Takeaways, restaurants & Community Council representations

[seanie]

I certainly think the letter could've been worded better, but the impact will be accidental. In an attempt to be fair and articulate a range of views it's unintentionally given undue emphasis to the reasons for objecting. That's maybe a bit embarrassing, and we may need to be more careful about tone and balance, but it's hardly a hanging offence.

[Porty]

[seashell]

Wait a minute. I don't think I was over-reacting, because I read this thread as saying that the PCC voted one way but the contents of the communication conveying that were at the very least unclear and were actually interpreted as being an objection. It also appeared that the person writing the letter was also the person who had raised the objection in the first place.
Can you confirm if that is the case?

[seashell]

[Porty]

[Mark Cameron]

Sorry don't know the full facts to this one but was the planning application actually granted or declined by CEC?

If the latter then certain members of PCC should hang their heads in shame on this one as their actions may have had a real negative impact on the individual's life/plans/dreams.

Don't get me wrong I'm not having a pop at the PCC - I take my hat off to them as they get off their butts and give up their time to do this work. For those that think they could do better I guess they could always stand for election?

I do however feel that if the PCC made themseleves more open and transparant and were seen to be promoting engagement and interaction to really get the real feeling about development appliations in our community they'd get more people on their side (or at least would give fewer people an opportunity to pick holes in things).

[seanie]

[Mark Cameron]

Was trying to find the PCC website.

It didn't come up when I Googled 'Portobello Community Council' so I looked at porty.org where there is information about PCC but no link to the website that I could see.

Could someone give post a link for me please. It might be worth adding a link to it from Porty.org?

[wangi]

http://portobellocc.org/

[Porty]

[seashell]

[seanie]

I've asked to speak about the matter at the next meeting.

[seashell]

I hope you will ask for an official apology from those involved to be formally tendered and minuted.

If resignationsare not forthcoming, perhaps those responsible for managing to misrepresent the democratic decision could be invited to demit their positions? They can hardly hope to credibly represent the community after this.

Perhaps it would be prudent for the PCC to decide that future communications like this should start with the voting result? (11/2) It would, of course, be prudent to try to achieve some semblance of balance, rather than to quote verbatim from the one objection received, thus giving it totally undue prominence. This reflects very poorly indeed on the PCC.

[wangi]

Seashell - 28th Nov, 19:30 at Baptist Church Hall, 185 Portobello High Street

I don't think it's great call; but the risks of a time-saving cut'n'paste eh!

[Bob Jefferson]

I can see that the Planning Officer has to make a judgement call on whether a letter is an objection, in support or just a comment and that sometimes it may not be entirely clear from the content of that letter. Wouldn't it be prudent, in such cases, for the author to make it quite clear by using the words 'Support', 'Objection' or 'Comment' as a heading? And in the CC's case, perhaps some indication as to how the vote went? It would be even simpler if they just used the Planning Portal because they would then be required to tick one of the boxes - support, object or neutral.

[seashell]

[Porty]

[seashell]

Why did they bother to respond?
Personal reasons?

[Porty]

[Mark Cameron]

Is the issue that there is nobody else willing to step up to the plate and challenge this behaviour. Seems to me from what's being written (which I can't of course verify as being the truth) there are individuals on our CC who are clearly acting in their own self interest.

The CC should be making clear in it's minutes what the overall strength of feeling regards issues it's dicussing are so that there is no ambiguity. If the intention is to object to anything that shoudl be made clear at the meeting so everyone in attendance is aware of the stance to be taken on behalf of the community. I agree with an earlier suggestion (think it was Bob's) that said any letter should clearly state the way a vote has gone (eg 11 in favour vs 2 objections) and whether the PCCs letter is an objection/acceptance.

How can this be tabled for discussion?

I accept that it is difficult in a large community such as ours getting the views of the majority is not easy so agree the CC have a job on thier hands .

However those on the PCC have chosen to serve on behalf of our community and if they do not consult and cannot evidence the feelings of the community on matters raised I'd say they are no position to comment so should not be commenting at all.

[Grunk]

Hasn't this all been covered in another thread.

I seem to recall that the general feeling of some members of PCC was the the community is too stupid to know what's good for them.

The other issue was that it was difficult to get a representation from all the entire community, so it's probably best not to bother asking anyone (with the exception of Seanie, who has made efforts in the past to canvas opinion).

[Porty]

[Puerto bella]

Why arent you on the community council?

[seanie]

Not eligible.

[Bob Jefferson]

Geographically indisposed.

[Porty]

Yeah i was until i moved abode out of ward. PCc exists for local traders but unless they also reside in porty they cant be councillors. Why do you ask, thought you may have already known the answer.

[Puerto bella]

Nope, no idea where you stay. Assumed you stayed here.

[Porty]

[Puerto bella]

In that case were you not skiving off early when we met you on the bus

[Porty]

Possibly - but I think i had moved house by then. Your wee lad was about 5- think.?