Based upon the obvious rapport that The Art Guy and his team had with the youngsters of our community during the 'Sign Design' event I thought it would be a positive step to build on this and organise another art based project in Looe Road Park.
The concept was that the children, assisted by The Art Guy, would create their own designs and these would be reproduced on T shirts by our local Community Association.
I spoke with Christine Fraser/SDNP with a view to arranging this event with the co-operation of Exeter City Council's Play Rangers. Christine informed that there was, "no way that the Art Guy's manager at the Scrapstore, Perry Evans, would agree to this".
Based upon my previous experiences of Christine's manipulative and self-seeking attitude, I decided that I would contact The Art Guy directly and discuss our Association's proposals with him personally. The information that I had been given by Christine Fraser was again untrue. Whilst The Art Guy was funded by ECC's Play Ranger scheme his participation in the T shirt event was not a problem as long it could be organised around The Art Guy's existing commitments for Exeter City Council. A date for this event was organised and it was very successful.
Once again our community had been misinformed/misled by Christine Fraser. It would not be unreasonable to comment here that Christine's bombastic personality had yet again created an element of ill-feeling with the very people that have so much to contribute to what our Community Association is trying to achieve on a local level. It was made clear, in emails to myself from Christine, that she had no time for Exeter City Council's Play Rangers generally, and Perry Evans specifically.
Christine, you should be ashamed of yourself for your attitude. Of course, you won't be, such is the level of your own arrogance that you believe that your behaviour is acceptable. It isn't.
My continued attempts to implement some level of control over Christine's behaviour, made to Hannah Reynolds, as always, resulted in no response other than the comment from Ms Reynolds that, "It's us (the community) against them, (Exeter City Council)".
Thank you for your support Hannah, your attitude is clearly no different to that of Christine Frasers.
Friday, 1 January 2010
Sign Design Event
An event was organised in Looe Road Park at which the youngsters of our comunity would create designs asa basis for new signage in the park. This event was organised with the co-operation of Exeter City Council's Play Ranger initiative and 'The Art Guy' (Stuart Dawson), also funded by ECC. This event proved to be very popular and new signage for the park was created and installed by ECC funding. A success, although our community is still waiting for for the sign that was promised for the new planter that was installed in the park. To date there is still no indication when this sign will be provided for installation by the youngster that designed it, despite reminders to ECC Parks Department.
Wednesday, 30 December 2009
Resignation from Exeter Parks Watch
Below is a copy of another document (highlighted in blue) presented to Susan Lawrence for inclusion in the minutes of the EPW meeting at which I resigned. Despite several requests to Susan Lawrence to accept this document for inclusion in the minutes, she refused. A copy was given to her and also distributed to others at this meeting.
Despite this post's reference to my resignation from EPW there is still a considerable quantity of information that will continue to be posted on this Blog.
It was also at this time that I resigned my 'position' on the SDNP committee.
Exeter Parks Watch Meeting – Hayes Barton – Friday, 14th March
It is with some regret that as of today I am withdrawing my involvement with Exeter Parks Watch. I feel that, at this time, there are irreconcilable differences and, in spite of trying vigorously to resolve these, I am left with no option but to withdraw, if only for the time being.
I have been concerned for some time about various issues, some of which I raised again at the previous meeting on 8th February. Whilst the points that I raised on the 8th February may have been viewed as critical, if I had been given the opportunity to finish speaking it would have been clear, to all those present, that I was using them as examples to highlight areas where there was scope for reappraisal of ‘working practices’. Unfortunately, my efforts at serious constructive discussion were responded to with open hostility from Christine Fraser/SDNP and, to a lesser degree, Susan Lawrence/EPW. Following the meeting of 8th February, I was asked, by Susan Lawrence, to provide a statement for inclusion in the minutes of that meeting. I provided the statement, as requested, but it was not included in the minutes when they were distributed. This failure is symptomatic of the way Exeter Parks Watch is run by CF/SDNP and SL.
During the interim period between the meeting of 8th February and today (14th March) I have received no information/emails relating to our community from Christine Fraser and only the minutes (incomplete and excluding my first statement) from Susan Lawrence. I have also been excluded from the ‘mailing list’ relating to the 14th March meeting but another attendee did forward a copy of the minutes to me. A clear attempt to exclude me from the information chain. If ‘constructive dismissal’ was applicable to committees then my departure from Parks Watch would, I’m sure, qualify.
In spite of this and, yet again, in an effort to reach a satisfactory solution, I invited Susan Lawrence to my home yesterday for an informal discussion. I asked Susan Lawrence if ‘the ends justify any means’, she chose not to respond. Susan, as always, was not prepared to accept any of my opinions. Susan also commented, "Paul Faulkner is a committee member of Parks Watch and, if Parks Watch pull out of Looe Road Park or are asked to end their involvement, Paul Faulkner goes as well, taking any funding with him. Any requests for funding would then have to be made directly to Exeter City Council". Whilst this comment may be true, the tone in which it was delivered was again typical of the ‘browbeating’ stance taken if anyone has the temerity to raise unwelcome issues. As far as I am aware, Paul Faulkner is an employee of Exeter City Council, and not ‘joined at the hip’ to Exeter Parks Watch. I have always appreciated Paul Faulkner’s commitment and contribution to our community, something I’m sure he is well aware of. It is regrettable that my opinions of Paul Faulkner have since changed, it would seem that Susan Lawrence's threats of the Parks Department's departure with EPW became a reality.
There have been minor successes for which our community is appreciative; this has never been disputed. There have also been many failures and misrepresentations, but it is essential that, as far as CF/SDNP/SL/EPW are concerned, these can only be presented with a positive ‘spin’ or not at all.
Despite this post's reference to my resignation from EPW there is still a considerable quantity of information that will continue to be posted on this Blog.
It was also at this time that I resigned my 'position' on the SDNP committee.
Exeter Parks Watch Meeting – Hayes Barton – Friday, 14th March
It is with some regret that as of today I am withdrawing my involvement with Exeter Parks Watch. I feel that, at this time, there are irreconcilable differences and, in spite of trying vigorously to resolve these, I am left with no option but to withdraw, if only for the time being.
