Portobello Community Council

[Porty]

I read the last minutes and it seems your input and ideas were 86ed Seanie.
It is such a pity that it all went wrong at the first Frequently Asked Question. Whoever penned the answer above obvoulsy hasn't read the brief for Community Councillors and is merely opining what they think they are supposed to be. Which is the root of the disconnect between Community and Commnunity Council.

Issues? The Traffic manangement debate is one that I can think of. The scheduling of the organic market is another.

[Porty]

I notice the PCC website doesn't publish the Constitution is at an oversight or something else?

[seanie]

That may follow but there are currently some unresolved issues regarding the PCC constitution.

[Porty]

How can there be unresolved issues relating to the PCC Constitution. What are they, please explain.

[wangi]

[seanie]

Well if you look at the minutes, back in October 2009, the PCC were asked to adopt a new standard constitution. There was some unhappiness about provision that 20 local residents could trigger an emergency meeting if they petitioned for it. The initial idea was to see if this aspect could be amended but the issue then fell off the radar. Almost a year and a half on the new constitution still hasn't been adopted, in either it's original or amended form.

[Porty]

Why would Diana Cairns want to make it more difficult for local residents to trigger an emergency meeting. Is it just her or others too?

Is the 20 person condition standard across all or most Community Councils?

[seanie]

As I understand it the constitution the PCC was asked to adopt is the national standard intended for all Community Councils in Scotland.

I think that's why the City Council is reluctant to approve any change and, under the terms of the existing constitution, any amendments require their approval.

[Makaveli]

Seems a bit odd then that the PCC needs to try and change a nationally accepted standard?

Is there a reason behind this?

[seanie]

I think a number of people felt that 20 was too low a figure. A very small minority could trigger a meeting at short notice causing considerable inconvenience. With 50 as the threshold they'd be more likely to represent a significant body of opinion within the community.

Personally I think either figure is a bit arbitrary; I can't imagine the clause being invoked much either way. But if the PCC feels strongly about it it's not unreasonable to seek a change. But after almost 18 months I'd hope we'd be closer to a resolution.

[Porty]

[Makaveli]

Ah thinks become a lot clearer now that Porty has explained one or two issues that the PCC seem to have internally. Does no other members of the PCC have a voice or do they just sit there and let this slide?

The more I learn about what goes on within the PCC the more embarrassed I am for them.

[seanie]

Everyone on the Commuity Council cares about the local community and wants the best, otherwise they wouldn't be doing it. But sometimes it's difficult, both individually and collectively, to have an informed discussion on issues and come to a satisfactory outcome. That's partly due to the variety of issues that come up. For instance we've been invited to comment on the consultation for the fire & police services. I know nothing about how either is organised, so short of wading through several lengthy documents, I'll be struggling to pass meaningful comment.

At other times we sometimes don't have information easily accessible. I confess that, until last weekend, I had never seen a copy of the PCC's constitution. At least I don't recall ever having been given a copy or seen it on-line anywhere. But the wording of the existing constitution is of considerable relevance to the issue of amending the new constitution.

I think better information sharing, both within the community council and with community at large, might help decision making.

[Mark Cameron]

I'm astounded the PCC would be seeking to change a nationaly agreed standard (as Seanie says it's unlikely ever to be invoked but the reason for change, without consulting the community, is a mystery to me!)

Some things I'd like the CC to look at:
- Traffic - the volume through the high street just keep on getting worse - especially seems bad at the lead up to the main crossroads going towards seafield in the morning and the otehr way in the evening. Perhaps somethign could be done to keep the lights on green for longer at teh peak times to let more traffic through?
- Promotion of Portobello - what can be done to raise the profile - work with tourist industry, lobby the council to see if we can get them bought in to seeing Porty as a jewel that will act as a draw.
- High street - how can we re-invigorate and attract new business. What will make the locals use the shops more - are the traders open to change to make things better for them (some ideas -altering opening hours to suit working families? Exploring ways to work together to provide a home delivery service? Looking at a 'Porty Pound' scheme where we have our own Portobello currency that can be used in local establishments).
- Car sharing - is there a way to promote this so fewer casrs are making the trip into town after the school drop offs?


-

[Porty]

[Bob Jefferson]

This is a ridiculous situation. PCC cannot operate without a constitution and until any proposed changes to the national constitution are ratified, then they must surely be duty-bound to accept it in its current form? PCC insists that groups represented on PCC have a constitution and yet it would appear that they do not have one themselves, or at least not one they accept. Can someone please explain?

edit - typo.

