Glasgow Shitty Council

[Ultima]

Originally Posted by indiekid

Political opinions belong in the Scottish Politics thread (where I can conveniently ignore them).

And Glasgow's Art scene is much better than Edinburgh's!

Be quiet.

[indiekid]

[RapidTaco]

That Urban realm article is absolute nonsense. They have clearly taken their lead from The Scotsman, quelle surprise!

The population proections have already been discussed in the Scottish Economy Thread.

[RapidTaco]

Originally Posted by Gommsta

Exactly.

Also, the projections are based on council boundaries, with Edi currently enjoying a far more "realistic" boundary than Glasgow. Everywhere with a G postcode should be part of Glasgow imo! Additionally the article doesn't take into account (nor can it) things like the 2014 games effect, which should open the city up to a whole lot of people who hadn't seen it/considered it as a place to settle.

All that said, it STILL has edi almost 100,000 short of Gla at that time. That's a big diffrerence in itself.

To summarise, the article is nonsense.

Indeed, 100,000 is the difference between the 2 cities as it stands at the moment (going by council boundaries) Hence, the article is baloney.

[Ultima]

Originally Posted by indiekid

picture older than internet itself

[indiekid]

True. It's almost as cliche as your political beliefs

[Targer]

There is a new book out by Jordin Yin entitled "Urban Planning for Dummies" that should be required reading for GCC's planning Dept. as a guideline for their work. Its probably a bit late with/for the damage that has been done in the last 4 decades perhaps 5. Almost the first estate this lot created "Penilee" worked out reasonably well because transport (trams/buses), shops (to some degree), and work (Rolls Royce, Hillington etc) were already in place. Many of the following estates were dismal failures. Although "Arden" phase one was excellent.

[M_Riaz]

CONVERTERS HAVE YOUR SAY ON PLANS FOR NEW WASTE HANDLING PLANT

ET

A PUBLIC consultation was launched today to give people the chance to have their say on a planned £154million rubbish recycling plant in Glasgow.

The community consultation will last 12 weeks and the company behind the plant will inform locals about the centre, which will turn waste into electricity.
The huge "energy-from-waste" facility will be built in Polmadie, in the South Side, and process up to 200,000 tonnes of domestic rubbish each year, as reported by the Evening Times last November.
Despite opposition from SNP and Green Party councillors, Glasgow City Council gave the site the go-ahead in December.It is due to open by 2015.
Steven Don, Scottish regional manager for sustainable waste company Viridor, said: "Our commitment is to support Glasgow City Council in achieving its ambitious aim of becoming one of Europe's most sustainable cities through enhanced recycling and recovering green energy from what remains."
Recycling bosses say the 25-year contract will save the city £254m and the equivalent of 28,000 tonnes of CO² every year.
The plant should generate enough energy to power the equivalent of 20,000 households and heat the equivalent of 8000 homes from the non-recyclable waste that remains.
Bosses have avoided calling the new plant an "incinerator" because it is different from traditional incinerators, which burned rubbish, releasing dangerous toxins in the air.
Although environmental campaigners and some engineers would call the waste-to-energy plant an incinerator, the plant will use hi-tech systems to turn non-recyclable rubbish into gas – and then burn that gas to create steam and drive electricity turbines.
Bosses say up to 250 jobs will be created, including 25 apprenticeships, and will boost local businesses throughout the building programme.
Mr Don added: "Our proposed centre represents the next generation of sustainable waste plants akin to what it is established in Norway, Sweden and Holland, built to the highest standards and providing significant benefits to the people in the surrounding areas and across Greater Glasgow, through jobs, investment and economic growth.
"We are keen to hear from the community. We are committed to listening and responding to questions or concerns and will continue to work hard alongside the city council to keep people informed as we progress."
Viridor, a recycling, renewable energy and sustainable waste management company, was awarded the contract to handle Glasgow's domestic residual waste after a 22-month tender process.
But environment campaigners oppose the energy-from-waste approach. They say such plants create an incentive for councils to produce more rubbish and recycle less.
The Unison, Unite and GMB trade unions also wrote to every Glasgow councillor urging opposition to the plant.
There will be a series of public events on June 18 and 19 at the Royal Concert Hall; June 21 at the Larkfield Centre; and June 22 and 23 at Toryglen Community Football Centre.
You can also have your say at www.transformingwasteinglasgow.com or at Twitter feed @viridor_glasgow

[gme]

Ex post facto consultation? Good to see GCC are keeping democracy alive as always...

This plant is a terrible idea.

[M_Riaz]

Why is it a bad idea GME ?

And just for good measure here is another one proposed for the southside of the clyde, planning went in this week.