I have been concerned for some time about various issues, some of which I raised again at the previous meeting on 8th February. Whilst the points that I raised on the 8th February may have been viewed as critical, if I had been given the opportunity to finish speaking it would have been clear, to all those present, that I was using them as examples to highlight areas where there was scope for reappraisal of ‘working practices’. Unfortunately, my efforts at serious constructive discussion were responded to with open hostility from Christine Fraser/SDNP and, to a lesser degree, Susan Lawrence/EPW. Following the meeting of 8th February, I was asked, by Susan Lawrence, to provide a statement for inclusion in the minutes of that meeting. I provided the statement, as requested, but it was not included in the minutes when they were distributed. This failure is symptomatic of the way Exeter Parks Watch is run by CF/SDNP and SL.
During the interim period between the meeting of 8th February and today (14th March) I have received no information/emails relating to our community from Christine Fraser and only the minutes (incomplete and excluding my first statement) from Susan Lawrence. I have also been excluded from the ‘mailing list’ relating to the 14th March meeting but another attendee did forward a copy of the minutes to me. A clear attempt to exclude me from the information chain. If ‘constructive dismissal’ was applicable to committees then my departure from Parks Watch would, I’m sure, qualify.
In spite of this and, yet again, in an effort to reach a satisfactory solution, I invited Susan Lawrence to my home yesterday for an informal discussion. I asked Susan Lawrence if ‘the ends justify any means’, she chose not to respond. Susan, as always, was not prepared to accept any of my opinions. Susan also commented, "Paul Faulkner is a committee member of Parks Watch and, if Parks Watch pull out of Looe Road Park or are asked to end their involvement, Paul Faulkner goes as well, taking any funding with him. Any requests for funding would then have to be made directly to Exeter City Council". Whilst this comment may be true, the tone in which it was delivered was again typical of the ‘browbeating’ stance taken if anyone has the temerity to raise unwelcome issues. As far as I am aware, Paul Faulkner is an employee of Exeter City Council, and not ‘joined at the hip’ to Exeter Parks Watch. I have always appreciated Paul Faulkner’s commitment and contribution to our community, something I’m sure he is well aware of. It is regrettable that my opinions of Paul Faulkner have since changed, it would seem that Susan Lawrence's threats of the Parks Department's departure with EPW became a reality.
There have been minor successes for which our community is appreciative; this has never been disputed. There have also been many failures and misrepresentations, but it is essential that, as far as CF/SDNP/SL/EPW are concerned, these can only be presented with a positive ‘spin’ or not at all.
Tuesday, 29 December 2009
Fencing Around Part of Looe Road Park
Following on from a previous post relating to the football pitch.
This pitch is not full-size and had become effectively little more than a dog's toilet and was also used for the annual November 5th bonfire.
The single most significant improvement to Looe Road Park has been the erection of metal fencing around the main section of the grassed area that includes the football pitch, funded by Exeter City Council. This has resulted in a virtually dog-mess free zone that provides a healthier recreational environment for our community and for this we are grateful. A community survey revealed that provision of this fencing was judged to be a high priority by the residents.
I have been informed by two governors of St.David's Primary School that the only reason that this fencing was installed was to enable use by the school because their own playing field could not be used due to ongoing building work that made use of their own football pitch impossible. I have also been informed that considerable pressure was applied to Exeter City Council to provide this fencing for the school's benefit. Clearly, the school children couldn't use the park whilst it presented a potential health risk due to contamination by dog faeces.
As a community we have absolutely no problem with the local primary school using Looe Road Park but, please, CF/SDNP/SL/EPW, do not inform our community or anyone else that the fencing was installed only because we wanted it, because this is clearly untrue. The fencing was installed first and foremost for the benefit of St.David's Primary School pupils, and not for our community, as you prefer to publicise.
It would appear that, despite the additional fencing, the primary school have visited Looe Road Park on only one occasion, and then only very briefly. Could this have been because of the lack of suitable toilet facilities in Looe Road Park for the schoolchilden? St.David's Primary School have had to transport their pupils to an alternative park elsewhere in Exeter that, presumably, had adequate facilities for the youngsters.
This pitch is not full-size and had become effectively little more than a dog's toilet and was also used for the annual November 5th bonfire.
The single most significant improvement to Looe Road Park has been the erection of metal fencing around the main section of the grassed area that includes the football pitch, funded by Exeter City Council. This has resulted in a virtually dog-mess free zone that provides a healthier recreational environment for our community and for this we are grateful. A community survey revealed that provision of this fencing was judged to be a high priority by the residents.
I have been informed by two governors of St.David's Primary School that the only reason that this fencing was installed was to enable use by the school because their own playing field could not be used due to ongoing building work that made use of their own football pitch impossible. I have also been informed that considerable pressure was applied to Exeter City Council to provide this fencing for the school's benefit. Clearly, the school children couldn't use the park whilst it presented a potential health risk due to contamination by dog faeces.
As a community we have absolutely no problem with the local primary school using Looe Road Park but, please, CF/SDNP/SL/EPW, do not inform our community or anyone else that the fencing was installed only because we wanted it, because this is clearly untrue. The fencing was installed first and foremost for the benefit of St.David's Primary School pupils, and not for our community, as you prefer to publicise.
It would appear that, despite the additional fencing, the primary school have visited Looe Road Park on only one occasion, and then only very briefly. Could this have been because of the lack of suitable toilet facilities in Looe Road Park for the schoolchilden? St.David's Primary School have had to transport their pupils to an alternative park elsewhere in Exeter that, presumably, had adequate facilities for the youngsters.
Wednesday, 23 December 2009
CF Decides To Hire Looe Road Park to A Language School
Yet another CF/SDNP surprise announcement at an EPW meeting.
CF/SDNP organised a meeting with a language school, based in St.David's Hill, with a view to the school hiring the football pitch in Looe Road Park for use by their international students.
The pitch hire had been discussed, presumably with the blessing of Exeter City Council's Park's Department, to allow the language school use of this community facility for a fee.
Once again there had been no consultation with community representatives regarding this proposal and it was announced at an EPW as a 'done deal'.
Whilst in principle there was no objection to this proposal, despite the total absence of community involvement re this decision (again!), concerns were expressed to CF/SDNP/SL/EPW as to how this may affect the use of this area by the youngsters of our community. As was becoming the norm, these concerns were brushed aside as irrelevant.
