Is Sheffield Council about to sell off bits of Graves Park YET AGAIN?

[Eater Sundae 12]

As I just pointed out, you had to know to look for things to do with Cobnar Cottage. Do you search every day to see if the council is planning to do things with it out of due diligence, or did you wait until AFTER you knew they were going to sell it and then found that publication. And that is my point. There was radio silence until they had marked it for sale.

 

I would have thought that the time that people needed to know was at the time of the Council Meeting that made the decision to sell, and the people that needed to know were the Friends of Graves Park, and any similar organization that had shown an interest in the whole issue of the cottage. But I don't see that the Council needed to advertise it to everyone. Provided such as the friends of Graves Park knew, that would be good enough, as they could then put it out to wider interest if they were concerned.

[sgtkate 10]

Graves Park is a charity so the accounts are online, take a look and find out how much the park costs the people of Sheffield and how the money is spent.

http://apps.charitycommission.gov.uk/Showcharity/RegisterOfCharities/DocumentList.aspx?RegisteredCharityNumber=510841&SubsidiaryNumber=0&DocType=AccountList

 

I've not been 100% against the selling of the property as I'm well aware of the costs and changing times. I think 1978's post summed it up quite well. My main issue, like so often, is how the council handles things like this. Time and time again decisions are seemingly made behind closed doors with little consultation or explanation and we are left scratching our heads. I just wish our council, who answer to us ultimately, would seriously improve their communication techniques to the average Sheffield resident. It's just inexcusable these days to not have an easy to access communication medium.

 

Ideally, I'd much rather the property wasn't sold, and was refurbished as utilised by the council for other purposes. The stonemason idea sounded quite good. But sometimes you have to have pragmatism and if selling this cottage allows for other park improvements then I'm happier.

 

---------- Post added 14-01-2016 at 14:20 ----------

 

I would have thought that the time that people needed to know was at the time of the Council Meeting that made the decision to sell, and the people that needed to know were the Friends of Graves Park, and any similar organization that had shown an interest in the whole issue of the cottage. But I don't see that the Council needed to advertise it to everyone. Provided such as the friends of Graves Park knew, that would be good enough, as they could then put it out to wider interest if they were concerned.

 

Hmm, not sure I agree. I see your point, but technically the Park belongs to everyone and the Friends of Graves Park are just a small group of campaigners and have no special status that I'm aware of. Based on the number of signatures on the petition to keep it, I'd say a lot of people in Sheffield are interested and would have appreciated more information being released well ahead of a sale being decided.

 

Maybe I'm being unfair to the council, maybe they did think they'd advertised it enough and had made efforts to keep people informed. Just seems hard to trust them.

[Blackbeard 10]

I've not been 100% against the selling of the property as I'm well aware of the costs and changing times. I think 1978's post summed it up quite well. My main issue, like so often, is how the council handles things like this. Time and time again decisions are seemingly made behind closed doors with little consultation or explanation and we are left scratching our heads. I just wish our council, who answer to us ultimately, would seriously improve their communication techniques to the average Sheffield resident. It's just inexcusable these days to not have an easy to access communication medium.

 

Ideally, I'd much rather the property wasn't sold, and was refurbished as utilised by the council for other purposes. The stonemason idea sounded quite good. But sometimes you have to have pragmatism and if selling this cottage allows for other park improvements then I'm happier.

 

---------- Post added 14-01-2016 at 14:20 ----------

 

 

Hmm, not sure I agree. I see your point, but technically the Park belongs to everyone and the Friends of Graves Park are just a small group of campaigners and have no special status that I'm aware of. Based on the number of signatures on the petition to keep it, I'd say a lot of people in Sheffield are interested and would have appreciated more information being released well ahead of a sale being decided.

 

Maybe I'm being unfair to the council, maybe they did think they'd advertised it enough and had made efforts to keep people informed. Just seems hard to trust them.

 

I have not bought a copy of the Sheffield Star for years but I know they have been covering the story for years, here is just one of the stories. http://www.thestar.co.uk/lifestyle/culture/sheffield-s-graves-park-cottage-set-to-be-sold-off-1-6954049

[999tigger 10]

I think the nub of it is that Graves Park is a recreational facility given to the people of Sheffield and to be run by the Council. How much should it be self funding and financing and how much should the Council be financially supporting this with its general responsibilities of providing open spaces and recreational facilities. The cuts mean its not hard to notice they might be looking for other revenue generating opportunities.

