savings.

Wifi in City centre is not vital instead encourage businesses to offer this.

A 20mph limit all over York is not vital and very expensive to set up,implement 20
zones where there is a proven safety issue.

Spending money to stop 1500 severely disabled using Davygate as a place to park and exit their cars will have cost implications and result in a large number of these people shopping elsewhere again not vital.
Here is a few ideas for the council to make savings. Wifi in City centre is not vital instead encourage businesses to offer this. A 20mph limit all over York is not vital and very expensive to set up,implement 20 zones where there is a proven safety issue. Spending money to stop 1500 severely disabled using Davygate as a place to park and exit their cars will have cost implications and result in a large number of these people shopping elsewhere again not vital. m dee
  • Score: 0

12:31pm Wed 30 Jan 13

roskoboskovic says...

the york budget could be slashed if they stopped pandering to the cycle nazis,the people obsessed with pedestrianising the city centre and the 20mph nutters.these are not necessities.it is not a matter of life and death and we can certainly do without them.
the york budget could be slashed if they stopped pandering to the cycle nazis,the people obsessed with pedestrianising the city centre and the 20mph nutters.these are not necessities.it is not a matter of life and death and we can certainly do without them. roskoboskovic
  • Score: 0

12:44pm Wed 30 Jan 13

bob the builder says...

... all Labour councils.
... all Labour councils. bob the builder
  • Score: 0

12:53pm Wed 30 Jan 13

meme says...

Give him his due he did do the electronic interview which can lead to all sorts of pitfalls..That has to be a plus.he was prepared to fight his corner in public. Not many politicians do that
I do worry about Yorks finances as we are likely to get stuck with a stadium which will cost us money;we borrowed, i think £20M, to fund a 'living' wage and other things.YCC spend money on things which are laudable but not necessities when money is v tight.
we have to get priorities right... Essential services first and then spare monies on good but not vital projects.
Give him his due he did do the electronic interview which can lead to all sorts of pitfalls..That has to be a plus.he was prepared to fight his corner in public. Not many politicians do that I do worry about Yorks finances as we are likely to get stuck with a stadium which will cost us money;we borrowed, i think £20M, to fund a 'living' wage and other things.YCC spend money on things which are laudable but not necessities when money is v tight. we have to get priorities right... Essential services first and then spare monies [if any] on good but not vital projects. meme
  • Score: 0

1:09pm Wed 30 Jan 13

TW says...

"Coun James Alexander voiced his fears about the future of local democracy......"
That's what a lot of us have been saying since Labour got in.
I also wonder who selected the questions for him to answer in this great show of 'answering to the people'
"Coun James Alexander voiced his fears about the future of local democracy......" That's what a lot of us have been saying since Labour got in. I also wonder who selected the questions for him to answer in this great show of 'answering to the people' TW
  • Score: 0

1:50pm Wed 30 Jan 13

Von_Dutch says...

voiceofnormalpeople wrote:
imagine the extra money this council would have if it hadn't been wasting money on cycle paths and bus lanes down boroughbridge road.
You know how much? Zero. CYC won this money from central government for this work and this work alone. It wasn't a gift. If we didn't use it for this it would be given to another council for their transport projects. We'd get nothing.

I really do wish commentators would appreciate the difference between funding.
[quote][p][bold]voiceofnormalpeople[/bold] wrote: imagine the extra money this council would have if it hadn't been wasting money on cycle paths and bus lanes down boroughbridge road.[/p][/quote]You know how much? Zero. CYC won this money from central government for this work and this work alone. It wasn't a gift. If we didn't use it for this it would be given to another council for their transport projects. We'd get nothing. I really do wish commentators would appreciate the difference between funding. Von_Dutch
  • Score: 0

1:53pm Wed 30 Jan 13

Von_Dutch says...

p.s. Nice of you to get in a dig at wasting money on cyclists too (ignorant much?!?) - however think you'll find there was already existing cycle lanes all the way down Boroughbridge Road.
p.s. Nice of you to get in a dig at wasting money on cyclists too (ignorant much?!?) - however think you'll find there was already existing cycle lanes all the way down Boroughbridge Road. Von_Dutch
  • Score: 0

1:56pm Wed 30 Jan 13

Von_Dutch says...

m dee wrote:
Here is a few ideas for the council to make savings.

Wifi in City centre is not vital instead encourage businesses to offer this.