As far as I am aware the pitch was never used by the language school. No doubt this 'exercise in community involvement' would have been publicised as CF/SDNP/SL/EPW 'forging links with other community-based organisations'. The fact that those of the community most affected by this agreement had not been involved in discussions was viewed as of no significance by CF/SDNP/SL/EPW.
CF/SDNP organised a meeting with a language school, based in St.David's Hill, with a view to the school hiring the football pitch in Looe Road Park for use by their international students.
The pitch hire had been discussed, presumably with the blessing of Exeter City Council's Park's Department, to allow the language school use of this community facility for a fee.
Once again there had been no consultation with community representatives regarding this proposal and it was announced at an EPW as a 'done deal'.
Whilst in principle there was no objection to this proposal, despite the total absence of community involvement re this decision (again!), concerns were expressed to CF/SDNP/SL/EPW as to how this may affect the use of this area by the youngsters of our community. As was becoming the norm, these concerns were brushed aside as irrelevant.
As far as I am aware the pitch was never used by the language school. No doubt this 'exercise in community involvement' would have been publicised as CF/SDNP/SL/EPW 'forging links with other community-based organisations'. The fact that those of the community most affected by this agreement had not been involved in discussions was viewed as of no significance by CF/SDNP/SL/EPW.
Sunday, 20 December 2009
'Comisca'....Or Should It Be 'Commisar'?
'Commisar' - As defined in the 'Free Online Dictionary'
"A person who tries to control public opinion", and
"An official ........... in charge of political indoctrination and the enforcement of party loyalty".
Both St.David's Neighbourhood Partnership and the relatively new Exeter Community Centre web-sites are designed and 'managed' by 'Comisca'. I have been informed, rightly or wrongly, that Comisca is a business managed/owned by Kelvin Lacey, Chair of St.David's Neighbourhood Partnership. If this is true it is reassuring to see that there can be no possible 'conflict of interest'. I'm sure that Kelvin will be able to confirm this, or otherwise.
It would also appear that emails directed through the 'Contact Us' link on the Community Centre website, that are posted to admin@ etc., go directly to Kelvin Lacey for his personal attention before, presumably, all being forwarded to the Community Centre staff. Given SDNP's proposals for the future of the Community Centre, is this acceptable? Why isn't there a clear and direct email contact from the Community Centre website to the staff?
Requests to Comisca to change the Community Centre website, so that it includes a direct email contact with the staff, have been ignored.
It should perhaps be noted that much of the information on the Centre website is incorrect and outdated, even the room-hire rates are wrong.
"A person who tries to control public opinion", and
"An official ........... in charge of political indoctrination and the enforcement of party loyalty".
Both St.David's Neighbourhood Partnership and the relatively new Exeter Community Centre web-sites are designed and 'managed' by 'Comisca'. I have been informed, rightly or wrongly, that Comisca is a business managed/owned by Kelvin Lacey, Chair of St.David's Neighbourhood Partnership. If this is true it is reassuring to see that there can be no possible 'conflict of interest'. I'm sure that Kelvin will be able to confirm this, or otherwise.
It would also appear that emails directed through the 'Contact Us' link on the Community Centre website, that are posted to admin@ etc., go directly to Kelvin Lacey for his personal attention before, presumably, all being forwarded to the Community Centre staff. Given SDNP's proposals for the future of the Community Centre, is this acceptable? Why isn't there a clear and direct email contact from the Community Centre website to the staff?
Requests to Comisca to change the Community Centre website, so that it includes a direct email contact with the staff, have been ignored.
It should perhaps be noted that much of the information on the Centre website is incorrect and outdated, even the room-hire rates are wrong.
Wednesday, 16 December 2009
Gina Richards....
....sourced sponsorship, for several football sessions in Looe Road Park, from 3 local businesses. For this our community is grateful, but why were requests for contact details of these valued sponsors, made to Christine Fraser/SDNP and Gina Richards, ignored? Our community requested this information so that we could invite these funders to attend the football sessions so that we would have the opportunity to express our appreciation of their invaluable contribution, if only as a matter of courtesy.
But no, yet again, requests for information were ignored and, understandably, instead of improving relationships between our community and possible sources of ongoing funding provision, the result has had a negative impact. Would you, as a contributor, feel inclined to participate in the future, having received no acknowledgment for what you have already given?
But no, yet again, requests for information were ignored and, understandably, instead of improving relationships between our community and possible sources of ongoing funding provision, the result has had a negative impact. Would you, as a contributor, feel inclined to participate in the future, having received no acknowledgment for what you have already given?
Eviction of Troublesome Exeter Housing Society (now Cornerstone) Tenants
Yet again, Christine Fraser/SDNP and EPW have implied that their 'actions' resulted in the eviction of a Cornerstone tenant in Looe Road. These tenants had been an ongoing problem for their neighbours for 2-3 years.
I have spoken to Cornerstone management regarding this and they have commented, "This is none of their (SDNP's/EPW's) business, and we would not involve them in this matter".
Once again CF/SDNP were enthusiastic to 'exaggerate' their non-existent involvement in an issue with which they had no input.
I have spoken to Cornerstone management regarding this and they have commented, "This is none of their (SDNP's/EPW's) business, and we would not involve them in this matter".
Once again CF/SDNP were enthusiastic to 'exaggerate' their non-existent involvement in an issue with which they had no input.
Wednesday, 9 December 2009
The Porkies Continue, or perhaps It's The Truth.
Christine Fraser 'toured' our local community with a representative of the 'Community Builders'
funding provider. Also in attendance was Kelvin Lacey, another CF/SDNP puppet. (More on Kelvin Lacey another time)
It seems a little odd that, given my role as Chairman of the local Community Association, CF and KL decided that, despite passing them in the street, I was not deemed worthy of an introduction to, or conversation with, the representative of Community Builders funding provider re SDNP's and EPW's contribution to our community.
No, instead of introducing me to Ray? from Community Builders it was decided to discuss SDNP's and EPW's contribution with another resident.
