Community Council - comments & representation?

by **Porty** » 09 Feb 2010, 11:50

Wangi- the documents you refer to; the complaint by the Mortgage People and John Stewart Briefing Notes are available. They were both circulated to all members ofthe community council I believe by Nick Stroud. I'm sure he will provide them if asked. (Is the above quote taken from an email to Nick)

The PCC also granted The Mortgage People (POP and I) a hearing at the January meeting, which lasted around 30 minutes and there was a discussion after we left. They have since responded to the complaint in general terms and are agreeing to review procedures etc after the imminent publication of new planning guidleines. Although we initially desired a reponse to all 4 points of complaint, we changed our minds between making the complaint in November and the hearing in January. We decided it was more productive to focus on improving things in future rather than dwell too much in the past. There are loopholes and pitfalls in the way the PCC currently operates, which have been highlighted in the discussion above.

I agree wholehertedly that the PCC should be more transparent and contactable. Email alone would make the valuable time they donate more efficient. Bob and yourself have offered to help, they should bite your hands off!!!

if you would like a copy of the presentation we gave to the the PCC and their response we will happily oblige.

by **wangi** » 09 Feb 2010, 17:37

by **Bob Jefferson** » 21 Feb 2010, 15:35

by **Bob Jefferson** » 04 Apr 2010, 08:21

by **Bob Jefferson** » 14 Apr 2010, 11:30

by **wangi** » 14 Apr 2010, 23:18

by **Maria** » 15 Apr 2010, 09:41

There are probably various reasons why the CC members are reluctant to use the website and TP. I can only hazard a guess as to some of them.

I reckon some members simply don't fully understand what is on offer by Talk Porty and porty.org.uk This might seem unlikely to regular internet users, but it is a factor. For example, I am also part of a 'closed group' on TP (Craigentinney/Telferton Allotments) and know that many members of this group perceive a difficulty registering and using this facility. As the old saying goes, 'You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink'.

Secondly, some PCC members have had a negative experience of the Forum and, therefore, will no longer support Talk Porty or porty.org.uk, viewing them as a single entity. I think we just have to accept this.

I think it would be beneficial to show PCC members exactly what the website and the Forum can offer. I accept that this will not change the views of some, but it may allay the fears of others.

I also worry, that posts on here criticising the PCC for not using community facilities on offer (frustrating as it may be), may only add to the presumption that all things web related are 'bad' and make the task of convincing them of the benefits even more difficult.

by **seashell** » 15 Apr 2010, 10:18

What is most worrying is that it was apparantly pointed out that the names of the Community Councillors are not available to the public ANYWHERE and that there are no plans to make this information available.

Why not? Surely in order for a PCC to operate the members of that community need to know who their representatives are, so that they can contact them about all manner of issues. I would venture that if all members are not willing to be contacted, then perhpas they should consider their membership of the PCC.

Regarding use of free resources to publicise the PCC, what a pity that a possible "presumption" has to lead to what appears to be a prejudice about the internet. It is here, it is widely used and to adopt an ostrich position by pretending discussions about the PCC are not going on is not beneficial to anybody.

To an outsider, all this gives the strong impression that the PCC are an exclusive group who do not really want or welcome any participation. That impression might be entirely wrong, but their actions are doing little to encourage participation and a more egalitarian attitude might reap great rewards. A community can only thrive if there is effective two-way communication.

by **Maria** » 15 Apr 2010, 10:59

by **allaboardtheskylark** » 15 Apr 2010, 11:48

by **Maria** » 15 Apr 2010, 12:31

by **seashell** » 15 Apr 2010, 12:43

[
The names of all the community councillors (and the groups that some represent) are to be found at the top of all the minutes of meetings Seashell. [/quote]

Thanks for that, Marya.

This directly contradicts the minutes then!!! ("Sean Watters asked if the names of community councillors were available to the public anywhere, and it was thought not"). Hmm - seems those communiation problems are a little worse than thought!!!

by **Bob Jefferson** » 15 Apr 2010, 18:45

So we sort of know who the community councillors are, but only really by default. By studying the minutes, we can tell which members attended any particular meeting and we can see who has offered apologies. By piecing together several months worth of minutes we might just be able to assemble a definitive list.

That isn't nearly good enough. It would be a simple matter to supply Portobello Online with the list and we would publish it, along with a contact email address. And at the same time, we could do with an updated introduction piece to replace the one Tom Smith kindly supplied us with many years ago. As for the photos, I'm sure that most CC members will be happy to have them published and to be identifiable to the public. And those who don't? We will just leave a space where their photo should be. What is there to discuss?

by **Porty** » 16 Apr 2010, 11:45

Frm the Mar Minutes.