A 20mph limit all over York is not vital and very expensive to set up,implement 20
zones where there is a proven safety issue.

Spending money to stop 1500 severely disabled using Davygate as a place to park and exit their cars will have cost implications and result in a large number of these people shopping elsewhere again not vital.
Doubt it will have any cost implications in reality. You're making out like 1500 disabled will stop using the city centre. It's a few spaces being removed is all.
[quote][p][bold]m dee[/bold] wrote: Here is a few ideas for the council to make savings. Wifi in City centre is not vital instead encourage businesses to offer this. A 20mph limit all over York is not vital and very expensive to set up,implement 20 zones where there is a proven safety issue. Spending money to stop 1500 severely disabled using Davygate as a place to park and exit their cars will have cost implications and result in a large number of these people shopping elsewhere again not vital.[/p][/quote]Doubt it will have any cost implications in reality. You're making out like 1500 disabled will stop using the city centre. It's a few spaces being removed is all. Von_Dutch
  • Score: 0

2:04pm Wed 30 Jan 13

MilkandTwo says...

Don't spend what you haven't got, don't borrow what you can't pay back

Pretty much common sense, imho.

OK, he may do some daft things / projects but he is looking at the big picture here.

And no, I don't vote Labour
Don't spend what you haven't got, don't borrow what you can't pay back Pretty much common sense, imho. OK, he may do some daft things / projects but he is looking at the big picture here. And no, I don't vote Labour MilkandTwo
  • Score: 0

3:19pm Wed 30 Jan 13

marvell says...

Cllr Alexander is someone who gives the people of York very little confidence in his ability to run the council to a tightly costed budget.

He spends money on unnecessary and inconsequential projects and sidelines essential infrastructure problems. His vanity fund is a nonsense, as is the 20mph blanket scheme rather than targetted zones near schools. The free wi-fi is far less important than road upkeep and salt bins in inclement weather.

Sadly, short term popularity is the watchword with this untalented and callow Labour Cabinet - trying to buy favour rather than doing the dull but right things that improve people's everyday experience of living and travelling in and around York.
Cllr Alexander is someone who gives the people of York very little confidence in his ability to run the council to a tightly costed budget. He spends money on unnecessary and inconsequential projects and sidelines essential infrastructure problems. His vanity fund is a nonsense, as is the 20mph blanket scheme rather than targetted zones near schools. The free wi-fi is far less important than road upkeep and salt bins in inclement weather. Sadly, short term popularity is the watchword with this untalented and callow Labour Cabinet - trying to buy favour rather than doing the dull but right things that improve people's everyday experience of living and travelling in and around York. marvell
  • Score: 0

4:34pm Wed 30 Jan 13

Scarlet Pimpernel says...

£600,000 - making James Street offices (only 5 yrs old) open plan.
£600,000 - on 20mph signage etc
£1.4m - new desks and chairs for West Offices
£1m - for new computers at west offices.
£800 - flights and accommodation for JA and KE on Paris, when they could have flown FOC the following day.

Is there really a chance of York Council going bust ?

If there is, then is the above expenditure damage limitation, or damage maximisation ?
£600,000 - making James Street offices (only 5 yrs old) open plan. £600,000 - on 20mph signage etc £1.4m - new desks and chairs for West Offices £1m - for new computers at west offices. £800 - flights and accommodation for JA and KE on Paris, when they could have flown FOC the following day. Is there really a chance of York Council going bust ? If there is, then is the above expenditure damage limitation, or damage maximisation ? Scarlet Pimpernel
  • Score: 0

4:34pm Wed 30 Jan 13

Torkie says...

I hate the 20mph scheme. Trying to force people to do 20 when it's perfectly safe doing 25-30, it's oppressive needless money wasting.
I hate the 20mph scheme. Trying to force people to do 20 when it's perfectly safe doing 25-30, it's oppressive needless money wasting. Torkie
  • Score: 0

4:36pm Wed 30 Jan 13

Scarlet Pimpernel says...

MilkandTwo wrote:
Don't spend what you haven't got, don't borrow what you can't pay back Pretty much common sense, imho. OK, he may do some daft things / projects but he is looking at the big picture here. And no, I don't vote Labour
It's what he does that is the worry, not what he looks at !!!!!
[quote][p][bold]MilkandTwo[/bold] wrote: Don't spend what you haven't got, don't borrow what you can't pay back Pretty much common sense, imho. OK, he may do some daft things / projects but he is looking at the big picture here. And no, I don't vote Labour[/p][/quote]It's what he does that is the worry, not what he looks at !!!!! Scarlet Pimpernel
  • Score: 0

4:47pm Wed 30 Jan 13

Scarlet Pimpernel says...

