| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
neil
Forum Owner / Moderator
United Kingdom
2623 Posts |
 Posted - 11 Jul 2014 : 16:33:04
|
The chairman of Angmering Parish Council has today responded to Crazypaving on a question this Forum member raised in the Parish Council Forum.
I generally agree with his reply, However, he made the remark:
"Any enquiries relating to councillors or council matters, should be directed to the Parish Office and not made through a forum."
The comment I would make is - what is the point of the APC asking for a Forum to be established to answer residents' questions if they do not want questions asked about "council matters"? Is APC going backwards? The first rule APC established for the use of their Forum was:
The “Angmering Parish Council Forum” is intended for an individual registered member of Angmering Forums to ask Angmering Parish Council (APC) a question about its functions or actions, or make a request for consideration by APC.
|
|
|
patty
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
738 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jul 2014 : 19:08:01
|
In view of the context of the chairmans reply, one would be inclined to think this is more a typo and should actually have read '.......councillor and councillor matters.....'
I personally think it is unfair to use this possible mistake to continue a thread that is malicious and unwarranted.
Rule 6 applies without a doubt and perhaps in hindsight should have been applied from day one.
6. Any question considered by the moderators to contain abuse of APC, its councillors, or officers, will be deleted. |
any comments and views listed above are those of myself personally and not as a Parish Councillor, and in no way reflect opinions of the Parish Council or any other professional bodies |
 |
|
|
westsussexbluenose
Average Member
43 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jul 2014 : 14:28:41
|
Patty,
As the topic is locked because it is not possible to enter into dialogue on the "questions for APC" section - has a response been given to the points Crazypaving made regarding why the payment was agreed in the first place, if so where can it be viewed? - cheers |
|
|
|
neil
Forum Owner / Moderator
United Kingdom
2623 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jul 2014 : 19:44:13
|
Pat, I'm sure that the chairman is now aware of my comments. If he did mean ".... councillor and councillor matters", then he will obviously wish to correct his posting. If not, then it would appear that the Council is doing a reverse on its declared wish for transparency.
And I agree, westsussexbluenose, that the chairman made no attempt to answer the fundamental question about the BMX track which suggests to me that he did actually mean ".....councillors and council matters". I think we should all be concerned.
I'm sure that there are a few people at APC who would wish to withdraw the facility from the Forums which would be a shame as it has been of some benefit. The problem is that, by doing so, it would undermine the Council's declared policy on improving communications with residents. The quarterly newsletter was abandoned immediately APC's application for Council Quality status was rejected. That tells us a lot about APC!
|
|
|
|
APC CHAIR
Moderator
United Kingdom
33 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jul 2014 : 15:30:08
|
Firstly, I regret any confusion the minor typo in my initial response may have caused. My comment should have read, "Any enquiries of councillors or councillor related matters …”
Whilst I shall not not comment further here as to the manner in which ‘Crazypaving’ phrased their earlier posting, I am quite happy to respond to the issues raised. The delay in so doing via this medium, is due to the fact that a very similar enquiry had been made of the Parish office by a named individual, who had been given a stated timeframe for a full response by APC. I am sure you would understand that it would be inappropriate to short-cut a system in favour of an anonymous posting, over a formal request to the council through conventional channels. As the named individual has now been given the answers requested, it is appropriate to answer the same questions here :-
• Mayflower Park was designed and planted by the developers, as a public park and recreation space – not an area of formal gardens. As such, it provides general amenity space for members of the public – young and old – to relax, take exercise and walk their dogs etc. At this time of year, the focus will be upon keeping the grassed areas cut to a level commensurate with the needs of the users in general and given these diverse needs, the length of cut will have to be somewhat longer than that for formal gardens. We are currently reviewing the tasking and work scheduling of our grounds maintenance team, in order to best serve the parish of Angmering as a whole.
• The BMX track has been a long standing proposal by the Parish Council (originally cited in the Angmering Parish Plan - Autumn 2003 “Action Plan for the Future” – page 18) - to provide what will be a genuine facility for the young (and maybe not so young) people of the parish. As such, it has been considered and reported upon thoroughly during publicised meetings, open to members of the public and the minutes of which are freely available via the APC website. BMX riding is now an Olympic sport and it will be a 'feather-in-the-cap' for Angmering to have its own purpose-built facility.
• Had there been any link between Councillor Turner and anyone involved in the submission of tenders for work, this would have had to be declared to the council at the time. Councillor Turner has made it abundantly clear throughout that there has never been any connection between her and DT Leisure.
• Whilst the Parish Council will endeavour to maintain all verges within its areas of responsibility, it must be appreciated that its two grounds keeping staff are responsible for the whole Parish area of just under 18 square kilometres and not solely Bramley Green's 0.3 square kilometre. Accordingly and in line with councils throughout the UK, we encourage householders to contribute to their community well-being by tending the verges outside their own property and possibly those of neighbours who are unable to do so for themselves.
• It should be noted that the verges around Bramley Green are cut approximately once every two weeks, whilst the remainder of the village is limited to the West Sussex frequency of just seven cuts per year, which works out at over a month between cuts.
