Thursday, July 2nd, 2009 by stevejarvis
North Herts Conservative Councillors have blocked a Liberal Democrat proposal to make value for money one of the council’s top priorities. The proposal would have replaced the council’s existing priorities, making delivering better value an additional priority.
Liberal Democrat opposition leader Steve Jarvis said, “Coming the week after the council discovered that this year’s council tax rise was double what it needed to be and an Audit Commission report that highlighted the council’s poor performance on value for money, the decision by the Conservatives that this should not be one of the council’s top priorities is stunning. People in North Herts are paying far more than those in surrounding areas, yet the Conservatives don’t seem to care.”
“When we challenge them on this they say that they are being careful with the council’s money. The problem is that they are using our money to do it. Other councils can do better than this. Why can’t North Herts?”
Monday, June 22nd, 2009 by stevejarvis
Papers for this week’s North Herts Council cabinet meeting reveal that, after pushing through a 3.9% increase in Council Tax in February, the council has now discovered that the increase could have been much lower. The council spent nearly £200,000 less than expected last year – enough to reduce the council tax rise by 2%.
Liberal Democrat leader of the opposition on the council, Steve Jarvis said, “North Herts has one of the highest levels of council tax in the area and a track record of big increases. Now it is clear that this year’s rise could actually been much lower, with no impact on local services. The Conservatives who run the council say that they are being prudent, but it’s easy to be prudent when somebody else picks up the bill. It’s time they recognised that they are giving local people a bad deal and brought their performance into line with other councils.”
Liberal Democrats proposed further savings in spending on new computers and software at the time of the budget. Coupled with the savings that have now been discovered these could have resulted in a tax rise of less than 1.5%. Neighbouring St.Albans council, which is run by the Liberal Democrats, did not increase its council tax at all this year.
June 19th, 2009 by stevejarvis
Comment?
North Herts Homes’ appeal against the District Council’s refusal of planning permission has been allowed by the planning inspectorate.
This was always likely since the District Council really had no legitimate grounds for refusing the application.
Hopefully North Herts Homes will now make an early start on building so that six local families can benefit.
June 5th, 2009 by stevejarvis
Comment?
The result of the County Council election in North Herts Rural was:
Conservative 2281 (+0.0%)
Ian Simpson 2208 (+3.1%)
Green 379 (+3.7%)
Labour 255 (-7.1%)
Conservative majority 73
Thanks to all those of you who supported Ian Simpson.
If a quarter of those who voted Green had supported Ian we would have a much greener county councillor than is now the case.
Elsewhere in Herts the Liberal Democrats gained three seats and are now the official opposition. Unfortunately the Conservatives have a big majority so no doubt the road repairs will return to their nomal, non-election standard pretty quickly!
Although the roads are a County Council responsibility I don’t think that this can be allowed to happen so I will be taking up Ian’s campaign to get them to do the job properly all year round, not just for a couple of months before the elections.
If you want to know more about this please contact me at steve@sjarvis.cix.co.uk.
May 25th, 2009 by stevejarvis
Comment?
In 2004, when Ian Simpson was our County Councillor, Herts County Council agreed to build a footpath in Hitchin Road, Weston between Post Office Row and Friars Road as part of the village travel plan.
When village travel plans were later abandoned I was told that the money had been reserved and the scheme would go ahead once negotiations with house owners were complete. Now he has been told that there was never a “commitment” to build the path and that it was “just an aspiration”.
Aparently the County Council has just discovered that the path would cost more than £100,000 to build, which is odd, since that’s what they told us 5 years ago. We need to find what happened to the money and get it re-allocated back to Hitchin Road.
May 16th, 2009 by stevejarvis
Comment?
On 4th June there are elections for the County Council and the European parliament.
Ian Simpson, who was our County Councillor until 2005, will be standing again in the County Council election. Ian succeeded in getting the County Council to back local projects like the pavement in Hitchin Road in Weston and proposals to deal with the poor state of many roads in the area. He was also working to get the money that is spent on public transport used to provide a service that was more useful for the small number of village residents who depend on it.
Unfortunately since 2005 many of these initiatives have been abandoned or simply forgotten. In the case of roads things have got a great deal worse
Perhaps this is because we have been represented at the County Council by somebody who lives in Royston and represents Royston on the District Council, rather than a villager who understands the area.
