Martin Brookes Oakham

Saturday, February 04, 2017

Oakham Town Partnership Town Manager Unauthorised Expenditure and Agreement by Oakham Mayors

Dear Adam Lowe (Chairman of Oakham Town Council)

I understand that the chairman of Oakham Town Partnership has resigned over the matter
of the appointment of the Town Manager.

Oakham Town Council has on file a letter from a Rutland County Council Officer, this letter was also distributed to all members of
the council, in the letter Two people are named as being involved with the negotiations which nearly saw a fraud being committed.
Leicestershire Police said no offence had been committed because the £62,586.50 had not been diverted in full from the council
to the Oakham Town Partnership as intended. If it had not been for the Officer at Rutland County Council carrying out checks
and finding the money should be paid to Oakham Town Council we may never have known it existed.

The two people named in the letter are the former Mayor Alf Dewis and The Current Mayor Adam Lowe.

At no time did the council give the authority to either of those members to act on behalf of the council.

Last month we received a letter from the Oakham Town Partnership chairman in which she states Oakham Town Council and Rutland
County Council met more than once with the Town Partnership to agree the appointment of the Town Centre Manager and this has resulted
in the council receiving an invoice for £31,293.25

The Town Council did not approve this appointment or expenditure. Therefore that expenditure is unlawful and the council is not obliged in
law to settle this demand.

As ex Cllr Alf Dewis found when he resigned, he had to repay money back to the council money he was not authorised to spend.
Even then he lied about what the money was spent on.

You are named in Rutland County Councils letter which makes you part responsible for the agreement and the unauthorised expenditure, should you
not be considering your position on the council before Wednesdays meeting or are Rutland County Council lying?

The only people I know lie is the one gone and yourself when you lie about me and the notice board conduct.

I would hope the Clerk would be able to distribute the letter from the RCC officer at the meeting when I mention it at the meeting
or I could go through my mountain of papers from last year to find my copy?

I would also like a copy of the agreement not seen or approved by this council. Made by Rutland County Council and Oakham Town Partnership and the person (s) claiming to represent our council so they can be held responsible for this large invoice. It wpuld prove who is telling the truth about the
matter.

In the meantime I have decided to submit a conduct complaint based on the evidence of that letter and the local government acts that
forbid any Councillor from acting and incurring expense without the authority of the full council.
It will then be up to the monitoring officer to investigate and bring this sorry mess to an end.

From

Martin Brookes

Conduct Complaint sent to Monitoring Officer at Rutland County Council

From 2014 to July 2016 Cllr Adam Lowe and Cllr Alf Dewis
Both had meetings with Rutland County County Council and the Town Partnership, to agree 106 payments from Hawkmead, this is confirmed in a letter sent by a Rutland County Council officer to the Town Council last year. I believe both Cllrs may have entered into a deception to obtain a total sum of £62,586.50 fraudulently for the Oakham Town Partnership If it had not been for the vigilance of another of Rutland County Council officer, The Town Council would not have known anything about this money. The Clerk at the time Richard White even thought Rutland County Council had sent the money in error and offered to return it to Rutland County Council Cllr Lowe and Mr Dewis both acted without the authority or knowledge of the council which is a breach of the local government act. The Town council has been sent a invoice from the Town Partnership totally £31,293.25 The council has not authorised the agreement mentioned or this expenditure. It is my belief that Cllr Lowe and Mr Dewis breached of the localism act this matter should therefore be investigated by Leicestershire Police.

Oakham Town Council May Walk Away From Taking Over Cemetery From Rutland County Council

Oakham Town Council May Walk Away From Taking Over Cemetery From Rutland County Council

It would appear mini Alf Cllr Michael Haley has messed up again.

It hard to believe he actually read his election propaganda or maybe he just cut and pasted it from another good cllrs leaflet?

After publicly voting twice over the last year we are being asked to vote on the cemetery at next Wednesdays meeting in secret. If it goes the way Cllr Michael Haley wishes because he makes things personal, then I think people will certainly start questioning the purpose of this dreadful pointless town council.

I ask the residents in Oakham SE Ward who I represent, how they would like me to vote at
next Wednesday's meeting?

Do they want me to vote for us to continue with the taking over of the cemetery maintenance?
And do they want me to vote for the town council to stop paying Rutland County Council any
money towards the maintenance of the cemetery?

Dear Michael Haley

Firstly can I thank you for providing us with a report The first from the working group in almost a year.

