quote I think we are all consistent in saying that only 2 people shouted in this way at the meeting. Both were residents who feel passionately about the site & the lack of engagement but, unfortunately their point was lost in their delivery & ended up being counter-productive. Both of these were residents & not Green Party Activists (& yes, I do know this for a fact)
I think it's really important that the truth is told on this - I am not part of a group of activists & nor were they. Nor were the Police called: they were present at every meeting from the start. unquote
If those two individuals are local residents then lord help us,you forgot to mention the sordid comments on leaving the church. Yes the police are present at the meetings ,which also tells us a lot,but you forgot to mention the fact that they had to take to the stage to issue a threat of eviction. Can you please tell me how many people that signed your petition actually live on roads that border on the RFHS site.Because these are the people that will have to bear the consequences as to what happens to this site,and that includes me. At the second meeting, as I recall, we agreed to keep the woods and the two fields on that side of the cinderpath, as they are,ie green. The big question is, what do we do with the rest of the site.You may or may not know,that the first day after the school closed its doors for the last time,and the council in all its wisdom did not have security in place,a couple of fire engines had to attend the site.So unfortunately we have to take into account, the brain dead of the area.So could you please go into more detail as to what you would actually like to see happen on the walled site,saving it for the local community,sounds good, but to me as a local resident it is just not specific enough.At the moment the walled site stands as just a monument to a failed school.
First up, I'm not condoning any person behaving badly - I said in my previous post that it was unacceptable - What I am saying is that I / we are not part of an organised group of agitators & infiltrators as has been portrayed. The individual you refer to was just that, an individual. Nothing to do with me or anyone else involved with the petition. Yet we are all being grouped together as one, with reports implying that our only motive in this campaign is political mischief. Rubbish.
I think you might also agree that the questioning at the meeting was composed other than the incidents you refer to - certainly the video confirms that to be the case - despite many feeling extremely frustrated.
Secondly, you ask how many petition signatures are from local residents? The answer is the overwhelming majority. You're welcome to see the forms if you doubt it. Also check out the comments on-line. They're mainly Highfield South, Thorpe Bank, Hurst Bank, Bankside, Old Chester Rd, Rock Lane West & Ravenswood Avenue plus plenty from the "Poets Avenues" (Browning, Spenser etc) & Highfield Road who regularly use the fields. Others who have signed are people who have family members who live around the site, Football players who use it for games & others are ex pupils so they too have a keen interest in its future.
My family has lived in Rock Ferry since 1939 & my house actually backs on to the field - as do other family members' properties - so I can assure you I share all your concerns about getting this decision right. (Our experience includes having a garden fence stolen & made into a bonfire by drunken youths so I am well aware of issues with the site in the past)
That's my whole point. You ask what we would do? Well for starters, we'd like to discuss some options. That's all we've asked from the start but have constantly been blocked in any efforts to engage in discussions.
We actually do have some options & we would equally be happy to discuss the Councillors' plans too. This is what we thought was the point of the proposed Residents' Executive suggested by Mr Field at the 13th February meeting.
However, despite being told at this (13th February) meeting that we would all meet before the next March meeting & then report back to everyone, nothing at all happened. We kept asking to meet but residents were first told that they could only join if they'd actually spoken at the meeting on the 13th Feb, then several others were refused access to the committee at all, despite overlooking the site & being Campaign Founders. Finally the first Executive meeting was called at short notice for 3pm on the day of the last meeting (13/03) when most people were at work or picking kids up. Therefore only 4 people could attend. Hardly representative of the community. Those who did attend were also told that was it - there would be no more public meetings after that.
My final point would be that once the land has a change of status agreed & it is declared fit for development, what then happens, once it's sold, is down to the developer - not the Council, not us. The Councillors can promise anything but if the planned development won't sell, the developer will build what will sell...&, yes, they may save the fields this time but what happens next year when they want a bit more money? That is why it is so important that we sit down together & get this right. Maybe agree a Legal Covenant to protect the land? If you still have any doubts about the potential risks in not reaching a satisfactory legal outcome; look at the situation with the Dell School where the residents were promised "Riverside Luxury Apartments" yet a decade on are looking at a derelict litter filled site.
Seriously, we're on the same side. We too just want to try & preserve the site to best suit our community & we also very much understand that means something needs to happen with the school buildings. That's why I started the petition in January so we residents could be consulted about its future - & I was pleasantly surprised that so many others felt the same. That's where the petition numbers came from & I must also add that when we surveyed residents from all adjoining roads again in the second week in March, not a single person had changed their mind.
Liverpooltiger Do not forget that the local community have already had a vote of sorts on RFHS , they voted with their feet and sent their children to any other school but RFHS. The Dell site was foremost in my mind at the last meeting,but unfortunately, due to the shambles at the start of the meeting and then Frank Fields illness, I could not get the question asked. I am well aware that the only reason local residents are being asked about the site, are due to the new Government rules that came in,in about November 2014.After attending all 3 meetings,all I can say at the moment, is,that process is in a bit of a mess,to put it mildly.Is that the impression that will be conveyed to the Secretary of State , I wonder.That should concentrate all minds,councillors and local residents.
![[Linked Image]](http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/9940/334766523006ccdm3.jpg)
Please do not adjust your mind, there is a slight problem with reality