12/00037/DC | Erection of waste management facility including recyclables recovery and energy from waste plant, with ancillary buildings, vehicular access and electricity substation | Land Opposite 337 Bogmoor Road Glasgow

http://www.peel.co.uk/scec

South Clyde Energy Centre

Peel Environmental is proposing to invest in the development of a £145million facility known as The South Clyde Energy Centre which would play a pivotal role in the management of up to 250,000 tons of waste per year.

The proposed South Clyde Energy Centre could help deliver one of Glasgow’s aspirational district heating zones, by potentially providing energy to a number of buildings around the site. The area is identified as a potential District Heating Zone in the latest version of the Glasgow City Plan.

There will be two core elements of the centre:
•A Recyclables Recovery Facility
•An Energy Recovery Facility


The Recyclables Recovery Facility, which will take up to 250,000 tonnes of residual (black bag) waste from households and businesses and remove recyclable materials, such as metals, plastics and glass, before creating a refuse derived fuel (RDF) from the leftover non-recycled waste. This will be mixed with RDF brought in from other facilities, which has already had recyclable materials removed, and used as a fuel in the Energy Recovery Facility.

The Energy Recovery Facility will use proven Energy from Waste (EfW) technology which is strictly regulated by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA).

[gme]

Originally Posted by M_Riaz

Why is it a bad idea GME ?

GCC has to produce a given quantity (as I remember, rather a large quantity) of non-recyclable waste every year and hand it over to Viridor. That doesn't incentivise us toward total recycling.

This is a 25 year contract, and in that time it's entirely feasible that we'll be able to recycle 50%-60% or more of our waste through other technologies, or just better collection processes. But there will be no point, since we'll have to meet our 'non-recycling' targets under this contract

Also, this is a private venture, which will run a core city service, which is always a bit worrying. I think that's why the unions are concerned.

Looking at the council minutes suggests that the facility will guarantee an 18% recycling rate from what's passed into the new facility - i.e. the otherwise non-recyclables. Better than nothing I suppose.

I'll admit I don't know very much about the technology that Viridor are proposing (a "Gasification Advanced Conversion Facility" for large particles, as well as anaerobic digestion for small organic matter), so I won't make the "it's an incinerator" argument.

[M_Riaz]

Clean Glasgow - Report

4 Docs with Several pages on each.

Purpose of Report:

To update Committee on the continuing work being undertaken via the Clean
Glasgow Initiative.

Recommendations:

That Committee note the contents of the report and continue their support of the
Clean Glasgow Initiative.

[milton]

This seems ill-advised.

Oatlands £1 property deal has turned into 'nightmare'

David Leask
Investigations Reporter

COUNCIL chiefs handed over an entire housing estate in Glasgow to a private developer without checking how much it was worth.

Bosses at Glasgow City Council have confirmed they did not value the neighbourhood of Oatlands and parts of nearby Richmond Park before giving it to a private housebuilder for a now nearly-stalled regeneration scheme.

Insiders admit that the development could now take years to complete.

The SNP MSP for Cathcart said: "As someone with very close connections to Oatlands – I was born there and both my parents came from there – I looked forward to a new beginning for an area that had been allowed to die a slow and painful death.

"Unfortunately it appears that due to the incompetency of Glasgow City Council this dream is rapidly becoming a nightmare for residents.

"I'm at a loss as to how the council could sign off on a contract without doing a full valuation of the land and considering what sort of deal they would get if, as proved the case, the economy slowed down and the development became less attractive.

"How were they to know if council taxpayers were getting a good deal without this valuation?

"This appears like another case of the council taking their eye off the ball."

Glasgow handed over Oatlands and a chunk of nearby Richmond Park to private housebuilder Bett in 2005 for a peppercorn, or symbolic, rent of £1 a year under a development deal, details of which they have refused to disclose.

The local authority, in response to a Freedom of Information inquiry, said: "There has been no council valuation of the land at Oatlands during or since 2004, nor any independent valuation known to the council."

The Evening Times today asked the council if it regretted this.

A spokesman said: " No – this scheme has continued to develop despite extremely difficult conditions in the housing and construction sectors, bringing a new neighbourhood and community facilities to Glasgow."

Bett sealed the deal at the expense of a rival consortium.

Their proposal, the Evening Times understands, was a 50/50 partnership profit sharing agreement.

The council and firm agreed a nine-stage development for the neighbourhood scheduled for completion in 2012/13, the current financial year.

So far the developer is coming to the end of only the second of those stages.

A spokesman for the council said: "There are 213 socially rented homes now built, with 255 private homes either built or under construction. This leaves 858 private homes still to be built."

Both Bett and the council blame delays on the credit crunch.