"277.11f . Stephen Hawkins expressed anxiety about
people who obtained planning permission for a particular standard of construction and then changed such
details as type of window, without any notice being taken; John Stewart suggested that it was important to
keep checking such details through the Council’s planning portal until construction was complete."

A perfect encapsulation of the preferred role of Portobello Community Council; One of our elected reps is "anxious" about changes in details of a window, a matter that our planning department are well equipped to deal with. And the Chairperson believes it is important to continually check the planning portal for any changes.

PCC clearly sees itself as a sort of safety net for the incompetence of the planning department.

Wasn't there a movie about those two?

by **seanie** » 16 Apr 2010, 12:25

by **seanie** » 16 Apr 2010, 15:29

I'm not sure what the current status actually is, but this list was circulated shortly after the 'elections' last year.

Individual members

Tom Ballantine
Sandra Blake
Archie Burns
Celia Butterworth
Diana Cairns
Dawson Currie
Maria Devoy
Lillian Graham
David Hamilton
Caroline Hosking
Nelson Johnstone
Peter McColl
Nick Stroud
Leon Thomson
William Wilson

Group representative members

Robert Gatliff, Joppa Tennis Club - tbc
Lawrence Marshall, Portobello Older Person's Project - tbc
Brenda Molony, Portobello Reporter
Margaret Munro , Portobello History Society
Margaret Rae, Portobello Park Action Group
John Stewart, Portobello Amenity Society
Anne Ward, Portobello Campaign Against the Superstore
Sean Watters, Towerbank Parent Council
Frances Wraith, Brightons and Rosefield Residents’ Association

Chair - John Stewart
Vice-chair - Margaret Munro
Joint Secretaries - Diana Cairns and Nick Stroud

by **Bob Jefferson** » 16 Apr 2010, 17:15

Well that's a good start, and if accurate, seems to account for the 15 'elected' members at least. We still have images for some of these people and they have previously given permission for them to be used, so unless they wish to provide us with new pics of them looking a few years older, then we can at least make a start with what we have. Then we can ask the others individually if they would like to be added. If we wait for the CC to make a collective decision about it then it will never happen.

Brenda Molony, Portobello Reporter

Dawson Currie

Margaret Munro, Portobello History Society and Vice Chair

Nick Stroud, Joint Secretary

Robert Gatliff, Joppa Tennis Club

And if the details are wrong, I take no responsibility. This is simply what we have been able to glean from the (lack of) information available thus far.

But don't you think that, simply by dint of having their photos online, they are already starting to look more friendly and approachable? Now if we could just add a few words, a pen portrait for each member, then we might start to believe that they are real people, with our best interests at heart.

by **Bob Jefferson** » 17 Apr 2010, 08:04

by **Maria** » 17 Apr 2010, 14:43

by **Bob Jefferson** » 17 Apr 2010, 15:12

by **Maria** » 17 Apr 2010, 16:41

by **Bob Jefferson** » 17 Apr 2010, 18:16

I rather think the point is that we have to able to identify you, warts and all, in Portobello High Street and thus be able to harangue you regarding our hobby horse or local issue du jour.

I think we should also have attendance records online so we can see who has not been pulling their weight. And expenses claimed, just in case any of you have delusions of becoming an MP.

by **Epykat** » 17 Apr 2010, 22:08

by **SoupDragon** » 18 Apr 2010, 00:09

by **Porty** » 21 Apr 2010, 13:16

by **Bob Jefferson** » 26 Apr 2010, 22:24

by **Bob Jefferson** » 27 Apr 2010, 20:54

by **wangi** » 27 Apr 2010, 21:52

by **Porty** » 04 May 2010, 16:38

With just a little bit of effort it is possible to track down the email addresses of members of PCC. I'm not sure this is a complete list but it may be useful if anyone wishes to contact individuals or the group as a whole.

admin: list of emails removed

by **Bob Jefferson** » 04 May 2010, 16:50

I rather got the impression that some of them preferred not to be identifiable or contactable. Do you think it is justifiable, in terms of being in the public interest, to 'out' them in this way? Or are you saying that this is information that is already publicly accessible and which you have simply compiled?

by **wangi** » 04 May 2010, 16:59

While I strongly believe the community council needs to be more accessible I don't think posting up individual email addresses without consent is the best way to do it. It needs to come from "them" and a central contact address is likewise much more suitable.

And I know many of these adresses are "in the wild" as it were - from planning objections, email mess-ups (Cc rather than Bcc), but...

Community Council - comments & representation?

Who is online