This resident raised the issue of the poor state of the footpaths in the park to which CF expressed her surprise that these repairs had not yet been implemented. CF went on to say that she had, "received emails from Exeter City Council stating that they (ECC) would carry out this much needed work to the footpaths".
I have contacted local Councillors/ECC parks Department and it has been confirmed that they have not agreed that this work will be carried out and that CF must have the "wrong information"! Mmmm... that's one way of putting it. Another was is that CF, obviously supported by Kelvin Lacey, was yet again misrepresenting the true facts to further the aims of herself and SDNP. Of course, Christine Fraser could be asked to provide the emails that state Exeter City Council's Parks Department are going to do this work. If she can I will offer her an unreserved apology for this misunderstanding.
funding provider. Also in attendance was Kelvin Lacey, another CF/SDNP puppet. (More on Kelvin Lacey another time)
It seems a little odd that, given my role as Chairman of the local Community Association, CF and KL decided that, despite passing them in the street, I was not deemed worthy of an introduction to, or conversation with, the representative of Community Builders funding provider re SDNP's and EPW's contribution to our community.
No, instead of introducing me to Ray? from Community Builders it was decided to discuss SDNP's and EPW's contribution with another resident.
This resident raised the issue of the poor state of the footpaths in the park to which CF expressed her surprise that these repairs had not yet been implemented. CF went on to say that she had, "received emails from Exeter City Council stating that they (ECC) would carry out this much needed work to the footpaths".
I have contacted local Councillors/ECC parks Department and it has been confirmed that they have not agreed that this work will be carried out and that CF must have the "wrong information"! Mmmm... that's one way of putting it. Another was is that CF, obviously supported by Kelvin Lacey, was yet again misrepresenting the true facts to further the aims of herself and SDNP. Of course, Christine Fraser could be asked to provide the emails that state Exeter City Council's Parks Department are going to do this work. If she can I will offer her an unreserved apology for this misunderstanding.
Tuesday, 8 December 2009
I Guess That It's Time Exeter City Council Had a Mention
Following Susan Lawrences' personal threats, that Exeter Parks Watch's 'departure' from involvement in Looe Road Park would also result in the exclusion of positive input by Exeter City Council's Parks and Opens Spaces Department Manager, Paul Faulkner, I contacted Paul McCormick, Exeter City Council's Director of Contracts and Services to clarify the situation.
I had a meeting with Paul McCormick at the Civic Centre and expressed my concerns that Susan Lawrence/EPW, in her opinion, was effectively controlling any service provision, in Looe Road Park, by Exeter City Council. He strenuously denied this and a subsequent on-site meeting was organised to discuss the future of the park. At this meeting it was obvious that Exeter City Council's preferred option would be for responsibility of this valuable community asset to be transferred to the residents. The option of setting up a 'Trust' to take control and management of the park was discussed and rejected by the local Community Association. It was agreed, between the Community Association and Paul McCormick, that a 'shared responsiblity' for the park would be a preferred and satisfactory option, to which he agreed.
Unfortunately, Exeter City Council's concept of shared responsibility and that of our community differ. Effectively, the Parks Department do the bare minimum. It appears that Susan Lawrence's threats became a reality.
Our community are willing to enter into any positive dialogue with any ECC department re improvements to our community.
I had a meeting with Paul McCormick at the Civic Centre and expressed my concerns that Susan Lawrence/EPW, in her opinion, was effectively controlling any service provision, in Looe Road Park, by Exeter City Council. He strenuously denied this and a subsequent on-site meeting was organised to discuss the future of the park. At this meeting it was obvious that Exeter City Council's preferred option would be for responsibility of this valuable community asset to be transferred to the residents. The option of setting up a 'Trust' to take control and management of the park was discussed and rejected by the local Community Association. It was agreed, between the Community Association and Paul McCormick, that a 'shared responsiblity' for the park would be a preferred and satisfactory option, to which he agreed.
Unfortunately, Exeter City Council's concept of shared responsibility and that of our community differ. Effectively, the Parks Department do the bare minimum. It appears that Susan Lawrence's threats became a reality.
Our community are willing to enter into any positive dialogue with any ECC department re improvements to our community.
Sunday, 6 December 2009
Hannah Reynolds Emailed Response to My Letter Recently Published in the Express & Echo.
Email begins -
Whilst I was grateful to see, from your letter to the Express and Echo, that you continue to support the Community Centre, I was shocked that almost all your facts are completely wrong. Where do you get the idea that doctors are not interested in creating a surgery at the Centre, or that there’s only going to be one community room for hire?
This is absolute nonsense – and peddling it in the newspapers just damages the efforts of other people in your community who have been working unselfishly for years to try and secure the centre for community use.
Why would you write these things without actually knowing what’s going on?
I’m not going to write back in the press – it just gives a semblance of credibility to your comments . If you’d like me to brief you about what is actually happening in the fight to save the centre, please do get in touch. I’m happy to do so.
Email ends.
My Comments -
"Whilst I was grateful to see, from your letter to the Express and Echo, that you continue to support the Community Centre...." Clearly the irony and specifics of this comment were wasted on you. I support the Community Centre, but not SDNP's future involvement in it. I do not believe that SDNP are suitable re the control of the Centre for the benefit of the Comunity. I base these opinions on the negative experiences of myself and my immediate community and your failure to address the questionable activities of your Partnership representatives when concerns have been brought to your attention. Surely as Chair of SDNP you are responsible for your Committee's actions? Or perhaps not, I have brought the actions of Christine Fraser to your attention on several occasions and ech time you have chosen to ignore them.
"I was shocked that almost all your facts are completely wrong". Really? If my facts are 'completely wrong' then I invite you to set out precisely your plans for the Community Centre to clarify the situation. By this I do not mean 'ifs', 'buts', and 'maybes', I mean specifics, not some vague concept of what 'might be' couched in your usual 'best for the community speak'.
"Absolute nonsense"? You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. Your usual reluctance/refusal to provide convincing evidence to support your proposals offers no reassurance and answer none of my questions.
"I’m not going to write back in the press – it just gives a semblance of credibility to your comments" . Of course you are not, it is nothing more than I, and others would expect, based on the previous actions of SDNP and its representatives.
Finally, for now at least, "working unselfishly for years". If this particular comment wasn't so pathetic it would be hilarious. Suffice to say, I will add no further comment for fear of adding a semblance of credibility to this ridiculous statement.
