I would like to express my sincerest concerns and confusion over the decision and procedure adopted to build a permanent gypsy and traveller site on Stratford road opposite the Chase Meadow housing estate.

I firstly would like to ask how it is possible to have chosen a site which was never actually on the original shortlist of sites? We live in a democracy, and this means abiding by the rules and regulations set out by those we elect. If those in a position to make decisions such as these do not abide by the basic principles and procedures in making those decisions then the whole system becomes dangerously and worrying flimsy. Any decision made regarding this also becomes invalid.

I furthermore must question what the point of having councillors is if they are not going to turn up to public meetings to listen to their people? I am insulted, as was everyone else at the meeting, that Chris Elliott said he would not be attending because he "did not want to listen to people's opinions." If he does not wish to listen to people's opinions then I must ask why he is in the job he is in? If this is the case then might I suggest he changes careers to something where he is not obliged to listen to people's opinions? Perhaps a lighthouse keeper? Or a shepherd?

This whole process of choosing the site has been totally baffling, and has not been in the least transparent. Members of the council fail to tell their constituents how far along the process is; how they are making their decisions; when they are making their decisions. On the rarer occasions when they do turn up to speak to people it is at times when the vast majority of people concerned are at work and so are unable to attend; the council cannot even be bothered to send the relevant people to the event to answer questions correctly, and as a result residents have been given incorrect or misleading information. This is absolutely unacceptable.

Furthermore, why would you choose to waste tax-payer's money on building on a council-acknowledged flood plain? When it floods due to the increased level of hard-standing and tarmac you will be putting down you will only have to rehouse the travellers and pay for repairs and compensation. Where do you plan to rehouse them when this happens? Have you a set budget in mind? How much is the site going to cost to build in the first place? Who is going to pay for all this?

I'd also like to ask how you propose entry to the site. The road from Longbridge village is far too small and bendy as it is to be able to accommodate enormous caravans, so a new one will have to be built. This is not included in the plans, so exactly what is the plan regarding access to the site? This has not been made clear.

I am also certain there could be other places where the site could be built without having to wipe out the local population of endangered species such as otters.

The facilities on Chase Meadow as it is are already busy or full; they will not cope with the expected increase of traffic and demand if the traveller site is installed where you are proposing. There is not the capacity in the local economy to be able to take it.

On the whole, the council's behaviour and attitude towards the concerns of local people has been totally unacceptable. The level of involvement, engagement and transparency over these plans given towards local people has been absolutely lacking. There has been a total dearth of clarity and engagement. The legislative process of choosing the location for this site has been absolutely ignored and not been abided by at all, so any decision to build the site on Stratford Road is null and void as it has not been taken in the correct manner, or in line with current legislation or procedures.

The council has behaved ineptly throughout this whole process and the concerns of locals which have so far been ignored must be acknowledged, addressed, and utilised in the decision-making process.

Your sincerely,

An extremely disgruntled resident of Chase Meadow.