I do not see the need for the recommendations to be exempt. Once the vote is cast I am told the outcome will be public knowledge.

The outcome may even result in questions being asked about the purpose of the town council, So I can see why you might what to keep

this all hidden from the public.

I have spoken to Rutland County Councillors today I did not discuss the content of your report with either.

One of the County Councillors did mention some points and offers made by RCC which you have indicated in your report, that Councillor

is not a member of any working group connected to the cemetery, It would appear RCC have shared all information progress or lack with all their

members and therefore it appears they don't consider this a confidential item.

I was pleased to read you had told Rutland County Council that the working group has no delegated powers to make decisions.

Then I am not pleased due to the working groups failure to bring questions from RCC to council. In March 2016 this council agreed my proposals

which were quite clear, the working group was meant to bring regular updates to council and seek the authority to act. Some of the demands made upon RCC included in your report I had not seen before and may not have supported those demand's. The working group has acted unlawfully many times I read the council wants RCC to do etc. The Council did not make any of those demands. It was my understanding that the role of the working group was to find out what was required and then for council to give instructions to the group as we went along. Cllr Stan Stubbs can be heard on the video saying I am not doing as he tells me. It is very clear that you and him and the rest of the working ignored the councils instructions and just went away and did your own thing ignoring the councils minuted instructions. Not my instructions.

Your random use of confidentiality is very confusing. You have published all the confidential terms provisionally agreed between the Council and The Ark Association. Now the public will know the Ark Association a profitable company is only paying £100 a month for the first year. A good return on a property valued at over £1,000 a month in poor condition. Its great that the Town Council is seeking a good return on its publicly owned assets.

From

Martin

Oakham Town Council Agenda Delay The Mayor Cllr Adam Lowe comes to the rescue

Oakham Town Council Agenda Delay The Mayor Cllr Adam Lowe comes to the rescue

This month like so many our Agenda Packs have not arrived within the legal time of three clear working days.

The Mayor Adam Lowe had to go into the office and copy and hand deliver summons and agenda
packs to all councillors today.

Of course he would not have to do this if the council stopped being difficult and sent them
electronically when requested or permitted Cllrs to collect them from the office.

I have read mine and it is shocking to find a unknown Councillor or Councillors have acted unlawfully by holding meeting and agreeing the appointment of a Town Centre Manager
without full council support according to a letter and invoice received from the partnership
for £31,293.25 if this demand from OTP is truthful then one or more councillors are set to receive
a very large bill. The law states if a Cllr agrees something with out full council consent they are
responsible for the full costs not the taxpayers.

This makes Ex Mayor Alf Dewis's unlawful conduct look quite petty in comparison.

I wondered when the old guard was gong to finally do something as big as this. The old guard
is tiny but it causes big problems for Oakham Town Council.

Dear All

Thank you to Adam for reprinting and delivering our summons and agenda's so we received them within the legal time frame.

Now I have received the pack and read it I find the some of the content astonishing and raise the following points.

1. I am pleased to see The Ark Association only requires a 15 year lease and not 99 years.
I was always against a 99 year lease being given for free. So I am not to unhappy that The Ark Association
no longer requires it.
Cllr Michael Haley in my opinion is not competent enough to sort this lease out for the council.
He has provided two reports both public the second contains the full details of a previous exempt item why?
I am now pleased the public can see the good deal the Ark Association is being given.

2. Appendix C We were told Councils are not covered by the Financial Services Compensation
Scheme and this is why for over a year I have raised a concern about the council only holding three accounts. The CA Rutland
has over 20 account to protect its money. Although I now welcome that the council may instruct the Clerk to find more accounts I question
why Cllr Michael Haley is giving us incorrect information regarding the Financial Services Compensation Scheme.

3. Item 9 I can not believe the council after displaying a notice in the window and notice boards is even considering spending public
money advertising about a conduct issues that happened over a year ago. Some might say enough is enough. I ask why have the council remained silent about Cllrs Haley and Stubs conduct findings? When is the Council going to give up singling me out and put as much energy and money into actually doing something constructive for the community.

The local paper refused to publish the councils previous notice due to its defamatory content. This proposed advert is also defamatory and if the council is to place it as an advert I suggest they seek legal advice first. I was told that the advert does not contain my name, Can I refer members to a finding by the conduct department of Leicestershire Police when one of there own officers was publishing comments about me online it was found he had discreditted the police service and even though he had not named me the public knew who he was referring to and I suggest if the council goes ahead and seeks publication of this proposed advert it will be doing the same. Why can we not just move on and deal with the serious issues of council like this next point. Of course if the council is wishing to continue this pointless campaign then they could post it on the Laughing Stocks Blog published by a former councillor and support by this council, described by the district Judge as Homophobic Crude and Crass.