The posts on this Blog details perfectly SDNP's unselfish contribution to the community.
Whilst I was grateful to see, from your letter to the Express and Echo, that you continue to support the Community Centre, I was shocked that almost all your facts are completely wrong. Where do you get the idea that doctors are not interested in creating a surgery at the Centre, or that there’s only going to be one community room for hire?
This is absolute nonsense – and peddling it in the newspapers just damages the efforts of other people in your community who have been working unselfishly for years to try and secure the centre for community use.
Why would you write these things without actually knowing what’s going on?
I’m not going to write back in the press – it just gives a semblance of credibility to your comments . If you’d like me to brief you about what is actually happening in the fight to save the centre, please do get in touch. I’m happy to do so.
Email ends.
My Comments -
"Whilst I was grateful to see, from your letter to the Express and Echo, that you continue to support the Community Centre...." Clearly the irony and specifics of this comment were wasted on you. I support the Community Centre, but not SDNP's future involvement in it. I do not believe that SDNP are suitable re the control of the Centre for the benefit of the Comunity. I base these opinions on the negative experiences of myself and my immediate community and your failure to address the questionable activities of your Partnership representatives when concerns have been brought to your attention. Surely as Chair of SDNP you are responsible for your Committee's actions? Or perhaps not, I have brought the actions of Christine Fraser to your attention on several occasions and ech time you have chosen to ignore them.
"I was shocked that almost all your facts are completely wrong". Really? If my facts are 'completely wrong' then I invite you to set out precisely your plans for the Community Centre to clarify the situation. By this I do not mean 'ifs', 'buts', and 'maybes', I mean specifics, not some vague concept of what 'might be' couched in your usual 'best for the community speak'.
"Absolute nonsense"? You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. Your usual reluctance/refusal to provide convincing evidence to support your proposals offers no reassurance and answer none of my questions.
"I’m not going to write back in the press – it just gives a semblance of credibility to your comments" . Of course you are not, it is nothing more than I, and others would expect, based on the previous actions of SDNP and its representatives.
Finally, for now at least, "working unselfishly for years". If this particular comment wasn't so pathetic it would be hilarious. Suffice to say, I will add no further comment for fear of adding a semblance of credibility to this ridiculous statement.
The posts on this Blog details perfectly SDNP's unselfish contribution to the community.
Before I Publish Hannah Reynolds Response to My Letter
Just to clarify -
I have spoken to Hannah Reynolds (Chair SDNP) on several occasions, expressing my concerns re the actions of SDNP, as an organisation, and Christine Fraser as an individual that publicly represents and comments on their behalf.
Hannah Reynolds has attempted to distance herself from CFs behaviour whilst at the same time making no attempt to deal with the lies, misrepresentations, and shabby behaviour of one of her own committee members, who also happens to be a close friend.
Clearly Ms.Reynolds is quite content to permit CF to do precisely as she pleases, as long as it promotes SDNP's own interests.
Ms.Reynolds preference not to respond openly to various questions and criticisms that I and others have raised, both personally and via the local newspaper, expresses perfectly SDNP's arrogance. This said, Ms Reynolds is more than happy to express her personal criticism of my attitude and comments on a face-to-face basis if ever we meet at 'community' events.
I have spoken to Hannah Reynolds (Chair SDNP) on several occasions, expressing my concerns re the actions of SDNP, as an organisation, and Christine Fraser as an individual that publicly represents and comments on their behalf.
Hannah Reynolds has attempted to distance herself from CFs behaviour whilst at the same time making no attempt to deal with the lies, misrepresentations, and shabby behaviour of one of her own committee members, who also happens to be a close friend.
Clearly Ms.Reynolds is quite content to permit CF to do precisely as she pleases, as long as it promotes SDNP's own interests.
Ms.Reynolds preference not to respond openly to various questions and criticisms that I and others have raised, both personally and via the local newspaper, expresses perfectly SDNP's arrogance. This said, Ms Reynolds is more than happy to express her personal criticism of my attitude and comments on a face-to-face basis if ever we meet at 'community' events.
Thursday, 3 December 2009
My Recently Published Letter to the Local Newspaper
This letter was written in response to yet another article relating to SDNP's proposed takeover of the control of the Community Centre that implied that part of their plans would include a doctors surgery. So far there is no evidence to support SDNPs claims that a surgery will be an integral part of their proposals, despite frequent requests for them to provide adequate confirmation.
Hannah Reynolds (SDNP Chair) responded personally to me by email and it will be copied above in this Blog.
Dear Letters -
Re your article – “Community Centre in Peril Without Funding” (Express & Echo, 3rd November).
Whoever takes control of the ‘Community Centre’ the community loses.
The Exeter Community Centre Trust plans, I note, include a Doctor’s Surgery. Has this been officially confirmed, is it to be a proper full-time surgery, or will it work at reduced hours? Will it provide a full range of medical services to the community as is expected at any Health Centre? My understanding is that prospective GPs had already visited the Centre and clearly expressed their disinterest in being involved. The police also declined a permanent stationing of officers at the Centre. I would be more than happy to be corrected on either of these matters.
St.David’s Neighbourhood Partnership’s/Exeter Community Centre Trust’s original plans only allowed for one single room for community hire, the majority of the building being effectively for startup businesses and ‘hot-desking’. I have also been informed that the existing playgroup are hoping to take over the only room that would be availabe for hire, as a new site for the playgroup and, presumably, this will effectively make the room unavilable for daytime hire usage by other groups. Assuming SDNP do take control, precisely what space will be available for community hire? The Community Centre is beginning to sound considerably more like a Business Centre than a true Community Centre. These are serious and relevant questions that need to be answered.
If the Community Centre is sold for redevelopment perhaps a condition of approval for the Planning Application could be the inclusion of adequate facilities for the Playgroup? Perhaps the building could be converted into single/multiple occupancy social housing units, there is certainly a definite shortage of such accommodation. Student accommodation could be another option.
Rest asured, whatever the outcome, I will continue to offer the same level of support that I always have.
Hannah Reynolds (SDNP Chair) responded personally to me by email and it will be copied above in this Blog.
