My email to Leeds City Council Chief Officer for Parks & Countryside and Executive Board member with responsibility for the decision to remove Otley’s iconic and historic Maypole.
——-
Thank you for your speedy actions and responses today with regards the Maypole and your commitment to replace it.

Following the Exec member advice I am putting in writing a series of comments and questions to be answered with regards the current situation.

First of all, can I categorically state that I fully understand and support the reasons for the Maypoles removal and accept for the sake of public safety it was necessary to remove it. I also fully understand LCC being ‘twitchy’ with regards to the previous flagpole incident in March 2013 in the Memorial Gardens here in Otley.

I am however, keen to better understand the sequence of events leading up to and beyond the removal of the Maypole because as you are fully aware this has stirred immense anger and frustration here in Otley. The sudden loss of its most iconic and historic landmark has shook many residents.

Therefore as you can imagine residents are naturally asking how could the Maypole go from being ‘fine’ when last inspected by OTC (Asset Management Committee Minutes – May 28th 2012) to being of such a critical nature that it was deemed necessary to be removed on the same day as the inspection by your forestry team.

Accordingly, can you answer and/or confirm the following.

1) That the assessment made by the officer involved was not part of a planned inspection but happened upon chance. Notwithstanding this that a written report must have been produced and therefore could elected members have a copy of the inspection report.
2) I am led to believe the council used its statutory duty under the ‘Roads and Street Works Act, 1991’ and that Highways was responsible for this decision following advice from your forestry team. May I ask how does forestry officers ‘grade’ (for want of a better word) risk. Is there a recognised formula for example, or do individual officers ‘make’ the decision.
3) Has LCC ever undertaken an inspection of the large Maypole? If not, why not when it appears LCC ‘owns’ and is responsible for the asset.
4) If LCC is not responsible for the Maypole (and you and Richard believe you are not, although OTC and senior OTC Cllrs contend this) then I am led to believe that OTC requires a ‘license’ which may stipulate how often OTC are expected to inspect the poles and failure to do so may be a breach of that license. Can elected members see this license?
5) Can you ensure that the two councils involved will not get into protracted discussions about who owns and is therefore responsible for the Maypole, it’s associated costs and, going forward, a regime for regular inspection and maintenance?
6) You have committed to a replacement Maypole and elected members thank and welcome this. Will it be of the same stature, size and presence of the former one, after all, we would not want to lose our ‘title’ as the town with the tallest permanent Maypole in Britain.
7) Can you confirm a timescale when we would expect such a replacement to be available?
8) Can you assure residents that the historic weathervane and plaque outlining the Maypoles history are safe and will be returned to their rightful place on the ‘new’ pole?
9) Finally, why did no officer think it necessary to inform members either before or after the removal of the Maypole?

Many thanks & regards

Sandy

Cllr Sandy Lay

Otley & Yeadon – Leeds City Council
and
Otley Town Councillor – Danefield Ward