Thank you.
|
|
|
|
neil
Forum Owner / Moderator
United Kingdom
2623 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jul 2014 : 17:01:38
|
| Thank you Chairman for the response and for correcting the typo in the original response which satisfies my personal concerns. |
|
|
|
westsussexbluenose
Average Member
43 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jul 2014 : 10:07:52
|
APC Chair - thank you for the reply and when I posted my original reply on this topic, I had not read the "implication" thread, this was read after I posted. For the record, I concur with various comments raised regarding personal attacks and potentially libelous comments.. I do however believe that the forum rules of limiting topics with the questions for APC to one question and one reply as counter productive. This only causes more frustration for people wanting to raise genuine concerns about the state of the village and for its future. It is impossible to discuss in a Parish Council meeting every individual concern and this forum does not allow for the slack to be picked up. This just causes greater frustration for all concerned.
On your point regarding the frequency of grass cutting in the Parish Council's area, why does Bramley Green get approx 26 verge cuttings per annum yet the remainder of the "Village" gets about 7 per annum.? Why does Bramley Green fall in the Angmering Parish Council area but the remainder of the area limited to WS frequency ? - I must admit to finding this position a little bit galling and to suggest that we could all help by doing the job ourselves is laughable - can this philosophy be extended to the traffic calming too,you will get loads of volunteers for that job! - Or alternatively, my driveway needs some attention and is showing some signs of potholes, will the Parish Council or WSCC help me with that in return for me assisting the authorities with their responsibilities 
Who will be responsible for the new verges when the village is developed? - on the current basis we might be lucky to get one cut pa!
I accept that grass cutting is not at the top of your priorities in the grand scheme of life, however would it not be better to spend £32,000 in employing more staff to look after ALL of the village verges which will benefit everybody rather than on a BMX track which will benefit a very small minority. |
|
|
|
neil
Forum Owner / Moderator
United Kingdom
2623 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jul 2014 : 10:29:37
|
I can probably answer part of the first para of your posting, westsussexbluenose.
Before the APC Forum was set up, some parish councillors attempted to answer residents' questions in the "open" Forums. This led to a free for all which often degenerated into a chaotic situation where some people, with an axe to grind with APC, posted on and on without achieving anything - all very negative.
This led to APC effectively banning councillors from writing on the Forums. Under the chairmanship of Pat Turner, the APC Forum was established with very strict rules to prevent another free for all. I agree that not all responses from APC have been satisfactory but, in the general scheme of things, it has been a step forward.
As I have said previously, not everybody at APC would like the APC Forum to continue. What I would say to all people at APC is that the APC Forums (and possibly even their enhancement) should be seen as an opportunity and not a threat! |
|
|
|
Nigel
Senior Member
United Kingdom
238 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jul 2014 : 17:40:52
|
| I was the APC Chairman prior to Pat Turner, and I would like to point out that at no time did I ban any councillor from posting on these forums. Both Councillor Turner and myself used these forums to answer villagers concerns whenever possible, but Neil, you are right to say that not all councillors were in agreement with the practice. This led to discussions within the council and finally to the setting up of The Parish Council Forum. Though this is not ideal, I must agree with Neil that at least it was a step forward, now if only the council would move the other leg. |
|
|
|
westsussexbluenose
Average Member
43 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jul 2014 : 19:42:06
|
cheers Nigel and Neil for the responses - I guessed that was the reasons why, shame it turned into slanging matches.
I think that it is embarrasing for some councillors to want to stop this forum as a means of contact, if you put yourself forward to represent people you should have broad enough shoulders to take the flack, especially as when there is good news or something non contraversial they are happy to take the plaudits then.
I look forward to receiving a reply from the current chair regarding the grass cutting points I raised |
|
|
|
neil
Forum Owner / Moderator
United Kingdom
2623 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jul 2014 : 20:08:41
|
| As you know, Nigel, there has been criticism within APC for many years of councillors writing on the Forums. I did not say that they had been banned from writing. What I said was "effectively banned" which is a shade different. The setting up of the APC Forum was not exactly a unanimous agreement within APC. |
|
|
|
derekdainton
deleted
579 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jul 2014 : 20:37:16
|
We're talking about a small Parish Council here, not a major metropolis.
This suggested 'muzzling' of Councillors contributes to the impression that they have inflated views of their own importance. |
|
|
|
Paul
Advanced Member
319 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jul 2014 : 20:49:44
|
| Please don't take this as gospel, but I recall that Bramley Green gets so many cuts per year because the consortium that built it contributed to the maintenance of various items for a number of years - 16 springs to mind. Therefore APC has a responsibility to provide the cuts that the consortium paid for. When the period is up, I guess it will fall into "normal" (austerity) maintenance. |
|
|
|
westsussexbluenose
Average Member
43 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jul 2014 : 14:42:50
|
Thanks Paul, probably right, but this will of course be confirmed when APC deal with the points raised in my post, still doesnt explain why APC think that spending £32,000 on a skateboard park is priority over maintaining the current infrastructure especially as money is hard to come by for councils.
quote:
Originally posted by Paul
Please don't take this as gospel, but I recall that Bramley Green gets so many cuts per year because the consortium that built it contributed to the maintenance of various items for a number of years - 16 springs to mind. Therefore APC has a responsibility to provide the cuts that the consortium paid for. When the period is up, I guess it will fall into "normal" (austerity) maintenance.
|
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Parish Council Forum
