Is Sheffield Council about to sell off bits of Graves Park YET AGAIN?

[Vague_Boy]

It seems that selling it is an obvious solution.

 

If a little short sighted.

 

 

And you believe everything the council tells you ?

 

Fraud and corruption? Sounds interesting. Tell us more.

[bassett one]

they cannot be trusted,because if they if they sell one building or piece of land ,this will enable them to set a president and sell sell sell till theres just a playground left,why not just stop wasting money on various park entertainments that could be paid for by the friends groups instead of using council money.trust me this scc cannot be trusted

[Anna Glypta]

But why do you think any other party would be better, do you really think tories are interested in local parks?

 

So there have been 3 attempts to sell off chunks of Graves Park. Which party or parties were the ones who attempted the sales?

[WallBuilder]

hang on. three attempts, I thought there had been the two concerning St. Lukes. maybe some-one could itemise the three attemts as bullet points so that the info isn't lost in a sea of council bashing . I'm also noticing a rather interesting lack of responses to most of my questions such as the two buildings which look as though they could of been connected to the park and now who owns them if people are now saying that selling properties could set a precedent..

The old mill in Millhouses park has been derelict for years and although the friends of Millhouses wanted something to happen they have never had the financial wherewithal to do anything it took a lottery grant to get that scheme moving. I would imagine that Graves park with it's greater financial outlay on upkeep simply haven't the fundds to do the discussed building up but still think it should be leased offf rather than sold, even if the rent was not paid till the new occupier got the place in a fit standard.

[andygardener]

I'd have thought the stipulation that you can't sell it is simple enough. Here is a park, for free, but you can't ever sell it. Do you want it? Yes.

 

End of chat.

 

The council need to learn to read basic English instead of wasting our money in legal fees unsuccessfully trying to do the morally indefensible even if they suceeded. Sack every officer concerned in this disgrace.

[Longcol]

Guidance from the Charity Commision on selling land can be found here.

 

http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/detailed-guidance/land-and-property/selling-charity-land-in-more-detail/

[Mr Bloom]

I'd have thought the stipulation that you can't sell it is simple enough. Here is a park, for free, but you can't ever sell it. Do you want it? Yes.

 

End of chat.

 

The council need to learn to read basic English instead of wasting our money in legal fees unsuccessfully trying to do the morally indefensible even if they suceeded. Sack every officer concerned in this disgrace.

 

Agreed. But I think they already have got away with the indefensible - charging people to park in the park.

[HotPhil]

Can they be sneaky and lease the land (not sell it) to someone who'll knock the property down and build a new dwelling?

[Womerry2]

Can they be sneaky and lease the land (not sell it) to someone who'll knock the property down and build a new dwelling?

 

Leasing for a new build might set an unfortunate precedent. How about a 30 year repairing lease for the existing building, with the income ring-fenced for the upkeep of Graves Park?

[Cyclone]

Yes.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

It is pretty straightforward subterfuge. You strip assetts from the charity and then substitute the money you get from the sale for the money that is in budget that the council is obliged to provide for the park's upkeep. Someone should perhaps ask how the council have in the past accounted for money that the kiddie-winkies put in that milk churn at the animal farm. Or as it used to be know the council money box.

 

Then there is the other part of the subterfuge as the charitable deeds for Graves Park specifically exclude the council from selling any buildings that are in the park.

 

If they specifically are not allowed then that's pretty clear.

 

And I do agree that it makes little sense to sell of capital assets in order to fund running costs, do that for long enough and you have no assets to run. A self defeating spiral.