The spokesman added: "Clearly the housing and property market has changed significantly since this project began, so it is difficult to say when it is likely to be complete.

"However, it seems reasonable to assume that the housing market will improve significantly – compared to the conditions of the past five years – in the medium-term, so this should mean higher demand for these homes in the years to come and an acceleration of the progress made during the current economic downturn."

The Oatlands development was estimated to be valued at around £190m in September 2005 when leases where signed for the area.

Bett as part of its deal with the council was supposed to carry out a whole series of "public works" as its construction progressed.

These included diverting Rutherglen Road, which has been done.

The Evening Times three years ago revealed that Glasgow City Council had picked up the bill for this – £3m – as Bett could not do so.

The council now declines to comment on this transaction. "Information on the Rutherglen Road diversion is commercially confidential between the parties," said the spokesman.

Other public work has been completed, including the laying out and planting of Oatlands Square, landscaping the entrance to Dixon's Blazes Industrial Estate, riverside pathways and relocating allotments. Other public works, including improvements to Richmond Park, will take place when Bett speeds up the project.

The Evening Times understands sales of the homes ran at three a month in 2011 and were planned to be about the same last year, a time in which sales had "picked up", according to the council.

There is no suggestion that Bett has done anything wrong or breached the terms of its deal with the council.

Bett had no comment.

I actually don't disagree in principle with nominal-value sales to spark development, but not even valuing the land seems odd.

[Gap74]

Whilst this just seems plain stinky...

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/c...2537n.19918193

Tuesday 15 January 2013


City agency slated for £500k pay-off to boss

Stewart Paterson
Political Reporter

A pay-off of £500,000 to a regeneration boss in Glasgow has been described as "misconduct" and "wholly unsatisfactory" by Scotland's charity watchdog.

Glasgow East Regeneration Agency, which was set up to alleviate poverty, paid the sum in redundancy and pension enhancement to former chief executive Ronnie Saez in 2011.

After press reports of the payment, the Office Of The Scottish Charity Regulator investigated to check if it was in the charity's best interest.

A report published today by the regulator says the actions of the trustees in approving the pay-out "constituted misconduct" and they have been warned about their responsibilities.

Glasgow East Regeneration Agency (GERA) was one of five regeneration organisations set up by the council in the 1990s and had charitable status. In 2011 the five bodies merged into one, Glasgow Regeneration Agency, and GERA was wound up.

The report states trustees of the GERA board – which included councillors Jim Coleman, who was board chairman, the now former councillor Catherine McMaster and East End councillor George Redmond – approved the package.

It included a statutory redundancy payment of about £40,000 and pension contributions of around £200,000, in line with Mr Saez's terms of employment.

However, they also decided to augment his pension pot by an extra 6½ years, which was worth another £232,708 and was paid from the charity's assets.

According to the regulator, the trustees said this was to reward the boss in a similar fashion to senior council officials, even though he was never employed by the council.

Four weeks after the winding up was approved and three days before the winding up date, the board met to agree the enhanced package.

The regulator's report said: "We consider the actions of the charity trustees in this instance constituted misconduct in the administration of the charity.

"However, the payment has already been made and the charity is in the final stages of being dissolved. We find this position wholly unacceptable but, unfortunately, have no powers to recoup the funds for use in the charitable sector.

Mr Coleman, Ms McMaster and Mr Redmond and two others on the board attended the meeting to approve the package. The other three sent apologies, but did not appear to have accessed the agenda sent to them.

However, the regulator said this does not absolve them of responsibility, stating they should still have read their papers and made their opinion known.

John Mason, who referred the complaint to the regulator, said "Even if part of the payment was a binding obligation, the Charity Regulator is clear £232,708 was not a requirement.

"That money should have been helping poorer people, not richer people."

stewart.paterson@ eveningtimes.co.uk

[RapidTaco]

Originally Posted by milton

This seems ill-advised.

I actually don't disagree in principle with nominal-value sales to spark development, but not even valuing the land seems odd.

Bit of a non-story IMO. I'm no advocate for GCC or anyone else for that matter but anyone can see that had it not been for the spectacular crash of the housing market and recession then this development would more than likely have been completed already.

[milton]

Originally Posted by Gap74

Whilst this just seems plain stinky...

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/c...2537n.19918193

That ET article curiously manages not once to mention the party allegiances of the councilors in question. Considering even the Hootsmon managed, it's quite clear that this was completely deliberate a strategy by the red top.

Controversial £500k payment to Glasgow regeneration chief criticised as ‘misconduct’ by OSCR

By ANDREW WHITAKER
Published on Wednesday 16 January 2013 09:36

A PAYOUT of £500,000 to the head of a taxpayer-funded agency set up to alleviate poverty has been condemned as an act of “misconduct” and “wholly unsatisfactory” by Scotland’s charity watchdog.

