Report on Johnson House call-in published
The report of the three-person scrutiny team who investigated the proposed Johnson House sale has now been published as part of the Agenda for the 16th September meeting of Copeland Council's Executive.
A fairly comprehensive summary is given on the front page of tomorrow's Whitehaven News which you can read on their website here.
It is difficult to disagree with my colleague Alistair Norwood's description of this as a "damning" report, since it is clear that in a number of respects the arrangements to sell the land was mismanaged. The report also suggests a constructive way forward.
Among the concerns raised by the scrutiny group:
* The land should have been classed as Open Space and accordingly advertised as prescribed by section 123 (2A) of the Local GOvernment Act 1972.
* The Formal valuation of the land was not made until August 28 2008 – 16 days after the Executive considered its report on the land disposal. The scrutiny tribunal's report says “The Executive decision would have been better if it had been made in principle subject to the determination of the valuation of the land."
* The scrutiny tribunal were concerned about drainage issues
* They felt that inadequate consideration had been given and information provided to the Executive about the option of selling Johnson House the part of the site which they actually need for the extension and giving the residents the opportunity to manage the remainder of the site as woodland.
* "While this disposal was a special purchase under the council procedures due consideration should have been taken of the ability of the buyer to acheive the conditions of sale. It could be considered that it was an unreasonable request to ask a not-for-profit organisation to take over the management of a woodland when they do not have the staff or resources to do so."
The report makes a number of constructive recommendations to further explore the possibilty of selling Johnson House the land they actually need while selling the remainder of the site to local residents for them to develop as a woodland.
I hope the Executive gives sympathetic consideration to the recommendations of the scrutiny group. I think the council also needs to consider how some of the mismanagement of this sale came about.
A fairly comprehensive summary is given on the front page of tomorrow's Whitehaven News which you can read on their website here.
It is difficult to disagree with my colleague Alistair Norwood's description of this as a "damning" report, since it is clear that in a number of respects the arrangements to sell the land was mismanaged. The report also suggests a constructive way forward.
Among the concerns raised by the scrutiny group:
* The land should have been classed as Open Space and accordingly advertised as prescribed by section 123 (2A) of the Local GOvernment Act 1972.
* The Formal valuation of the land was not made until August 28 2008 – 16 days after the Executive considered its report on the land disposal. The scrutiny tribunal's report says “The Executive decision would have been better if it had been made in principle subject to the determination of the valuation of the land."
* The scrutiny tribunal were concerned about drainage issues
* They felt that inadequate consideration had been given and information provided to the Executive about the option of selling Johnson House the part of the site which they actually need for the extension and giving the residents the opportunity to manage the remainder of the site as woodland.
* "While this disposal was a special purchase under the council procedures due consideration should have been taken of the ability of the buyer to acheive the conditions of sale. It could be considered that it was an unreasonable request to ask a not-for-profit organisation to take over the management of a woodland when they do not have the staff or resources to do so."
The report makes a number of constructive recommendations to further explore the possibilty of selling Johnson House the land they actually need while selling the remainder of the site to local residents for them to develop as a woodland.
I hope the Executive gives sympathetic consideration to the recommendations of the scrutiny group. I think the council also needs to consider how some of the mismanagement of this sale came about.
Comments