Sir, - It has come to light, via a member of the public, that negotiations have been taking place since November 30 between Richmondshire District Council and Croft circuit about an out of court settlement to be paid to Croft circuit. These monies are to cover costs incurred relating to the noise abatement notice, which was issued and subsequently rescinded, by the council.

The council officers involved were of a very senior position. The discussions were held in secret without the knowledge of the ward member. In fact the costs and details were not to be made public, there was even to be a confidentiality clause.

The officers agreed on a sum of £40,000, allegedly, and said they would call a resources urgency sub-committee meeting to endorse it.

On December 6, that meeting took place and the background papers were sent out two days beforehand to only five committee members. Yet again the ward member was not informed. The meeting was to be kept secret; everything was to be put on "pink paper" and all documents were to be collected in at the end of the meeting. The vote for the previously negotiated sum of money to be paid was passed 4:1. The one councillor who voted against suggested that the background papers should be shown to the ward member.

This took place via a senior officer with legal knowledge who instructed the ward member, Coun Jane Parlour, that the details of the meeting and the sum of money could not be disclosed, otherwise there could be a potential legal comeback from Croft circuit.

This matter should not he kept secret as it is tax-payers' money which is being used.

Why should an important issue like this be voted on by only five members?

Why the use of an urgency sub-committee meeting - what was the urgency?

Why the cloak and dagger approach?

Why should secret meetings be required and used, and why the need for a confidentiality agreement?

These and probably many more questions need to be answered.

What is going on in Richmondshire District Council?

Jennifer M Wilson

The Green,

Hurworth-on-Tees,

Darlington.

Bump misery

Sir, - I refer to yet more calls for installing speed cushions.

In my opinion they are too prevalent and another case where the majority has to suffer for the actions of careless motorists. I have a passenger with a bad back, and no matter how slowly I go, there is always a nasty jolt, therefore I now look for alternative routes.

I also practise car sympathy by avoiding manholes, potholes etc. If you bump up and down over these humps/speed cushions repeatedly, I am sure there is a risk of damage to suspension and tyres. How many accidents do we hear where the vehicle has gone out of control?

In addition the speed cushions have been narrowed to allow buses to straddle them, as there is a known risk of repetitive back injury.

Where I was born, and still have elderly relatives living, in Salters Lane South in Darlington, there are nine speed cushions. I now have to pick an alternative route to visit them which involves missing these humps and takes me through a large housing estate.

In the case of Skeeby, where I have done civil works in the village, I would say a lowered speed limit of 30 mph together with a seven-ton weight restriction on the bridge should be sufficient, as most accidents involve large vehicles.

B R WASTELL

The Avenue

Fairfield

Stockton on Tees

Sound offer

Sir, - In all D&S references to the toilet in the high street at Northallerton, it is claimed they need to be demolished because they are structurally unsound. I presume that the roof is not designed for crowd loading. When I consider designs I have prepared for conserving buildings, ranging from tottering Norman ruins to unsound 60s' tower blocks, I cannot conceive of any defect in such a structure that could not be resolved.

If disabled access is not the issue, there is no reason why the semi-buried facilities could not be refurbished to form an unobtrusive toilet block just where it's wanted.

Our office is within a stone's throw of the old toilets. We would be pleased to offer, without charge, three outline structural solutions to get around whatever is preventing the preparation of a decent architectural scheme.

ROBERT THORNLEY-WALKER

Director of Structural & Civil

Consultants Ltd,

Northallerton.

More Letters to the Editor on page 26