Dear Letters -
Re your article – “Community Centre in Peril Without Funding” (Express & Echo, 3rd November).
Whoever takes control of the ‘Community Centre’ the community loses.
The Exeter Community Centre Trust plans, I note, include a Doctor’s Surgery. Has this been officially confirmed, is it to be a proper full-time surgery, or will it work at reduced hours? Will it provide a full range of medical services to the community as is expected at any Health Centre? My understanding is that prospective GPs had already visited the Centre and clearly expressed their disinterest in being involved. The police also declined a permanent stationing of officers at the Centre. I would be more than happy to be corrected on either of these matters.
St.David’s Neighbourhood Partnership’s/Exeter Community Centre Trust’s original plans only allowed for one single room for community hire, the majority of the building being effectively for startup businesses and ‘hot-desking’. I have also been informed that the existing playgroup are hoping to take over the only room that would be availabe for hire, as a new site for the playgroup and, presumably, this will effectively make the room unavilable for daytime hire usage by other groups. Assuming SDNP do take control, precisely what space will be available for community hire? The Community Centre is beginning to sound considerably more like a Business Centre than a true Community Centre. These are serious and relevant questions that need to be answered.
If the Community Centre is sold for redevelopment perhaps a condition of approval for the Planning Application could be the inclusion of adequate facilities for the Playgroup? Perhaps the building could be converted into single/multiple occupancy social housing units, there is certainly a definite shortage of such accommodation. Student accommodation could be another option.
Rest asured, whatever the outcome, I will continue to offer the same level of support that I always have.
Tuesday, 1 December 2009
I Know What to Do, I'll Try and Build Some Bridges!
Hope sprung eternal! - In an effort to pour a little oil on troubled waters I contacted Christine Fraser - below are the relevant emails.
Christine - Perhaps we should get together and try to sort out our differences.
Hannah (Reynolds) has agreed to supply tea and act, if necessary, as mediator/referee!!
Her response -
Thank you for your email. This has of course been passed to my legal adviser for his opinion. You will understand that I am therefore unable to meet with you at this time.
Christine
My response to her response
Christine,
Hmm..I see, clearly you are not interested in my proposal. I look forward to hearing from you and/or your legal adviser in due course.
Oddly enough, I never did hear from Christine, or her legal adviser.
Christine - Perhaps we should get together and try to sort out our differences.
Hannah (Reynolds) has agreed to supply tea and act, if necessary, as mediator/referee!!
Her response -
Thank you for your email. This has of course been passed to my legal adviser for his opinion. You will understand that I am therefore unable to meet with you at this time.
Christine
My response to her response
Christine,
Hmm..I see, clearly you are not interested in my proposal. I look forward to hearing from you and/or your legal adviser in due course.
Oddly enough, I never did hear from Christine, or her legal adviser.
Sunday, 29 November 2009
Whoopee! New Chidrens Play Equipment for the Park, Nearly
An Exeter City Council staff member created plans for, if I recall correctly, £48,000 worth of new equipment for the childrens Play Area in Looe Road Park. Christine Fraser criticised the Council's plans and when I asked her, "What are they like?", she responded,"I have no idea, I haven't even seen the plans, but no doubt they will be their usual rubbish". I see Christine, you have not even seen these plans and yet you decide that they are rubbish. Surely this was a decision for the community to decide, not for you to once again 'claim to represent the views of the residents and users of the park' without discussion. Yet again your personal arrogance and interference went too far. We didn't get the new play equipment.
Logos - Will we, won't we?
Logos are an important aspect of any organisation's image and their partnership organisations.
I produced and distributed flyers on a regular basis around our community to keep them informed of many different issues and CF/SL/EPW insisted on including the logos of the various ‘partnership’ organisations. Not a problem, only in that frequent requests for specific logos, made by myself to CF/SL/EPW, were ignored and this caused a great many delays in the production and distribution of flyers.
I was then told by CF, “not to bother to include some of the logos, as long as EPW and Exeter City Council were included the rest were unimportant”. This approach was typical of EPW, something that was 'insisted on', one day, could be ‘discarded’ the next.
This made it very difficult to know precisely what protocols should, or shouldn’t, be followed. Eventually I realised that the only protocols that existed were at the whim of CF/SL.
EPW Chair, Susan Lawrence refused, on at least two occasions, to include written statements, from myself in the minutes of meetings. I specifically requested, several times, that these statements be included in the minutes and each time SL refused, stating that, “these matters have already been dealt with”, which was untrue. Other attendees at these meetings can confirm this.
I produced and distributed flyers on a regular basis around our community to keep them informed of many different issues and CF/SL/EPW insisted on including the logos of the various ‘partnership’ organisations. Not a problem, only in that frequent requests for specific logos, made by myself to CF/SL/EPW, were ignored and this caused a great many delays in the production and distribution of flyers.
I was then told by CF, “not to bother to include some of the logos, as long as EPW and Exeter City Council were included the rest were unimportant”. This approach was typical of EPW, something that was 'insisted on', one day, could be ‘discarded’ the next.
This made it very difficult to know precisely what protocols should, or shouldn’t, be followed. Eventually I realised that the only protocols that existed were at the whim of CF/SL.
EPW Chair, Susan Lawrence refused, on at least two occasions, to include written statements, from myself in the minutes of meetings. I specifically requested, several times, that these statements be included in the minutes and each time SL refused, stating that, “these matters have already been dealt with”, which was untrue. Other attendees at these meetings can confirm this.
Gina Richards - My Request for Support
By this stage in the 'game' I ,and other community reps, had serious concerns relating to how CF/SDNP/SL/EPW conducted themselves, particularly CF who was determined to create a 'make-believe' presence of SDNP in Looe Road Park from 2003.
I had accummulated a considerable amount of information supporting our community's concerns re CF/SL/EPW and passed a copy to Gina Richards, another Bonhay Road resident, requesting her support in putting an end to the actions of those already named. Gina Richards returned the paperwork to me, posted through my letterbox, with a note stating, "I do not wish to read this".