4. Oakham Town Partnership Manager.
This is a very serious issue.
As a town council we never authorised any member of this council to agree the appointment of a town centre manager, attached to the agenda item is a invoice and letter from the partnership which clearly states a meetings were held in 2016 and agreements were made by Rutland County Council, Oakham Town Council and the partnership.

The town council did not authorise these meetings.
No agreement to employ was put to full council, so this makes any agreement unlawful. I would like to know who made this agreement on behalf of the council as they are legally responsible for this invoice totally £31,293.25 and future invoices.

If agreements were made unlawfully by a member of this council I wonder why The Town Partnership has failed to provide us with copies. If we had copies we would know who to send the bill onto.

We have never formally met or been introduced to the town centre manager employed by OTP and we were not invited to the meeting they chaired at the castle a few weeks ago.

I have personally met the town centre manager and find her approachable, many business's in the town or residents do not have
a clue as to who the town centre manager is. So even if we were legally obliged to settle this invoice, I would still object as it is very poor value for money. The events are so few it would have proved cheaper for the partnership to pay a normal event organisors at past rates.

I also find it astonishing that the Manager is only now holding meetings to seek ideas and plan for events to be held this year, did the partnership not learn anything from their past mistakes like the car rally. Most public events need to planned at least a year in advance so the appropriate organisations can be consulted, example Leicestershire Police require 12 month notice for event like the failed car rally. (race)

I am also concerned that The Partnership has provided a copy of the Hawksmead Deed and the town council has made the entire document available to the public when the public copy made available on Rutland County Council website has signatures redacted.

5. Item 21 The cemetery, From my understanding of this Cllr Michael Haley has messed up again. In the past we have received letters from RCC stating members of the working group had breach the Town Council Standing Order. From the 11 page exempt report I can see why, The group
has made demands of Rutland County Council which the council did not request. There has been a total lack of reports from the working group until
now. Although I can see the possible need to keep the report exempt, I do not see any need for the recommendations and the outcome of any vote should be exempt and I would ask the clerk looks into the legality of that. I don't think we need to exempt the item the recommendations are very clear and we should vote on them ASAP. meaning I don't think we need to publically discuss the content of the report.
I can also see why we have not included something in the budget for next year. I would say that was predetermined by the few councillors who run this council behind closed doors.

From

Martin

Friday, February 03, 2017

Leicestershire Police Rutland South beat report detailing crime for last month.

Leicestershire Police Rutland South beat report detailing crime for last month.

Rutland South beat report detailing crime for last month.

4/1/17 – Burglary dwelling – Main street, Lyddington x 2

4/1/17 – Theft from unattended motor vehicle – Aldgate, ketton

5/1/17 – Theft from unattended motor vehicle (number plates)– Spring lane, Glaston x 2

5/1/17 – Theft from unattended motor vehicle (number plates) – Crocket lane, Empingham

5/1/17 – Theft from unattended motor vehicle (number plates) – Orchard close, Lyddington

10/1/17 – Damage – Loddington lane, Belton

18/1/17 – Assault – Tixover

30/1/17 – Assault – Braunston

Leicestershire Police current Neighbourhood Priority is targeting hare coursing along the A47 corridor from Uppingham to Tixover & parts of the north beat area from Langham towards the A1. Last month, members of the public reported to police numerous reports of hare coursing. As a result several people and vehicles have been identified as taking part in this illegal activity.

Leicestershire Police would encourage you all to be vigilant and report any persons you suspect as acting suspicious. Take note of any vehicle and registration number they are in and ring the police on 101.

Remember to visit the Rural Watch website, via the below link for rural crime updates and a whole host of crime prevention advice.

www.leics.police.uk/ruralwatch

PC Paul Le Pla is retiring from Leicestershire police in April after 30 years’ service

He has been the Rutland south neighbourhood officer for almost 8 years now and says he has thoroughly enjoyed his time here.

"I will miss not being a bobby anymore, but will miss the people more. I thank you all.
At this time"

The few times I met PC Paul Le Pla I found him OK and don't believe he was one of the
corrupted Rutland team. I wish him well in whatever he does next.