Walsall Council faces strong criticism from campaigner Linda Boys, who alleges the authority is breaching its own constitution and policies by proceeding with plans to relocate the Leather Museum. The cherished local attraction, currently located on Littleton Street West, is set to close on April 11 as part of the contentious move.
Linda Boys has actively questioned councillors and council directors over recent months in a determined effort to save the museum at its current site. Her concerns center on the claim that relocating the museum violates the town centre policy explicitly stating that the Leather Museum “will be protected at its current location.” Moreover, she argues the council’s constitution—which mandates that executive actions must conform to the council’s policy framework—is being disregarded.
Despite these objections, the council remains committed to transferring the exhibits to a former drapers store at 1-3 The Bridge. Council leader Mike Bird has indicated the new venue’s ground floor will predominantly feature leather exhibits, while upper floors will accommodate children’s services. This plan coincides with the existing building’s impending renovation to serve Walsall College’s SEND provision, currently housed at Hawbush Road.
READ MORE: Four Key Energy Bill Changes for UK Households Starting April
READ MORE: My Love for Birmingham City Endures, But I Had to Leave to Find Myself
The proposal, approved by cabinet members in September 2025, followed the decision that the former M&S site in the Saddlers Centre—planned as an Adult Learning Centre—was unsuitable for the SEND offering due to poor transport links and lack of outdoor space. However, when Linda requested supporting studies about the M&S site’s unsuitability, council officials admitted they held no such feasibility report. Instead, the college provided her with an undated and unattributed rationale document that made no mention of the M&S location.
Further concerns raised by Linda include the financial transparency of the relocation process. She points out an absence of any reference to the Leather Museum in the 2026/27 council budget and questions claims by Councillor Bird that the move will cost taxpayers nothing, as the project supposedly lies within the capital programme—yet no corresponding budget details can be found.
Linda emphasizes the importance of openness, accountability, and adherence to constitutional safeguards, warning against unchecked executive decisions. She cautions that if doubts exist regarding the legality or propriety of the relocation, the council should clarify them to maintain public trust.
Councillor Bird has referenced the case law Buck v Doncaster in defense of the relocation plans, but Linda contends this precedent only applies when decisions align clearly with policy and budget frameworks, which she believes is not the case here.
As the dispute continues, Linda expresses frustration over the dismissive tone she encounters, which she feels compounds the community’s sense of injustice. Walsall Council has declined to respond directly to her allegations but maintains that all democratic and governance procedures have been properly followed throughout the process.
A council spokesperson reiterated the authority’s respect for the town’s rich leather heritage and insists the relocation aims to enhance accessibility, visitor experience, and the museum’s long-term viability. The council underscores ongoing consultation and community engagement, stating plans will evolve in partnership with stakeholders to create a refreshed museum reflecting Walsall’s identity and supporting broader town regeneration efforts. Transparency remains a stated priority as work on the new site continues to develop.