Alexander has no grasp of figures.

He demonstrated that during last Friday's BBC Radio York Jonathan Cowap show phone-in/interview.

He was asked how many houses were built in York in the last 12-months. He admitted that he didn't know, and instead quoted 220 for 2010/11 from a Centre for Cities Report.

This was wrong.

The true figure for 2010/11 from York Council's own figures was 514.

The Centre for Cities report was defective and used the 2011/12 figure from DCLG table 253.

Alexander quotes figures from reports, left right and centre, but, he doesn't understand them, and hasn't a clue if they are right or wrong.

I complained to York Labour Party and asked him to apologise for misleading York residents - his reply was arrogant and unapologetic.

He's a fraud.
Alexander has no grasp of figures. He demonstrated that during last Friday's BBC Radio York Jonathan Cowap show phone-in/interview. He was asked how many houses were built in York in the last 12-months. He admitted that he didn't know, and instead quoted 220 for 2010/11 from a Centre for Cities Report. This was wrong. The true figure for 2010/11 from York Council's own figures was 514. The Centre for Cities report was defective and used the 2011/12 figure from DCLG table 253. Alexander quotes figures from reports, left right and centre, but, he doesn't understand them, and hasn't a clue if they are right or wrong. I complained to York Labour Party and asked him to apologise for misleading York residents - his reply was arrogant and unapologetic. He's a fraud. Scarlet Pimpernel
  • Score: 0

5:01pm Wed 30 Jan 13

Ichabod76 says...

Will you be having comments removed from this thread as well Dan ?
Will you be having comments removed from this thread as well Dan ? Ichabod76
  • Score: 0

5:02pm Wed 30 Jan 13

Keeet Lemon says...

More councillors than joe public on this website, get some real work done!
More councillors than joe public on this website, get some real work done! Keeet Lemon
  • Score: 0

5:03pm Wed 30 Jan 13

Scarlet Pimpernel says...

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:
Alexander has no grasp of figures. He demonstrated that during last Friday's BBC Radio York Jonathan Cowap show phone-in/interview. He was asked how many houses were built in York in the last 12-months. He admitted that he didn't know, and instead quoted 220 for 2010/11 from a Centre for Cities Report. This was wrong. The true figure for 2010/11 from York Council's own figures was 514. The Centre for Cities report was defective and used the 2011/12 figure from DCLG table 253. Alexander quotes figures from reports, left right and centre, but, he doesn't understand them, and hasn't a clue if they are right or wrong. I complained to York Labour Party and asked him to apologise for misleading York residents - his reply was arrogant and unapologetic. He's a fraud.
BTW, the 2011/12 figure in DCLG table 253 is 220, but York council's own figure is 321.

The difference is because sites below 5 dwellings are not counted in the DCLG figures.

I am certain that James Alexander doesn't know this.

It is no excuse.

He said at the beginning of the year that he will increase the number of houses built in York in 2013 compared with the previous year, but, he doesn't even know how many were built in 2012 ?

It's time that did his homework, and finds out what is going on in the city he is supposed to be the leader of !
[quote][p][bold]Scarlet Pimpernel[/bold] wrote: Alexander has no grasp of figures. He demonstrated that during last Friday's BBC Radio York Jonathan Cowap show phone-in/interview. He was asked how many houses were built in York in the last 12-months. He admitted that he didn't know, and instead quoted 220 for 2010/11 from a Centre for Cities Report. This was wrong. The true figure for 2010/11 from York Council's own figures was 514. The Centre for Cities report was defective and used the 2011/12 figure from DCLG table 253. Alexander quotes figures from reports, left right and centre, but, he doesn't understand them, and hasn't a clue if they are right or wrong. I complained to York Labour Party and asked him to apologise for misleading York residents - his reply was arrogant and unapologetic. He's a fraud.[/p][/quote]BTW, the 2011/12 figure in DCLG table 253 is 220, but York council's own figure is 321. The difference is because sites below 5 dwellings are not counted in the DCLG figures. I am certain that James Alexander doesn't know this. It is no excuse. He said at the beginning of the year that he will increase the number of houses built in York in 2013 compared with the previous year, but, he doesn't even know how many were built in 2012 ? It's time that did his homework, and finds out what is going on in the city he is supposed to be the leader of ! Scarlet Pimpernel
  • Score: 0

5:56pm Wed 30 Jan 13

Ichabod76 says...

