Sir, - Gilling West is designated as a conservation village and I am appalled to learn of the proposal to site a telecommunications mast on its Northern sky line. I object that one of the few remaining unspoiled localities in the Richmondshire District Council area is to be disfigured, as have many others, by a mast of this nature.

The counter to the company's argument regarding the need for such a mast, ie that the three other locations they have considered are "too far" from the nearest mast in the chain, is fatuous in the extreme. They should install more unobtrusive, intermediate masts.

In recent times, the district council has done its best to despoil the village of Gilling West. Firstly, by trying to foist on the village a refuse collection depot at its centre, and, what was more unbelievably crass, it was to be located in the most dangerous part of the High Street, adjacent to a narrow hump back bridge.

It then allowed a lake to be dug on a known flood plain, adjacent to an aged persons complex which, according to independent experts, will cause a local beck in flood (which it does frequently) to inundate not only this complex but the properties downstream.

Additionally, it is considering a proposal to build a concrete road across our award-winning millennium green and now we have this latest obscene proposition. I understand that decisions on these matters have, or will be, delegated to officers. Why?

And why is everything done so covertly, so these matters only come to light as a fait accompli? We are in danger of being run by the bureaucracy, and not by the elected members.

This is a total abrogation of responsibility by our representatives, who apparently are deaf to the concerns of local people. This is a travesty of so called local democracy.

C J WATSON

Millgate,

Gilling West.

What I support

Sir, - Your correspondent Mike Latter (D&S letters, Dec 28) has clearly missed the point when he refers to my supposed support to sell the village playing field to Miller Homes.

Mr Latter should be aware that I have so far supported the idea that the offer from Miller Homes should be investigated in principle in order to ascertain the level of support or otherwise from village residents. There is of course a distinct difference between the two.

This view is also shared by Middleton St George parish council, of which I am a member. The parish council owns 75pc of the playing field and has been quite clear in saying that any decision to go ahead with such a plan would only be made with a majority of support from the village.

Surely it would be totally wrong to simply ignore Miller Homes when it is offering to build a new sports/community centre and to provide a new playground and football field, particularly in the light of the recent health and safety problems with the current playing field?

My objections to previous developments in the village were due to lack of accompanying facilities when the opinion of residents was largely ignored. At least on this occasion the parish councils and the residents will have the final say.

However, it should be made clear that the Miller Homes scenario is only one avenue being explored to provide suitable playing facilities for a village, and as Mike Latter is a member of Low Dinsdale parish council which owns the remaining 25pc of the playing field, I would be delighted to hear his proposals to provide the finance required, rather than his so far negative and unproductive attitude.

Coun DORIS JONES

The Oaklands,

Middleton One Row.

Paying for policing

Sir, - The number of police in North Yorkshire has hit its highest ever level. By March 31, there will be over 1,420, 100 more than January 2001.

At the same time, however, the pensions bill for retired officers is soaring. This is no fault of the officers themselves, who deserve a good pension after a lifetime's service to our communities and who contribute 11pc of their earnings towards it.

Next year's government grant will not bridge all of the gap. The North Yorkshire Police Authority is reviewing all areas of expenditure for savings. But despite its best endeavours, there will be a shortfall.

A key question is how this will be filled. The main options will be to reduce the number of officers or increase the police tax (council tax precept) - currently £62.59 a year for the average household. This level is well below the national average for police authorities.

We would be interested to hear reader reactions to levels of policing and raising enough money locally to pay for them. The police authority is consulting the public on this issue and is holding an open meeting at County Hall, Northallerton on Monday, January 28, at 5pm where the financial position will be explained.

County Coun C LES, Mr C D CARTER, Mrs J H RYAN, JP

North Yorkshire Police Authority,

Northallerton