Steve Gillen wrote: =============== > Ah... That may be so, but in the case of Farsley Celtic he has more of a > reason - he is the elected councillor for Farsley & Calverley and so has > a right, nay, Duty to inquire as to what works are undertaken and the > impact upon the local community. >
true Steve, but there are rules regarding what he may or may not say in public etc prior to the planning application being determined. for a start there is the general code of conduct for councillors in Leeds: http://tinyurl.com/29r5cm and then there are national guidelines about councillors involved in planning issues. The former Liberal Democrat joint leader of the council Mark whatsisface for instance would have had difficulty being involved in a Leeds United planning application because he has business links with them. Oh and please note if you are going to comment (favourably or otherwise) about a planning issue that is going to be determined at committee or a local enquiry ensure that your comments are on "planning issues" alone or they will be ignored. 40,000 letters saying "we are Leeds we are leeds we are leeds" will go straight into the waste paper basket. Anyone seriously thinking about supporting Bates should look at http://www.planning-applications.co.uk/objection.htm which shows you how to do it properly. Bates as an applicant would have to meet all sorts of criteria too check out http://www.planning-applications.co.uk/major_application_checklist_pdf.pdf for the hoops our man with the sheaf of papers under his desk from the Wembley fiasco will have to slide through........... Betty (King Of Planning) _______________________________________________ the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list administrators accept no liability for the personal views and opinions of contributors. Leedslist mailing list [email protected] http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist DELETE THE FOOTERS WHEN REPLYING YOU LAZY SODS!!!! DELETE THE FOOTERS WHEN REPLYING YOU LAZY SODS!!!!
