Hall options

In 2001, Borrowby Parish Council took advantage of the Countryside Agency's Vital Villages initiative to prepare a Parish Plan. The plan was published in 2002 and a summary delivered to all households in the parish. A village meeting considered the points identified and action groups formed to address specific issues. The parish council and village hall committee, both reflecting many sectors within the village, had obvious roles to play but other individuals were nominated and approved at the meeting.

Before this, the village hall committee had its own plans to refurbish the existing hall and improve access, but its location is in a hollow and this limits its potential for good disabled facilities and any extension, as it is surrounded by a higher village green and a raised parking area with a maximum of 12 spaces mainly occupied by local residents to avoid roadside obstruction.

Other groups looking at playspace and a community shop also faced difficulties and this prompted the idea of a joint approach and a wider debate and ultimately, as your report says, an alternative site became available where all objectives could be achieved if funding could be raised.

This would also allow current services to continue without interruption in the interim, and an overall increase in village parking of 32 places. This joint approach has already resulted in a temporary sub-post office opening at the end of January in the hall after a gap of two years. It could move to a new site if required.

Throughout, progress has been reported at parish council meetings.

Although actively involved, the village hall committee has made people aware at meetings and open days, that its trust deed requires that if a proposal is to be made to "discontinue the use of the trust property", a village meeting must be called and ... "the decision shall be confirmed by three-quarters of such inhabitants present and voting at such a meeting". Only then could we proceed and decide upon disposal of the current site.

We are trying to be responsive to the wishes of the village as expressed in the parish plan. We are now awaiting the outcome of the outline planning application before taking any further decisions.

Any future village meeting at which a vote could be called for will be well publicised - including by house-to-house notices.

NORMA SUTTON

On behalf of Borrowby Village Hall Committee

The Green,

Borrowby.

Wasted money

Sir, - If Hambleton District Council was a little more in touch with the real world it could have saved itself a lot of money.

In King's Gardens, Sowerby, the council is ripping out hedges (where does the wildlife go?) and installing drives, wooden fences and dropping kerbstones.

How much is this costing us? Why not just take up all the grass verges instead. There would then be no costly grass to mow during the summer months. No place for dogs to foul and consequently for young children to stand in.

Residents would, as they have always done, maintain their own hedges (wildlife happy and housed). Wider roads would then have been created for the emergency services. Parking bays would have been formed and any resident who wished to park in their own garden would do as everyone else has done and install a drive themselves at their own cost (saving the council more money).

The wooden fences will have to be maintained which will cost more money. We could then perhaps have more efficient street cleaning than at present.

Why not take a leaf out of Richmondshire District Council's book and go one better. The street cleaners should be allowed to issue dog foulers and litter louts with fixed penalty fines (more money). It would not take long for offenders to get the message and realise that leaving dog excreta and dropping fitter would not be tolerated.

Thirsk flower displays look wonderful, but at times the eye wanders to the rubbish in the streets and this, I'm sure, must lower the enthusiasm and morale of the dedicated volunteers who maintain these displays in all weathers.

J BREEDS

King's Gardens,

Sowerby.

Protect the Green

Sir, - I write with concern at the furore over residents and others parking on the fringes of the village green in Piercebridge.

Much more alarming is the knowledge that the chairman of the council has endeavoured and is still pressing on with her efforts to persuade Darlington Borough Council to rescind the by-law which carries a penalty of £20 for parking on The Green.

It may be difficult to implement the charge but it is, and has been, an effective deterrent from the days of "free for all". Does the chairman really look forward to the return of the days when every weekend, summer and winter, bank holidays and late evenings, an ice-cream van would drive on to The Green and park?

This would be followed by up to 40-50 cars coming and going. They would park, while occupants consumed their purchases, leaving litter.

Do all residents who overlook The Green(90pc) want this spectacle to return? There is not the slightest doubt it would, if parking were no longer prohibited.

The problem with residents' parking can, I'm sure, be settled without forfeiting the protection of the "no parking" by-law. Rather than rescind this hard fought-for law, the penalty could be increased in line with inflation.

F KEIGHLEY

The Green,

Piercebridge.

Samsung disgrace

Sir, - The situation at Samsung is a disgrace. Someone has taken advantage of the ordinary British taxpayer.

Agricultural land cost about £4,000 an acre when Samsung was given permission to build at Wynyard. As light industrial land, the Samsung facilities are worth millions. Samsung already had a plant at Billingham - the old Rediffusion plant. The Billingham Industrial Estate was half empty.

Samsung could have easily expanded there. Instead it was given permission to open at Wynyard on a greenfield site. Samsung has made a fortune in the property market by developing a greenfield site. Samsung is cashing in those millions by leaving.

We should ask whichever authority granted planning permission if it placed any conditions on the grant relating to the proceeds of any sale? If not why not?

If we are to reclaim any money given to Samsung in grants we should look no further than the proceeds of the sale of the Wynyard site.

Perhaps if Mr Blair acts quickly we could nationalise the site by Act of Parliament paying Samsung in compensation only the amount paid for the land at first instance and the cost of the buildings.

This needs a public enquiry.

NIGEL BODDY

St Cuthberts Place,

Darlington.

Excessive

Sir, - You reported (D&S, Jan 2) that Stokesley Parish Council was to set a tax precept of £50,000 up from £47,000 this current year because of the increase in population and dwellings. On January 13 the published parish council accounts advised after all payments a balance of over £98,000.

The parish council carried forward a balance of £81,801.59 from the year 2002/03 into this current year and £66,358.43 for the year before that.

£50,000 is not only unreasonable it is totally excessive and can lead to unwarranted expenditure.

How is it that Great Ayton Parish Council intends to precept £38,500 (2004/05) when the population and demands are similar to Stokesley?

Stokesley electors have been denied a contested election of parish councillors (apart from a casual vacancy, through resignation) since 1987, thus 20 years will have passed without a councillor being selected by democratic voting up to 2007.

Great Ayton Parish Council was most wise not to increase the number of councillors permitted by reference to their population to 11 members as Stokesley did a few years ago.

Prior to the introduction of the community charge and council tax, householders paid on the rateable value to a maximum upper limit of 2 pence X rateable value of the property. Very few parish councils worth their salt asked for as much as the 2 pence, and most householders in Stokesley and Great Ayton would then have been contributing between £2 and £5 per annum towards the precept.

Interestingly Yarm, with a much larger population, is to precept £48,200 and has £24,000 reserves.

R W BARKER

Ladycross Farm,

Stokesley