I would, through this Blog, like to know why Gina, a member of the Looe Road Working Group, and an EPW member and, presumably having the welfare of her own community as her basis for involvement, refused to support my concerns? Gina Richards was subsequently refused membership of Lower St.David's Community Association based on relevant section(s) of the Association Constitution and is now an active member of St.David's Neighbourhood Partnership. It is also my understanding that Gina Richards retains her position as a member of the EPW Looe Road Working Group despite having no contact with anyone in the Lower St.David's community including Lower St.David's Community Association and the residents of Looe Road.
I had accummulated a considerable amount of information supporting our community's concerns re CF/SL/EPW and passed a copy to Gina Richards, another Bonhay Road resident, requesting her support in putting an end to the actions of those already named. Gina Richards returned the paperwork to me, posted through my letterbox, with a note stating, "I do not wish to read this".
I would, through this Blog, like to know why Gina, a member of the Looe Road Working Group, and an EPW member and, presumably having the welfare of her own community as her basis for involvement, refused to support my concerns? Gina Richards was subsequently refused membership of Lower St.David's Community Association based on relevant section(s) of the Association Constitution and is now an active member of St.David's Neighbourhood Partnership. It is also my understanding that Gina Richards retains her position as a member of the EPW Looe Road Working Group despite having no contact with anyone in the Lower St.David's community including Lower St.David's Community Association and the residents of Looe Road.
Negotiations with Network Rail and First Great Western for community funding
The link between Network Rail (NR) and Looe Road is that some of the cottages were once occupied by railway employees.
Christine Fraser, myself, and another Bonhay Road resident, Gina Richards (more about Gina Richards to follow in another post), met at St.David's Railway Station with a NR representative to discuss the possibility of Network Rail providing some funding for improvements to our community, or so I had been led to believe by Christine.
This meeting discussed nothing more than NR providing funding for a piece of 'modern art' outside the front of the Railway Station.
This was not what I had been told this meeting was for. To raise funding,Yes, but given the many other more important things that need attention, a sculpture, no!
No doubt the installation of a sculpture outside the Station carried more kudos for CF/SDNP/SL/EPW than implementing other more mundane improvements.
Christine Fraser, myself, and another Bonhay Road resident, Gina Richards (more about Gina Richards to follow in another post), met at St.David's Railway Station with a NR representative to discuss the possibility of Network Rail providing some funding for improvements to our community, or so I had been led to believe by Christine.
This meeting discussed nothing more than NR providing funding for a piece of 'modern art' outside the front of the Railway Station.
This was not what I had been told this meeting was for. To raise funding,Yes, but given the many other more important things that need attention, a sculpture, no!
No doubt the installation of a sculpture outside the Station carried more kudos for CF/SDNP/SL/EPW than implementing other more mundane improvements.
Friday, 27 November 2009
Express & Echo Article
Subject: Full/Half Page Article in the Express and Echo
Various emails, starting with one from myself to CF/SDNP and SL/EPW + others.
Hi All – I have persuaded the Express and Echo to do a full/half page feature re Looe Road Park and its surrounding community. The article will include the input from various partnership organisations particularly Exeter Parks Watch and the Parks Department. I particularly want to include some input from Devon and Cornwall Constabulary.
Response from Christine Fraser/SDNP -
Hi Bob Well done. I saw your picture in today's edition, so it looks as if you are taking up residence in that journal! Happy to do whatever (within reason!) is required...!
Christine
Response from Susan Lawrence/EPW -
Hi Bob Happy to help to promote Looe Road Park and the work of Parks Watch.Regards Sue
Sorry Bob. Forgot to give you my number: XXXXXXXXXX.See you next Friday. Susan
Another email from Susan Lawrence/EPW, following on from her previous message.
Hi Bob do be careful about this link with E&E. I have been down this avenue with the E&E before and one discordant word and the E&E will splash it over everywhere and the voice of reason will be forgotten. Also everyone has to be careful that they do not give their views which then appears to be the views of Parks Watch. I don’t want PW to lose all its credibility that PW and other local residents have worked hard to achieve in their own particular parks throughout Exeter, hard work that has gone on for 6 years. Believe me it can happen. Been there – done it and don’t want to do it again!
Emails end.
It would appear from SL's second email that she shares SDNP's concerns about 'losing credibility'. What both organisations are unable, or unwilling, to see is that any credibility they have lost is because of their own actions, not those of anyone else.
Because of inaction from CF/SDNP/SL/EPW on this matter I took the initiative and arranged for a comprehensive article, re Looe Road Park, to be published in the Express & Echo. I thought this would be an ideal opportunity to 'sell ourselves/involved organisations' and what we are all trying to achieve within our community'. I also thought, by raising our profile, it may help raise awareness of the need for funding.
Christine Fraser/SDNP/Susan Lawrence/EPW were originally very receptive and positive towards the idea (see above). However, approximately a week before the Express and Echo journalist was due to contact various members (listed at the start of this paragraph + others) of involved organisations and specific individuals, I was contacted by SL who expressed her reluctance to being involved, in spite of originally expressing her support for the article. Because of SLs concerns I requested a copy of the article from the E&E before publication to ensure there would be no negativity included. The article will be (was) published but any contribution from EPW only relate to 'generalities' rather than the specifics of Looe Road Park. My main concern was that this reluctance from EPW to be involved could affect important opportunities in the future and may have already done so.
CF also commented that she and SDNP, “Don’t get involved in this sort of thing”. It was agreed, between the Express and Echo and myself that, in view of Susan Lawrence’s and Christine Fraser’s and, of course SDNPs reluctance to be involved, that they would not be asked to contribute to this article. The subsequent article gave a very positive overview of what we, as a community are trying to achieve, despite EPW’s/SDNP’s refusal to participate.
It was also unfortunate that Paul Faulkner, Manager of Parks and Open Spaces was 'unable to attend, but he did at least send one of his staff to represent his department.
In conclusion - Whilst I appreciate that some level of 'monitoring' is probably necessary, any personal initiatives are generally frowned upon and discouraged. I appreciate that Sue Lawrence works and is therefore limited in the time and energy that she can/wants to devote to our community but this is surely sufficient reason alone to delegate some of the responsibility. The work restrictions on Sue Lawrence’s time also allowed Christine Fraser to do more or less as she pleased, which she generally did/does anyway.