I think that Cllr Crisp will be loosing her place come the reshuffle.
JA is getting the message the people of York are not at all happy with the lack of transparency and democracy, that's why we have these publicity stunt Q&A's trying to regain some trust

the fact she only has one person defending her publicly speaks volumes
I think that Cllr Crisp will be loosing her place come the reshuffle. JA is getting the message the people of York are not at all happy with the lack of transparency and democracy, that's why we have these publicity stunt Q&A's trying to regain some trust the fact she only has one person defending her publicly speaks volumes Ichabod76
  • Score: 0

6:32pm Wed 30 Jan 13

Digital Editor says...

So that we don't have to delete any further posts on the topic, we would like to point out that the user 'south Bronx red 2' is not Dan Sidley.
So that we don't have to delete any further posts on the topic, we would like to point out that the user 'south Bronx red 2' is not Dan Sidley. Digital Editor
  • Score: 0

8:49pm Wed 30 Jan 13

south bronx red 2 says...

You can add a whole host of other names too.
Strange how a complaint from Paul is dealt by deletion.
But he is allowed to mud sling without any sanction.
I mentioned a convicted fraudster and it was deleted, Paul is allowed to accuse an elected official of fraud but nothing said nor done.
Keep guessing Paul, get some of that group therapy you were on about whilst your at it.
You can add a whole host of other names too. Strange how a complaint from Paul is dealt by deletion. But he is allowed to mud sling without any sanction. I mentioned a convicted fraudster and it was deleted, Paul is allowed to accuse an elected official of fraud but nothing said nor done. Keep guessing Paul, get some of that group therapy you were on about whilst your at it. south bronx red 2
  • Score: 0

12:23am Thu 31 Jan 13

Scarlet Pimpernel says...

south bronx red 2 wrote:
You can add a whole host of other names too. Strange how a complaint from Paul is dealt by deletion. But he is allowed to mud sling without any sanction. I mentioned a convicted fraudster and it was deleted, Paul is allowed to accuse an elected official of fraud but nothing said nor done. Keep guessing Paul, get some of that group therapy you were on about whilst your at it.
Has it not ocurred to you that it might be others offended by your defamatory remarks that have reported your posts ? You made accusations against others, not just myself.

As I have said before, it wasn't me. Most of the posts deleted were by me, and I received a warning that my posts were offending others. Stop trying to blame me for your actions.

I didn't accuse anyong OF FRAUD. I said James Alexander is a FRAUD. There is a difference.

I wasn't the person who actually suggested that you are Dan Sidley. I just agreed that it sounded like you, being as thick as thieves with your puppet-master Red Sonja.

I never mentioned 'group therapy'. You on the other hand advised me that there were good programmes for mental health, after calling me a 'whackjob'

I doubt that anyone on here actually believes anything you say, given your vitriolic, absurd outbursts. Conversely, many seem to agree with me.
[quote][p][bold]south bronx red 2[/bold] wrote: You can add a whole host of other names too. Strange how a complaint from Paul is dealt by deletion. But he is allowed to mud sling without any sanction. I mentioned a convicted fraudster and it was deleted, Paul is allowed to accuse an elected official of fraud but nothing said nor done. Keep guessing Paul, get some of that group therapy you were on about whilst your at it.[/p][/quote]Has it not ocurred to you that it might be others offended by your defamatory remarks that have reported your posts ? You made accusations against others, not just myself. As I have said before, it wasn't me. Most of the posts deleted were by me, and I received a warning that my posts were offending others. Stop trying to blame me for your actions. I didn't accuse anyong OF FRAUD. I said James Alexander is a FRAUD. There is a difference. I wasn't the person who actually suggested that you are Dan Sidley. I just agreed that it sounded like you, being as thick as thieves with your puppet-master Red Sonja. I never mentioned 'group therapy'. You on the other hand advised me that there were good programmes for mental health, after calling me a 'whackjob' I doubt that anyone on here actually believes anything you say, given your vitriolic, absurd outbursts. Conversely, many seem to agree with me. Scarlet Pimpernel
  • Score: 0

12:25am Thu 31 Jan 13

Scarlet Pimpernel says...