The Glasgow East Regeneration Agency (Gera) handed the sum to former chief executive Ronnie Saez as part of a redundancy and pension package in 2011.

Mr Saez was paid a statutory severance payment of about £40,000, pension contributions of around £200,000 and a discretionary top-up of £232,708 paid directly from Gera, which was set up by Glasgow council as a registered charity.

The Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator (OSCR) began an investigation into the redundancy payment after a number of complaints about what was said to be a “high-value severence package” for Mr Saez, who had worked for the agency since it was set up in 2007.

Its report concluded that money which should have been spent helping to reduce poverty in the east end of Glasgow was instead used to fund Mr Saez’s substantial payout.

“A very considerable sum of the charity’s assets which should have been used to further the charity’s purposes was removed from the charitable sector by the charity trustees for the private benefit of a former employee,” the report stated. “We consider that the actions of the charity trustees in this instance constituted misconduct in the administration of the charity.”

The OSCR report went on to criticise the trustees for having approved the payment to Mr Saez “without first obtaining external professional advice about the advisability of the proposal”.

Last night, it emerged the councillors involved in the decision to hand over the £500,000 payout could also face an investigation by Scotland’s Public Standards Commissioner, after SNP MSP John Mason, who alerted the charity regulator to the payout, said he was considering making a fresh complaint.

“This report is a damning indictment of the Labour councillors who have blatantly misused public money in one of the most unacceptable ways possible,” Mr Mason said.

Gera was one of five local regeneration bodies set up by the council to tackle poverty in economically vulnerable areas, but in 2011 the five merged into Glasgow’s Regeneration Agency.

Three chief executives were made redundant, with new jobs being found for the heads of two agencies. The other two chief executives made redundant received payoffs of about £76,778.

Mr Saez’s golden handshake of £500,000 was agreed two years ago by five directors of the charity, including Labour councillors Jim Coleman, who was board chairman, George Redmond and former councillor Catherine McMaster.

Mr Saez was aged 50 when he was handed the £500,000 pay-off in 2011. His pay-off came out of a £2.2m pot to cover the

redundancy and pensions deals for 164 staff at the charity.

The trustees had claimed the award was increased to reward Mr Saez in a similar way to that of senior executives at Glasgow council, with his pension pot topped up by an extra six and a half years – worth another £232,708.

However, the charity regulator insisted the decision to increase the payment had been made without “sufficient justification that this action was in the interests of the charity”.

The watchdog said it had no powers to recover the £500,000, but ordered that the trustees of the charity, including the Glasgow councillors, take part in training to prevent “similar misconduct recurring”.

A spokesman for Glsagow City Council said: “The Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator recommended that members undergo training, which we will put in place.”

Mr Saez was unavailable for comment last night.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/scottis...oscr-1-2738244

[milton]

Originally Posted by RapidTaco

Bit of a non-story IMO. I'm no advocate for GCC or anyone else for that matter but anyone can see that had it not been for the spectacular crash of the housing market and recession then this development would more than likely have been completed already.

Absolutely, but I still don't understand why they would not have even valued the land before proceeding.

[Chris99]

Originally Posted by milton

Absolutely, but I still don't understand why they would not have even valued the land before proceeding.

I believe Scottish Govt departments are not allowed to dispose of land without first instructing a professional independent valuation. I would have thought there would be a similar requirement for local authorities as part of whatever procedures are in place to ensure proper handling and reporting of public funds. It's very odd.

[Due East]

Originally Posted by milton

That ET article curiously manages not once to mention the party allegiances of the councilors in question. Considering even the Hootsmon managed, it's quite clear that this was completely deliberate a strategy by the red top.



http://www.scotsman.com/news/scottis...oscr-1-2738244

This is scandalous but not entirely surprising. I've been doing some work with some 'registered' charities recently and the senior execs in these organisations have been drawing salaries that are VASTLY out of proportion to either the impact they are making or the number of staff they employ. To put it in perspective, a manufacturing exec I did work for (employing hundreds) was making £83k a year (for a well run well known drinks company) - meanwhile a smallish (mostly publicly funded) social enterprise was drawing a higher salary and doing fuck all (but somehow maintaining a positive public profile). In sum, a total joke.

Good on Cllr Mason for exposing this. This incompetent GERA clown is basically stripping opportunities from the poorest community in the UK with his 1/2 million theft. What happened to the days when an individual would be too shamefaced to take money they didn't earn or deserve.

Parasite.

[ForzaD]

Gordon Matheson.

I'm not going to say anything for now until I read the full story but tomorrow's papers will be an interesting read.