If, like me, you think something must be done about the state of local roads, that we need to provide more facilities for young people and end the massive rises in Council Tax that we see every year I hope that you will support Ian Simpson on 4th June.
I know that Ian will be calling on as many local people as possible over the next few weeks but you can find more information about what he has been doing and what he plans to do by visiting his web site at www.iansimpson.mycouncillor.org.uk
Friday, May 1st, 2009 by stevejarvis
At a meeting of the council on Thursday the Conservatives running North Herts Council dismissed a bad report from the Audit Commission claiming that the Audit Commission got it wrong. They rejected a Liberal Democrat proposal to recognise that the Council was falling behind other districts and needed to do better.
Steve Jarvis, Liberal Democrat leader of the opposition on the council, said, “The Audit Commission report clearly identified that North Herts council’s performance and value for money is worse than most other district councils. They reached this conclusion after studying the council’s performance and comparing it will other councils where they have conducted similar exercises . The Audit Commission is an independent body that has no reason to conclude that North Herts Council is worse than other councils unless that’s what the evidence shows. Rather than accept that there is a need to do things differently and that the Audit Commission is providing helpful information the leader of the council told us that the Audit Commission is wrong and that everything is fine.
“Many people will think that this sort of complacency is one of the reasons why North Herts Council performs more poorly than it could.”
Comments made by the Audit Commission in their annual audit letter to the council include
- Performance has largely stood still whilst other councils have improved
- Value for money is improving but sill falls short of levels achieved at most other authorities
- Over the last three years the council has also achieved a below average rate of improvement. This indicates that the council’s performance has not advanced at the rate of most district councils.
April 23rd, 2009 by stevejarvis
Comment?
North Herts Council’s planning commitee voted to refuse planning permission for the proposed Weston wind farm.
Speaking after the meeting Steve Jarvis said, “In some ways I was saddened not to be able to support the plan, but having looked carefully at all the evidence there were just too many problems. The biggest issues from my point of view are the site’s location in the Green Belt. Whilst we do need renewable energy there is no compelling reason why this should be done in the Green Belt. If the Green Belt means anything we should not be allowing development there that can easily take place elsewhere.”
“Other important considerations are the prominence of the location in the local landscape on the Weston Hills, were it can be seen close up and the failure of the technical details submitted with the application to demonstrate that there would be not be a problem with noise for nearby residents. There also appear to be some problems with light aircraft safety, although some evidence that only came to light very late may affect this.
“I would like to thank the many local people who contacted me about the application, some of whom raised some very significant questions that I was able to ensure were considered by the council.”
April 15th, 2009 by stevejarvis
Comment?
The Council’s planning officer has recommended that the planning application for the wind farm should be refused for six reasons. In summary these are:
- The site is in the green belt.
- The technical information submitted on the potential noise of the turbines is not adequate.
- The proposal would have an adverse effect on Graveley and Rush Green airfields.
- The turbines would be closer than the recommended distance from Hatch Lane and a public footpath.
- The turbines would have an unacceptable impact on the Weston conservation area.
- The proposal would have a significant adverse impact on the local landscape due the distinctive features.
You can see the full report at http://www.north-herts.gov.uk/item_5.1_-_weston_hills_wind_turbine.pdf.
It is, of course, up to the Planning Committee to decide at its meeting on 23rd April to decide whether to agree to these recommendations.
The meeting is at 7.30 in the Council Chamber at the Council Offices in Gernon Road, Letchworth. The meeting will be held in public and there will be an opportunity for members of the public to speak for and against the application before it is debated by the committee. Normally this is limited to 3 minutes for those for and 3 minutes for those against, but I understand that this may be extended in this case.
March 5th, 2009 by stevejarvis
Comment?
Since there seems to be some confusion about my position I think that I should make it clear that I have supported neither those who are opposed to the wind farm application nor those who are in favour of it.
I have taken this view because I believe that it is right to consider the matter on its merits and to maintain my ability to vote on the application if this is required (I am a substitute member of the planning committee and therefore will only have a vote if certain other members are unable to attend). Councillors are not allowed to vote on planning applications if it appears that they have made up their minds before hearing all the evidence.
Steve Jarvis
