‘Help safeguard a much loved monument’ – crowdfunding campaign launched to fight Clifford’s Tower plan
‘Your contribution could help safeguard a much loved monument as it stands and provide a more optimistic plan for the future.’
The words of a crowdfunding campaign, launched on Tuesday (December 20) to support the fight against the new visitor centre at Clifford’s Tower.
To make a donation visit the CrowdJustice funding page
It follows last week’s dramatic intervention by independent councillor Johnny Hayes, when he told the full City of York Council meeting that he was launching a legal challenge to the development.
The council’s decision to grant English Heritage planning permission for the visitor centre could now be taken to the High Court for a judicial review.
Cllr Hayes has already put up half his teacher’s pension to pay for the early legal costs. Now he and his wife Frankie have launched a crowdfunding campaign to cover further fees.
They hope to raise £7,800 within 30 days.
The costs are broken down as follows:
Stage 1 – £7,800 to fund the “Permission Stage” where a judge considers the papers and decides whether it should go forward. The council could quash the original planning permission at this stage. If not it goes to
Stage 2 – £7,800 to prepare papers for the High Court hearings. Again the council could quash the decision. If not it’s time for
Stage 3 – £35,000 for the full High Court hearing.
English Heritage have won permission to build a concrete and glass building incorporating a souvenir shop, coffee bar and viewing area. This will be embedded into the base of the mound on which the castle sits.
The crowdfunding campaign states:
It is felt that it would be an offensively commercial addition to this much loved landmark.
Early backers echoed this sentiment.
So basically the Councillor announces in a blaze of publicity a couple of weeks ago that HE is mounting a legal challenge and then decides to let other people pay for it. How very noble.
He had very little to say when it was coming in front of the council for a decision and then rallies people who also had nothing to say before the decision once the decision is made. If it meant so much to so many people where were they when it mattered. Do they take this kind of retrospective approach to every legal matter? They obviously think due process and deadlines are immaterial and anything can be overturned and lots of money can be wasted on council decisions that mean nothing given they can be rescinded at a later date.