Community Council - comments & representation?

seanie · Post by **seanie** » 08 Feb 2010, 21:54

Apologies.

I'm as much to blame as anyone. I think the PCC is very much aware of the need for better communication and more pro-active engagement with the community but it's difficult to get round to doing stuff about it.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 08 Feb 2010, 22:26

Well a contact email address that works would be a good start. So here is a no-strings offer. I will set up an email address, portycc@porty.org.uk and route it to the chair, the secretary or whoever you like. The CC can then publish this contact address in their minutes, use it on official headed paper etc and I will add it as a contact on the Community Council pages on Portobello Online.

Portobello Online remains, as it always has been, happy to offer the CC a web presence and a means of communicating directly with local people. I also recall that, during my stewardship of the discussion forum, I offered CC members a private forum where they could continue discussion on matters that arose during meetings. Another offer that fell upon deaf ears. I don't even receive an 'official' copy of CC minutes to publish but rely upon a third party to pass them on.

CC members should be identifiable, contactable and accountable. There is an obvious need for greater transparency and better communication/interaction and this must be properly addressed as a priority.

Post by **wangi** » 08 Feb 2010, 23:40

No need to apologise Seanie.

I was just asking after a couple off appendices that seem to be missing from the latest minutes:

Hi, I was recently reading the November minutes at porty.org.uk and it looks as if the online minutes are missing a couple of appendices?

http://porty.org.uk/council/index.php?t ... &year=2009
* Action: Nick Stroud to circulate the letter of complaint with the minutes.
* Action: John Stewart to circulate his responses to the individual components of the complaint.

Are these available?

L/

Post by **wangi** » 08 Feb 2010, 23:41

Bob Jefferson wrote:during my stewardship of the discussion forum, I offered CC members a private forum where they could continue discussion on matters that arose during meetings.

An offer still open here on Talk Porty to any and all community groups.

L/

Porty · Post 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.

Post by **wangi** » 09 Feb 2010, 17:37

Thanks Porty - makes sense of some of the recent posts!

I've now got the copies of the missing documents. For reference and anyone else who is interested:

Portobello Community Council minutes, November 2009
Letter of complaint from Mortgage People / Portobello Partnership
John Stewart's briefing notes on complaint
Presentation given by Portobello Partnership at meeting
Portobello Community Council minutes, January 2010 (pending)

(edit: updated with presentation)
L/

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

The eagerly-awaited CC minutes for January are now available online:

January CC Minutes

In relation to our discussion, I note the following:

275.3j Nick Stroud to collect photos and introductory paragraphs for the website from those who wish to supply them (274.8 ); this item was deferred pending a discussion of how the Community Council should present itself to Portobello.

275.3c Office Bearers to consider how to put letters and other Community Council documents in the public domain (274.3h).

I can think of one solution. Photocopy your letter, email me a copy and I will add it to the Community Council section of the community website.

275.9 Communications and public image
There are several ways in which the Community Council could publicise its work and receive feedback from the local community, which will be discussed in detail at a future meeting.

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

So, following this period of consideration and deliberation, the CC met again for its "detailed discussion" on how to "publicise its work and receive feedback from the local community".

The minutes are published here:

PCC Minutes Feb 10

276.8 Communications and public image

There was some discussion about how to handle the large volume of communications which come into the Community Council, mostly from the City Council, and how the Community Council could improve communication to and from the local community that it is expected to represent. John Stewart asked that group representatives use their networks to spread relevant news further afield, while appreciating that the Community Council still has several vacancies for group representatives. It was suggested that the City Council distinguish between information intended mainly for the Community Council itself, and information intended for wider circulation; it was also expected that the City Council would use every means at its disposal to distribute public information, rather than expecting community councils to do it all.

Several suggestions were made for the Community Council to distribute news, including a newsletter, the community website, the Neighbourhood Partnership website, and a yahoo group. John Stewart asked that everyone give some thought to how we improve our communication with our community. He mentioned that he and Brenda Molony are assembling a list of contact details for all members of the Community Council, for our own use, and everyone agreed to be included on this.