[seanie]

I think our current constitution is this, adopted in 2008.

The reaosn this is still the PCC constitution is the final clause, stating that any amendments to the constitution can't take effect until approved by the City Council. Since they haven't approved our suggested change to the new standard consitution, our old constitution must still be in effect.

[Porty]

And has that constitution been distributed to members>

[seanie]

It was certainly circulated in some manner back in 2008 when adopted, although I don't think it has been since. The new model constitution, standing orders etc have been circulated, probably twice. But it's the current (2008) constitution that contains the vital clause about any amendment requiring approval.

Our existing constitution requires City Council approval to be amended, but they haven't given approval to our suggested change to the new constitution, so we can't proceed to adopt the new constitution amended by ourselves.

[Porty]

Has the non-approved amended constitution been circulated? I bet it has.

[seanie]

Not sure if it has. I don't seem to have anything by e-mail but I've missed a couple of meetings recently and things are sometimes distributed then. But the only actual change proposed is the 20 to 50 so a revised version isn't really required for detailed consideration. However everything rests on Council approval; without that we can't really do anything with the constitution.

[Porty]

The council won't give approval- no chance.

[Mark Cameron]

What would happen if 20 members of our community use the contact us link on the new PCCillin website to say they don't agree that this amendment should be progressed without consultation?

[Porty]

THat's a great idea>

[Mark Cameron]

I don't want to come over as anti cc. I think they have a hard task. but I do think we need to see a real effort to engage with the community onattrrs that affect us.

I also posted a suggestion to the new website that it would be useful if there was a 'subscribe for update notifications' option. By registering this would also give the cc a database of email addresses with which to conduct some consultation.

[Bob Jefferson]

How many Community Councils are there in Edinburgh? Of these, how many have adopted the new model constitution, unamended? How can this matter remain unresolved after all this time? Are CCs obliged to adopt the new constitution or can they just carry on regardless? Was a vote taken within PCC to decide whether or not to adopt it in its current form? Presumably, all CCs had input into the drafting of the national standard constitution and any objection should have been raised at that point. What are the main advantages of the new constitution to the community? What are we missing out on as a result of its non-adoption?

[wangi]

[seanie]

I largely agree. If an organisation is working effectively, the constitution is something that can be left in the drawer gathering dust. And 20 or 50 doesn't make much odds.

But after 18 months it's still not resolved and we, collectively, still don't seem to have clarity about the situation. Subsequent e-mails have left me further confused, but the thrust seems to be that the PCC have resolved to challenge the Council to provide a 'legal' reason why we can't change the constitution, and unless they can we'll adopt the change anyway.

But our existing constitution forbids any change without such approval. So I don't understand where we're going with this. If the Council agree fine, but if not what?

Are we going to breach the terms of our existing constitution, adopt the recommended constitution, or just leave it unresolved? I don't know.

[Bob Jefferson]

OK, so how about if we organise a petition of 50 people.....

[seanie]

I wouldn't. Hopefully we can resolve it at our next meeting.

[Mark Cameron]

By resolve it Seanie do you mean push to get the draft constitution accepted as is or with the amendment to 50?

[seanie]

As far as I can see, unless the Council approves the 50 (which doesn't seem likely since they've declined so far) then the only option left is to adopt as is. The existing constitution is also subject to approval by the Council. If the Council decided they no longer recognised it then what would our status be then?

[Mark Cameron]

Surely the PCC would not have the power to act on behalf of the community in that case? The only other option would be to accept the suggested new constituation including the 20 people for an EM - No?

[Puerto bella]

Sort of related to a number of threads - re: Portobello High St and the PCC and for info.

I have just read with interest a contract award notice on the public procurement web site of work being undertaken by Dalgety Bay and Hillend Community Council supported by Fife Council and the Muirdean Community Trust for a Town Centre Study of Dalgety Bay.

The objective of that study is to provide a framework plan for the town centre taking into account the possibilties of improving existing facilities, the review of land ownership, an economical appraisal to assess the demand for community/recreational uses, a review of transport and highway issues,pedestrian movement, green infrastucture study and an audit of public space requirements.
The preparation of the framework will include public engagement to establish their views.
Three visions for the framework are to be provided.

It happens in other places......

[seanie]

I think the PCC could play a useful part in something like that, but they may not be the best vehicle for getting it up and running. Some sort of long term strategic plan could be valuable though.