The Save Oxford Campaign

We urgently need your help in two ways:
1. Can you please write to City Councillors to object to the way the council's legal department is punishing local residents for expressing their views by pressing for such heavy and excessive charges. Please ask them to write to the Chief Executive, Marion Headicar, and demand that she hold an investigation into the matter. You will find a list of current councillors and their addresses on the back of this sheet. Below is a summary of some of the injustices.

2. We would be very grateful for any contributions you could make to help towards the legal costs. Cheques should be made payable to the `Council for the Protection of Rural England' and sent to: The Save Oxford Campaign Box 164, 266 Banbury Road Summertown
Oxford OX2 7DL
Oxford City Council Attempts to Bankrupt Local Residents

In August of last year, four residents of Oxford sought to launch a Judicial Review against Oxford City Council. They believed that City Councillors had been wrongly advised by the City Council Legal Department, and were intimidated into accepting a planning application for an enormous study centre (Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies) to be built on the Magdalen College sportsfield The Lord Mayor, Maureen Christian, herself admitted on cable television that the proposals broke local planning regulations, yet insisted that the plans go ahead. 98°/a of Marston residents petitioned opposed the scheme, and a number of statutory bodies, such as the Countryside Agency and the Council for the Protection of Rural England, also strongly objected to the proposals.
On 11`" December 2000, the local residents attended a hearing in which they sought permission to hold judicial review. Their request for a judicial review was turned down, therefore no judicial review hearing was held.

When seeking permission for a judicial review, they understood that if they lost, they would have to pay the defendants' costs. According to numerous sources, including our solicitor and QC, and court reporters who see these cases every day, the normal claim for costs is up to £5,000, although in one or two cases £7,500 has been awarded. Oxford City Council demanded £ 16,000.
For several months, their solicitor tried to come to an agreement with the Council's Legal Department. At one point, they offered to pay as much as £12,000, The Council's response to this offer was to increase their claim to £21,000! They now have only until the end of May to agree an out?of?court settlement, but the City Council are refusing to negotiate. If this dispute over costs goes to court, both the Council and ourselves will incur yet further legal costs.Oxford City Council only spent £3,650 to pay for their QC. Had they made a reasonable claim for their own expenses, they would have asked for an amount in the region of £15,000. Instead, they spent a further £1,480 to have a costs draftsman, increase their claim from £16,000 to £21,000. £16,000 of this total is for in house charges to pay for the salaries of Council employees.

 Could it be true that Council employees worked hundreds of hours on a permission hearing? The Council officers claim to have spent 6 times as many hours working for the permission hearing than all of our solicitors and barristers combined. Following is a sample of the hours and costs they claimed:
1. £500 for waiting
2. £619 to have the Council plan their strategy with
the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies
3. 86 hours to produce 14 pages of witness
statements at a cost of £4,800
4. Three and a half hours to make notes on a one
hour meeting
36 hours spent on `matters arising' (i.e. no detail provided), costing £2033
6. £1,480 to hire a costs draftsman to increase their claims from £16,000 to £21,000 after we had offered to pay £12,000
Why is the Oxford City council legal Department pursuing such draconian measures? One can only assume that Council Lawyers are trying to punish local residents for daring to question their actions and defending the rights of the community. This is an attempt to crush local democracy and to ensure that local residents do not have influence on decisions that really matter.Who will dare to stand up to the actions of Council employees if they will he penalised and forced to hay thousands of pounds for Council salaries? Who will be able to retain faith in City Councillors if they stand by and let their own staff carry out such injustices?Corinna Redman, the Chair of Strategies and Resources, would not look into the matter. She refused to question the actions of the Legal Department. If the Councillor in charge of the Council Legal Department will not question the actions of its employees and protect the rights of voters, who will? She thought it was appropriate for the Legal Department to extract as much money as possible out of Oxford residents who have dared to challenge the City Council, using democratic and legal means, over a project which will have a profound and massive impact on the Marston area and on Oxford as a whole.