Local residents will no doubt have been relieved to read in Monday's Evening Press of York councillors' decision to maintain the Queen Anne School site in educational use.

Credit where credit is due - well done English Heritage for stepping in and spot-listing the Walter Brierley building after the city council had already gone out to tender to redevelop the whole site.

If the building hadn't been listed the tenders for housing development on the site would have been two or three times the original educational bid, with inevitable results.

The mystery is why the council itself didn't seek to get the building listed, and why it didn't consult with residents and produce a development brief for the site before going out to tender?

Considerable time has been wasted because of re-tendering and the building stands boarded-up. If the process had been handled efficiently the council could have already had the money in the bank.

Besides, it cannot be taken for granted that the Government will approve the council's decision because of its flawed procedures. After all, they are now ruling out higher bids for the site because of criteria which were not stated when the council went out to tender.

This saga seems to be typical of a council attitude which is only to consult after it has gone a long way down the road of its own choosing. The so-called consultation on Clifton primary education is another case; the council has decided what they want to do. Their consultation asks: "Do you approve or not - yes or no?" No debate, no discussion of the issues or alternatives.

Is it any wonder in this climate that dedicated council officers such as city archivist Rita Freedman feel obliged to whistle-blow to draw attention to issues which should be in the public arena at a stage when people can have a real influence?

Is the council brave enough to listen and consult first, not last?

Keith Knight,

Clifton, York.