Dear Oakham Town Council Members
Here is the second statement from a member of the public, I am inviting members of the pubic from my ward to witness your bullying of me at each meeting.
Cllr Lucas walks around our ward discrediting me every day, she reports the same to RCC. Constant lies!
You are all a disgrace and should all go. You have all done everything you can to stop me serving these people. Locks on doors, bullying, banning me from the office.
I am pleased the public are now coming forward to support me.
Personally I don't think the council can be fixed with the current members and clerk.
It would be better scrapped.
You have a disgusting control over the local press, so much so they will never publish a negative comment or news item.
From
Cllr Martin Brookes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 22:02:38 +0000
From: j.********@btinternet.com
Subject: co-option meeting
To: MartinJBrookes@hotmail.com
To whom it may concern
Having attended last weeks "extra" meeting on June 16th to see for myself exactly what goes on at the town council I find it bewildering that my recollection of the events differ greatly to the proposed minutes. I recall being very surprised at the wall of silence that greeted Cllr Brookes upon proposing that the press and members of the public be excluded from confidential discussions regarding co-option of two new Councillors. NO-ONE seconded or commented at all. An embarrassing silence and stony expressions all around. Motion obviously not carried. I presumed - in my naivety - that the proceedings would have to begin with members of the public in situ. How wrong can one be. Apparently at Oakham Town Council after ignoring Cllr Brookes proposal another member (Cllr Alf Dewis - according to Council website photo) can see fit to announce that maybe the public shouldn't be at the discussion after all and without further ado - no seconding or discussion - the motion was somehow carried and out we went. I do not object to being excluded but to the way Cllr Brookes was totally ignored - it was petty and childish. I was also at a loss as to why it was an extra meeting of the Council when Standing Order 76e clearly states the decision on co-option will be taken at the next scheduled meeting but I can see that standing orders don't always apply (mobile phone - Cllr Swiffin) and rules can be disregarded at will when it suits. This was my first experience of a meeting and it was a sham.
Regards
Mrs * H******
Member of public and council tax payer
