Comments on: Ownership of Quayside in Cambridge http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/ownership-of-quayside-in-cambridge.html Cambridge, United Kingdom. Fri, 10 Sep 2010 10:35:30 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Richard http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/ownership-of-quayside-in-cambridge.html#comment-4608 Richard Wed, 10 Dec 2008 02:15:43 +0000 http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/ownership-of-quayside-in-cambridge.html#comment-4608 Cllr Howell, a member of the Strategy and Resources Scrutiny Committee, has revealed in the above comment that the council has decided to do something. <a href="http://cherryhintonroad.blogspot.com/2008/12/future-of-quayside.html" rel="nofollow">Writing on his own site</a> he states he and his opposition colleagues have been considering: <blockquote>"whether the deal sold the City down the river, so to speak. "</blockquote> City residents will have the opportunity to judge their success when the details are made public - presumably following successful registration(s) of land with the land registry. Cllr Howell, a member of the Strategy and Resources Scrutiny Committee, has revealed in the above comment that the council has decided to do something.
Writing on his own site he states he and his opposition colleagues have been considering:

“whether the deal sold the City down the river, so to speak. “

City residents will have the opportunity to judge their success when the details are made public - presumably following successful registration(s) of land with the land registry.

]]> By: Chris Howell http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/ownership-of-quayside-in-cambridge.html#comment-4606 Chris Howell Wed, 10 Dec 2008 00:50:00 +0000 http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/ownership-of-quayside-in-cambridge.html#comment-4606 Richard, You certainly have a keen interest in these matters! My observations: I would certainly agree that the discussions fell within the scope of those for which the press and public should and were legally justified in being excluded at this stage - because if this hadn't been the case the Council's position in a legal dispute could have been seriously harmed. As a result of the meeting, the Executive Councillor (Cllr Cantrill) decided on a course of action, and it won't be possible to disclose any details until negotiations have been finalised and signed off with the relevant parties. However, as well as expressing the concerns you mention above about the (lack of) prior consultations with interested parties and commenting very fully on the details of the situation, both myself and I understand Cllr Herbert are concerned to ensure that as many details as possible about what has been agreed are made available as soon as possible. Interest parties can then judge whether the decision made by the Executive Councillor can be justified in light of the facts of the situation and the interests of Cambridge, and if there are any lessons to be learnt from the Councils actions or lack of in the past and going forwards. Cllr Chris Howell Richard,
You certainly have a keen interest in these matters! My observations:
I would certainly agree that the discussions fell within the scope of those for which the press and public should and were legally justified in being excluded at this stage - because if this hadn’t been the case the Council’s position in a legal dispute could have been seriously harmed.
As a result of the meeting, the Executive Councillor (Cllr Cantrill) decided on a course of action, and it won’t be possible to disclose any details until negotiations have been finalised and signed off with the relevant parties.
However, as well as expressing the concerns you mention above about the (lack of) prior consultations with interested parties and commenting very fully on the details of the situation, both myself and I understand Cllr Herbert are concerned to ensure that as many details as possible about what has been agreed are made available as soon as possible. Interest parties can then judge whether the decision made by the Executive Councillor can be justified in light of the facts of the situation and the interests of Cambridge, and if there are any lessons to be learnt from the Councils actions or lack of in the past and going forwards.
Cllr Chris Howell

]]> By: Richard http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/ownership-of-quayside-in-cambridge.html#comment-4601 Richard Tue, 09 Dec 2008 15:45:10 +0000 http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/ownership-of-quayside-in-cambridge.html#comment-4601 A <a href="http://www.cambridgerivertour.com/pinsentmason.html" rel="nofollow">submission from Scudamore's solicitors to the council</a>, dated February 2008 and published on the <a href="http://www.cambridgerivertour.com/" rel="nofollow">Save Independent Punting Website</a>, shows Scudamore's solicitors making clear to the council that: <blockquote>The City Council is not the landowner at Quayside and as such it is, as a matter of fact and law, unable to demand payment of rent from our client;</blockquote> Clearly obtaining some kind of payment or rent from Scudamore's might be something the council is looking to do. The amount of business rates (if any) paid by Scudamore's is not in the public domain and might also form part of any deal, although councillors do not have direct control over this. The council charges residential boaters on parts of the Cam a fee equivalent to Band A council tax; so it is possible that an analogous arrangement with respect to business rates could be being sought. A submission from Scudamore’s solicitors to the council, dated February 2008 and published on the Save Independent Punting Website, shows Scudamore’s solicitors making clear to the council that:

The City Council is not the landowner at Quayside and as such it is, as a matter of fact and law, unable to demand payment of rent from our client;

Clearly obtaining some kind of payment or rent from Scudamore’s might be something the council is looking to do.

The amount of business rates (if any) paid by Scudamore’s is not in the public domain and might also form part of any deal, although councillors do not have direct control over this.

The council charges residential boaters on parts of the Cam a fee equivalent to Band A council tax; so it is possible that an analogous arrangement with respect to business rates could be being sought.

]]>