Digital Editor wrote:
So that we don't have to delete any further posts on the topic, we would like to point out that the user 'south Bronx red 2' is not Dan Sidley.
Prove it !
[quote][p][bold]Digital Editor[/bold] wrote: So that we don't have to delete any further posts on the topic, we would like to point out that the user 'south Bronx red 2' is not Dan Sidley.[/p][/quote]Prove it ! Scarlet Pimpernel
  • Score: 0

2:40am Thu 31 Jan 13

Magicman! says...

There are several factors involved in councils not having enough money...

(1) Councillors salaries too high
(2) Councillors claiming too many things on expenses
(3) Councillors not listening to public surveys and spending stupid amounts of money on things such as tampering with traffic lights at Clifton green to shift the queue away from Water End and on to Shipton Road, adopting a citywide 20mph limit despite only 3 people wanting it
(4) council using false economy on projects such as road repairs: using 'poor mans road surface' aka loose chippings to resurface a road instead of completely removing the top levels of tarmac and laying new ones - loose chippings last a maximum of 2 years beofre the road surface looks wrecked again, compared to 10 years with a full stripping and relaying of a road surface
(5) having a Tory government who'd rather ease tax debts for corporations and the highest earners so as to get their vote next time round as opposed to giving out money where it is needed.
There are several factors involved in councils not having enough money... (1) Councillors salaries too high (2) Councillors claiming too many things on expenses (3) Councillors not listening to public surveys and spending stupid amounts of money on things such as tampering with traffic lights at Clifton green to shift the queue away from Water End and on to Shipton Road, adopting a citywide 20mph limit despite only 3 people wanting it (4) council using false economy on projects such as road repairs: using 'poor mans road surface' aka loose chippings to resurface a road instead of completely removing the top levels of tarmac and laying new ones - loose chippings last a maximum of 2 years beofre the road surface looks wrecked again, compared to 10 years with a full stripping and relaying of a road surface (5) having a Tory government who'd rather ease tax debts for corporations and the highest earners so as to get their vote next time round as opposed to giving out money where it is needed. Magicman!
  • Score: 0

8:06am Thu 31 Jan 13

powerwatt says...

So the whole boom and bust cycle is being endorsed by JA. He wants to carry on spending wildly and then go bankrupt at the end of it. That makes sense.
So the whole boom and bust cycle is being endorsed by JA. He wants to carry on spending wildly and then go bankrupt at the end of it. That makes sense. powerwatt
  • Score: 0

10:23am Thu 31 Jan 13

m dee says...

Von_Dutch wrote:
m dee wrote:
Here is a few ideas for the council to make savings.

Wifi in City centre is not vital instead encourage businesses to offer this.

A 20mph limit all over York is not vital and very expensive to set up,implement 20
zones where there is a proven safety issue.

Spending money to stop 1500 severely disabled using Davygate as a place to park and exit their cars will have cost implications and result in a large number of these people shopping elsewhere again not vital.
Doubt it will have any cost implications in reality. You're making out like 1500 disabled will stop using the city centre. It's a few spaces being removed is all.
You are missing the point,there has to be cost implications on any traffic changes ,signage ,the associated documentation for existing and future service users will need to be changed,for what?there is no problems that warrant it changing unless a hidden agenda like a cycle route is planned.
The other point lets say 2% of the green badge users visit the City at any one time considering Church st/ St Sampsons is usually full where exactly would they find the additional 30 parking spaces nearby ?
[quote][p][bold]Von_Dutch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]m dee[/bold] wrote: Here is a few ideas for the council to make savings. Wifi in City centre is not vital instead encourage businesses to offer this. A 20mph limit all over York is not vital and very expensive to set up,implement 20 zones where there is a proven safety issue. Spending money to stop 1500 severely disabled using Davygate as a place to park and exit their cars will have cost implications and result in a large number of these people shopping elsewhere again not vital.[/p][/quote]Doubt it will have any cost implications in reality. You're making out like 1500 disabled will stop using the city centre. It's a few spaces being removed is all.[/p][/quote]You are missing the point,there has to be cost implications on any traffic changes ,signage ,the associated documentation for existing and future service users will need to be changed,for what?there is no problems that warrant it changing unless a hidden agenda like a cycle route is planned. The other point lets say 2% of the green badge users visit the City at any one time considering Church st/ St Sampsons is usually full where exactly would they find the additional 30 parking spaces nearby ? m dee
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree