Protestors against Cirencester Town Council's proposed sale of the town's oldest standing building have made a breakthrough that should scupper any sale.
April 10, 2006 (Press Release) --
Campaigners against the sale of Cirencester’s Norman Arch have made a major breakthrough after uncovering important evidence and legal arguments that should secure the future of the town’s oldest standing building in the ownership of the town and in the “care” of the Town Council.
“We are very excited about this breakthrough” said a NAG spokesman “and we will be revealing details of the evidence and argument at the public meeting on May 3rd, at present we are preparing the information with our legal team”.
The Town Clerk Andrew Crook, former Mayor Cllr Deryck Nash and Cllr Robin Bourne, who have been spearheading the proposed sale, have each asked NAG to come up with a legal reason why they should not sell the gift to the town, “Now that we have a legal basis and the resources to provide specialist legal advice, we feel will be able to satisfy this request and avoid having to seek legal redress from the courts”.
The Town Council retaining ownership and responsibility for the Arch does not obviate the need for local people to engage with the council to help find better ways of managing the Arch for the community. “NAG members would much rather be working in partnership with the Town Council and other organisations to help improve and enhance the town, such as litter picking, grant applications, community event organisation by donating time, fund raising activities and research than trying to stop them doing something they will later regret, we hope that a climate for this to happen will soon prevail.”
“We are very excited about this breakthrough” said a NAG spokesman “and we will be revealing details of the evidence and argument at the public meeting on May 3rd, at present we are preparing the information with our legal team”.
The Town Clerk Andrew Crook, former Mayor Cllr Deryck Nash and Cllr Robin Bourne, who have been spearheading the proposed sale, have each asked NAG to come up with a legal reason why they should not sell the gift to the town, “Now that we have a legal basis and the resources to provide specialist legal advice, we feel will be able to satisfy this request and avoid having to seek legal redress from the courts”.
The Town Council retaining ownership and responsibility for the Arch does not obviate the need for local people to engage with the council to help find better ways of managing the Arch for the community. “NAG members would much rather be working in partnership with the Town Council and other organisations to help improve and enhance the town, such as litter picking, grant applications, community event organisation by donating time, fund raising activities and research than trying to stop them doing something they will later regret, we hope that a climate for this to happen will soon prevail.”
Email
Print
SPAM
