Wednesday, 23 February 2011

Action to Tackle Speeding on Glen Estate

SPEED CHECKS: Local campaigners Tom Redmond, a member of the Glen committee, and Chris Beverley, joined two PCSOs during a recent exercise on Glen Road.

The following article appeared in this week's Morley paper.

Estate's speed crackdown

Speed checks have been carried out on Glen Road following work carried out by the Glen Tenants and Residents Association.

The subject of speeding traffic on the estate has been raised a number of times at the group's meetings and its secretary, Jean Redmond, contacted Morley's local policing team to request that checks be carried out using mobile units that display the speed of a vehicle on its approach.

The mobile speed-monitoring device displays a smiley face to vehicles that are driving within the speed limit, and an unhappy face to those that are speeding.

Vehicles that are caught travelling at above the 30mph speed limit also receive a warning letter from the police.

Local campaigner Tom Redmond said: "We are grateful to the police for their help with this issue and we as a group will continue to work with the police and local residents to do all we can to address the problems of speeding vehicles coming travelling through the Glen Estate."

Thursday, 10 February 2011

More on the Precept

Pictured: The Town Hall in healthier times.

This excellent letter was published in this week's Morley paper.

Value for money?

I had a wry and hearty chuckle at the spinning riposte from Steve Jones – a professional accountant and an amateur (unpaid) politician – regarding Morley Town Council's precept in January 26's paper.

This was in reply to a letter sent the previous week by one of his predecessors, former councillor Paul Jaimeson.

Noting that firstly, it is election year in 2011 and secondly, he didn't actually refute the analogy of the television and how it could be paid for, Coun Jones then proceeded to lecture everyone chapter and verse about how the annual precept (£175k) represented value for money for Morley residents.

Coming from a public body comprising 24 members, and only approximately 50 per cent of those members who actually pay that precept – Coun Jones himself doesn't – is pretty rich.

However, what should be of even more concern to readers and thrifty Morley residents is that now the legality of an industrial tribunal is over, how can he justify that just under 25 per cent of that £175k annual precept has been used in a pay-off for the former town clerk when her contract w
as terminated unlawfully by the council in a previous year?

Moreover, senior councillors have not denied that figure when that size of pay-off has been suggested to them either.

Could Coun Jones, who, remember, doesn't make a contribution to the precept and under whose watch this happened, call that value for money?

Finally, if there is a sizeable amount in reserves, why doesn't the council reduce the precept in these very difficult times?

Stewart McArdle