13th June 2010 Council sends coaches in wrong direction More >>

11th June 2010 Local paper 'airbrushes' Jerwood More >

16th April 2010 - Council blunder costs taxpayer £20,000 More >>

22nd February 2010 - Foreshore Trust agrees land swap More >>

15th January 2010 - Foreshore Trust applies for land swap More >>

9th December 2009 - Hastings Borough Council grants planning permission. More>>

Now you see it, now you don't

Left, as it is (15th June)

Right as it appeared in the Hastings Observer, 11th June.

Council blunder costs taxpayer £20,000
A council blunder over the Jerwood plans has cost the taxpayer more than £20,000.
The original application for the redevelopment of the Stade had to be withdrawn after a legal challenge from a local resident.

He claimed Hastings Borough Council (HBC) officers had not addressed traffic concerns around the site and the council decided to submit a new application, approved in December.

The High Court ordered the council pay all the legal fees – revealed this week as £20,679.

Matthew Elliott of the Taxpayers' Alliance said: "It is despicable that such huge legal fees have arisen because the council was incompetent when it drew up the initial plans."

Paddy Stephenson, of Whittlewood Close, St Leonards, who has fought a long-running campaign against council planners, was also amazed at the amount.

"How many more times will the taxpayer have to fork out hard-earned money when planning officers make mistakes?" she said.

"If this occurred within the private sector those responsible would receive their marching orders. In the case of the council, a rap on the knuckles will probably suffice.

"If planning personnel are not up to the job they are paid to do, they should be removed before we are faced with further costs," she added.
The amount came to a light thanks to a question posted on the council website.

Kevin Boorman, who oversees the Jerwood project, said the council did its best to keep the costs down.

"I am obviously disappointed it has cost us £20,000 and I would have preferred to spend the money in other ways," he said.

"We chose not to fight the challenge in court and did all we could to contain the legal costs.

"I would make the point that this was a technical challenge over a procedural point and that the application was again agreed unanimously when it was re-submitted in December."

Mr Boorman refused to be drawn on whether anyone had been disciplined over the bungled first application. But he said: "When anyone takes any successful action against us we review our procedures and there are always lessons to be learned."

The Taxpayers' Alliance called on HBC to find savings elsewhere in the project to make up for the legal bill.

15th January 2010 - Foreshore Trust applies for land swap.

9th December 2009 - Hastings Borough Council grants planning permission.

In order to reach an unbiased result SOS requested that the application be heard by a councillors who had not not sat on the original board (you wouldn't want the same jury if a case was being re-heard in court would you, and planning boards are quasi-judicial) Unsurprisingly consent was granted, Cllr Daniel even trotted out the same inane remark "you wouldn't demolish an art gallery to build a car park would you" - time will tell.

The decision to re-use what was pretty much the original planning board is in direct contravention of Hastings Borough Council's own planning protocol where it states;-

“17. Members shall not participate in the consideration of a planning application if to do so would give the appearance of bias. The test for bias is: “Would the fair-minded observer, knowing the background, consider that there was a real possibility of bias?” It is not the Member’s view of whether they are biased that is relevant here but the view of the independent observer. Perception is important and can lead to judicial challenge in the High Court.”

paragraphs 15, 16 and 23 are also relevant

The complete protocol is here or can be found on HBC's website

19 November 2009 Government minister gives thumbs-up to Jerwood plans (as reported in the Hastings Observer by Richard Gladstone).
Ms Hodge compared the Jerwood to the Business Design Centre (built in 1861 as the Royal Agricultural Hall in Islington and known locally as "The Aggie".

To set the record straight

At the previous exhibition, the HBC survey forms were not prominently displayed and indeed SOS were not even aware of them until early afternoon at the Saturday exhibition. When we became aware of them we asked people signing our petitions outside if they had filled in the survey forms inside. The universal response was essentially 'what form?'. From this we concluded that only those members of the public who were clearly in support of the combined proposals were being directed to the forms. When we asked people to return to the exhibition, having told them where the forms were, or to ask for one, many of them declined as it was something of a fight to get back inside - anyone who was there will remember that it was very busy indeed that day.

For those reasons, at the recent exhibition we took the initiative and brought some of the HBC forms outside so that if members of the public had not filled one in already, they could do so outside - it's called customer service! Interestingly, and as with the previous exhibition, most of those we asked while they were signing our petitions responded 'what form?'

Whilst an unknown proportion of those signing our SOS petitions and HBC forms outside had not, at that point, visited the exhibition, by HBC's own admission the plans were essentially unchanged. They already knew what was on offer from before and were still opposed to the plans, as before.

We should also point out that we had a few pro Jerwood people complete the HBC forms outside and we can assure you that we put all of their forms in the ballot box as well.

20th October 2009 - New planning application lodged. Planning web site is here, Application No. for the 'Gallery' is HS/FA/09/00576 rest of the site is HS/FA/09/00577. You can object online by following the links on the planning pages. Missing from the file is the draft lease, it was up there briefly then removed - we have a copy here

Online Polls conducted by the Hastings Observer asked the question "Are you pleased that the Jerwood Gallery plans have been approved" - 79% of respondents said "No". Earlier the Observer asked "Are you backing the Jerwood Gallery on the Stade?" - 72% of respondents said "No".

The minutes of a meeting of  the Management Committee of the Hastings  Old  Town  Residents  Association (HOTRA) held 3/6/09 reveals 132 paid-up members - not that they were ever asked if they supported the gallery. We already know that 82% of the fishermen are against it, that the Old Town Traders are against it, that there were 487 signatures on three petitions against it, so who is actually in favour?

Since Sea Space, the 'regeneration quango' became involved in Hastings the town has worstened by a further seven places in the Index of Multiple Deprivation - At its height Hastings & St Leonards ranked with the most fashionable of Victorian resorts and the local economy prospered through the first half of the 20th century. From such heights Hastings’ fortunes declined and it is now England’s second most deprived resort town after Blackpool and one of the most deprived areas in the South East region. The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) 2007 shows that the Borough of Hastings is the 31st most deprived Local Authority out of 374 LAs in England. This position has worsened by seven places since the IMD 2004 moving it from within the 20 percent most deprived in England to within the 10 percent most deprived. para 2.3 page 7, Stade Impacts Assessment

A film view

www.thatsfor.me.uk

Yahoo Discussion Group

Hastings Reality

The Jerwood Foundation

Wordpress

The Tate at St Ives