So much for supporting our community. Whilst CF/SDNP/SL/EPW refused, yet again, to support initiatives and contribute to the article focussing on our community, "because they don't get involved in this sort of thing", they are more than happy to use the local press in other matters when it suits them.
Various emails, starting with one from myself to CF/SDNP and SL/EPW + others.
Hi All – I have persuaded the Express and Echo to do a full/half page feature re Looe Road Park and its surrounding community. The article will include the input from various partnership organisations particularly Exeter Parks Watch and the Parks Department. I particularly want to include some input from Devon and Cornwall Constabulary.
Response from Christine Fraser/SDNP -
Hi Bob Well done. I saw your picture in today's edition, so it looks as if you are taking up residence in that journal! Happy to do whatever (within reason!) is required...!
Christine
Response from Susan Lawrence/EPW -
Hi Bob Happy to help to promote Looe Road Park and the work of Parks Watch.Regards Sue
Sorry Bob. Forgot to give you my number: XXXXXXXXXX.See you next Friday. Susan
Another email from Susan Lawrence/EPW, following on from her previous message.
Hi Bob do be careful about this link with E&E. I have been down this avenue with the E&E before and one discordant word and the E&E will splash it over everywhere and the voice of reason will be forgotten. Also everyone has to be careful that they do not give their views which then appears to be the views of Parks Watch. I don’t want PW to lose all its credibility that PW and other local residents have worked hard to achieve in their own particular parks throughout Exeter, hard work that has gone on for 6 years. Believe me it can happen. Been there – done it and don’t want to do it again!
Emails end.
It would appear from SL's second email that she shares SDNP's concerns about 'losing credibility'. What both organisations are unable, or unwilling, to see is that any credibility they have lost is because of their own actions, not those of anyone else.
Because of inaction from CF/SDNP/SL/EPW on this matter I took the initiative and arranged for a comprehensive article, re Looe Road Park, to be published in the Express & Echo. I thought this would be an ideal opportunity to 'sell ourselves/involved organisations' and what we are all trying to achieve within our community'. I also thought, by raising our profile, it may help raise awareness of the need for funding.
Christine Fraser/SDNP/Susan Lawrence/EPW were originally very receptive and positive towards the idea (see above). However, approximately a week before the Express and Echo journalist was due to contact various members (listed at the start of this paragraph + others) of involved organisations and specific individuals, I was contacted by SL who expressed her reluctance to being involved, in spite of originally expressing her support for the article. Because of SLs concerns I requested a copy of the article from the E&E before publication to ensure there would be no negativity included. The article will be (was) published but any contribution from EPW only relate to 'generalities' rather than the specifics of Looe Road Park. My main concern was that this reluctance from EPW to be involved could affect important opportunities in the future and may have already done so.
CF also commented that she and SDNP, “Don’t get involved in this sort of thing”. It was agreed, between the Express and Echo and myself that, in view of Susan Lawrence’s and Christine Fraser’s and, of course SDNPs reluctance to be involved, that they would not be asked to contribute to this article. The subsequent article gave a very positive overview of what we, as a community are trying to achieve, despite EPW’s/SDNP’s refusal to participate.
It was also unfortunate that Paul Faulkner, Manager of Parks and Open Spaces was 'unable to attend, but he did at least send one of his staff to represent his department.
In conclusion - Whilst I appreciate that some level of 'monitoring' is probably necessary, any personal initiatives are generally frowned upon and discouraged. I appreciate that Sue Lawrence works and is therefore limited in the time and energy that she can/wants to devote to our community but this is surely sufficient reason alone to delegate some of the responsibility. The work restrictions on Sue Lawrence’s time also allowed Christine Fraser to do more or less as she pleased, which she generally did/does anyway.
So much for supporting our community. Whilst CF/SDNP/SL/EPW refused, yet again, to support initiatives and contribute to the article focussing on our community, "because they don't get involved in this sort of thing", they are more than happy to use the local press in other matters when it suits them.
Statement Specifically Requested by Susan Lawrence for Inclusion in EPW Meeting Minutes Part1
Below is copied some of my original statement,specifically requested by Susan Lawrence for the inclusion in the Minutes of an EPW meeting. Parts of this statement have been excluded from this message but will be included at a later date and in greater detail.
Final paragraph from my original statement presented at the Looe Road Parks Watch meeting 08/02/08.
"This is not a ‘witch-hunt’, and it is never my intention to ‘step-on toes’, but this is perhaps a good opportunity to review procedures so that initiatives can move forward more smoothly. Because of the infrequency of meetings and reluctance of the Chair to delegate anything other than minor responsibilities I am concerned that future opportunities for support/funding may be missed".
Firstly, I would like to apologise to all those present at the meeting for my angry response directed mainly at Christine Fraser. This was not without provocation from Christine, who chose to direct a personal verbal attack against myself and my motives for involvement in our local community. Yes, I am passionate about this work but I resent her comment that I am a "martyr to it". Since this disagreement Christine no longer keeps me informed of any information that relates to what is, or isn't, occurring in our community. Clearly Christine and Susan have taken the original statement very personally and responded or, more to the point, not responded, as she (they) see fit. I draw your attention to the first paragraph of this statement.
Some of the other issues raised in my original statement are dealt with below; others will be published elsewhere on this Blog.
Final paragraph from my original statement presented at the Looe Road Parks Watch meeting 08/02/08.
"This is not a ‘witch-hunt’, and it is never my intention to ‘step-on toes’, but this is perhaps a good opportunity to review procedures so that initiatives can move forward more smoothly. Because of the infrequency of meetings and reluctance of the Chair to delegate anything other than minor responsibilities I am concerned that future opportunities for support/funding may be missed".
Firstly, I would like to apologise to all those present at the meeting for my angry response directed mainly at Christine Fraser. This was not without provocation from Christine, who chose to direct a personal verbal attack against myself and my motives for involvement in our local community. Yes, I am passionate about this work but I resent her comment that I am a "martyr to it". Since this disagreement Christine no longer keeps me informed of any information that relates to what is, or isn't, occurring in our community. Clearly Christine and Susan have taken the original statement very personally and responded or, more to the point, not responded, as she (they) see fit. I draw your attention to the first paragraph of this statement.
Some of the other issues raised in my original statement are dealt with below; others will be published elsewhere on this Blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