 

Btw already looked, but its nice these days you cna just look up so much information online, be it the Charity Commission or Friends of Grave Park.

[sgtkate 10]

I have not bought a copy of the Sheffield Star for years but I know they have been covering the story for years, here is just one of the stories. http://www.thestar.co.uk/lifestyle/culture/sheffield-s-graves-park-cottage-set-to-be-sold-off-1-6954049

 

Yes, a story brought about from the Friends of Graves Park and not an example of the council openly saying that we plan to sell off this cottage, we think we can do this legally because of..., and when it sells it will fund the following projects dependant on sale price...

 

We are arguing a minor point. I find the lack of communication from the council frustrating and it makes me distrustful of them. Then in turn I doubt their motives in all things, like selling off a cottage they seem to have full legal rights to do so. I want the council to make more effort to involve people like me who do care and do try to find out information about how things are going. I thought the cottage had tried to be sold in the past and the council were told they weren't allowed. That was the last I'd heard until before Christmas.

[999tigger 10]

It was a different cottage. They were told it was illegal, but that could have been a procedural defect rather than it being illegal to sell the cottage per se. Youd have to look at the ruling to find out more.

 

The one advantage Graves park does have is its right next to the main Uni campus and i bet they do have influence and financial muscle.

[Eric Arthur 10]

I have not bought a copy of the Sheffield Star for years

 

That's because we use the internet now. Here's how to disseminate news properly with a simple cut and paste.

 

http://www.facebook.com

http://www.twiiter.com

http://www.linkedin.com

and the holy of holies, http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/news where I note that the council are today claiming that they secured a Lottery funding for the General Cemetery.

Edited January 14, 2016 by Eric Arthur

[Robin-H 11]

Yes, a story brought about from the Friends of Graves Park and not an example of the council openly saying that we plan to sell off this cottage, we think we can do this legally because of..., and when it sells it will fund the following projects dependant on sale price...

 

We are arguing a minor point. I find the lack of communication from the council frustrating and it makes me distrustful of them. Then in turn I doubt their motives in all things, like selling off a cottage they seem to have full legal rights to do so. I want the council to make more effort to involve people like me who do care and do try to find out information about how things are going. I thought the cottage had tried to be sold in the past and the council were told they weren't allowed. That was the last I'd heard until before Christmas.

 

I agree. I feel slightly conflicted by the message recently put out by the Council.

 

On the face of it I understand their reasoning and I think if this was properly outlined from the beginning and there had been proper community consultation involving the Friends of Graves Park then I very much doubt the council would have received this negative response.

 

However, the lack of communication and the previous attempts by the council to sell off Graves Park, (which have been found to be unlawful), have made it difficult not the approach this with a certain level of cynicism.

 

The statement by the council where they emphatically state that they have no plans to sell off any more park also rings a little hollow when they have attempted to do exactly that in the past..

[Jonny5 10]

I've always gotten the impression that SCC have a contemptuous opinion of the people they are paid to serve.

[1978 14]

From the accounts; "If expenditure is greater than income the variance is borne by Sheffield City Council and not brought forward into the following year." About £250k each year.

 

There's the challenge, to increase the Trust's income (and/or reduce expenditure) to such a level as to eliminate the need for Council support. As long as that is required the park remains vulnerable. At present the income of the Trust is less than half the annual costs required to maintain the park.

 

If we want to help we need to be applying constructive thinking to improve that balance, and in ways that will hold good for many years. Spending more money without very early covering income isn't practical in the current economic climate.

 

Have a look at the latest accounts; (They came out upside down for me - perhaps that's an indication of the problem!)

[atticus 97]

I've always gotten the impression that SCC have a contemptuous opinion of the people they are paid to serve.

 

 

It may be true on a local level but its definitely true on a national one.

[Vrsaljko 196]

I've always gotten the impression that SCC have a contemptuous opinion of the people they are paid to serve.

 

Hardly surprising when the same cretins vote them in time and time again. They know they can essentially do what they want because it won't matter.