* Action: Group representatives to use their networks to feed news in and out.
* Action: Community Council to fill remaining group vacancies.
* Action: Diana Cairns to ask Eileen Hewitt (City Council) to distinguish news for community councils and news for public consumption, and to let us know what other channels are used for the latter.
* Action: All, to consider how to improve our communication networks.
* Action: All, to send contact information to Brenda Molony.

So, several suggestions but very little action. They have been talking about a newsletter for years and no-one looks at the Neighbourhood Partnership website. Instead, more 'consideration' and waffle. What happened to the "photos and introductory paragraphs" for the community website, for example? It didn't even rate a mention.

Months after the "election" I still haven't seen a definitive list of who the CC members are, let alone how to contact them. And now it transpires that members don't even have contact information for each other!

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

And so on to the March meeting.

277.10 Communications and public image

John Stewart and Diana Cairns reported that they had met Joyce Campbell and Mary Dunbar to discuss ways of raising the Community Council’s profile in the Library, and were told that we were eligible for a grant of £500 from the Neighbourhood Partnership for each of the financial years ending on 5th April and beginning on 6th April – for a total of £1,000. They had therefore applied for both these grants and planned to use them for a dedicated display and shelving in the Library, together with some kind of feedback facility. We would also be able to advertise particular events and issues on the large plasma display screen about to be installed in the Library window.

Maria Devoy offered the Community Council the use of the Portobello website, and Brenda Molony wondered if there was still a plan to produce an annual report, as South Queensferry Community Council does, for distribution with the Portobello Reporter. David Hamilton mentioned the community noticeboard about to be installed at Gilberstoun which could be used for our material.

Sean Watters asked if the names of community councillors were available to the public anywhere, and it was thought not; John Stewart said he would arrange for contact details for the Chairman and Secretary to be advertised on the Library noticeboard along with the list of groups represented on the Community Council.

* Action: Diana Cairns to arrange for some Community Council details to be displayed in the Library.

So, who are the members of Portobello Community Council and how do we contact them? Perhaps if you go the Library you might find this information somewhere on the noticeboard. If you are successful, do let me know.

You might expect the Community Council to engage (entirely free of charge) with the award-winning local community website and with the popular local discussion forum, both run by local volunteers without any sort of grant assistance. But they don't seem to be in any hurry to do so. I wonder why?

Post by **wangi** » 14 Apr 2010, 23:18

I had also offered up Talk Porty; slightly disappointed it didn't even get mentioned.

Maria · Post 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.

seashell · Post 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.

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 15 Apr 2010, 10:59

seashell wrote: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.

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. The minutes are all to be found on porty.org.uk as well as in the library. The plasma screen that the library will install will be in the window, so all details that the CC put up on it, will be viewable outside library opening hours.

I agree that all names should be readily available and would also like to see, as has been done in the past, individual photos of PCC members displayed on porty.org.uk so we are easily identifiable - even though I hate getting my photo taken!

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

I was informed at the library that Community Councillors pictures will not be put up in the Library as they were concerned some of the children would get nightmares.

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 15 Apr 2010, 12:31

seashell · Post 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!!!

Bob Jefferson · Post 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?

Porty · Post 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?

seanie · Post by **seanie** » 16 Apr 2010, 12:25

seashell wrote: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!!!

The minutes list Community Councillors in attendance and those who've sent apologies, but that'll rarely if ever be a complete list, and it's hardly the same as having a readily accessible one. At the end of the day Commmunity Councillors are there to represent the views of the community, above and beyond their own personal views. Given that, it seems the very least we could do is make it readily known who we actually are.

seanie · Post 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

Bob Jefferson · Post 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.

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

Hang on a minute, I've just noticed this in Marya's announcement re the forthcoming election hustings:

If you wish to submit a question, please do so by Saturday 25 April by e-mailing portobellocc@googlemail.com or portycc@me.com, or by placing a question in the box in the library

.

So, Portobello Community Council suddenly has not just one, but two email contact addresses. I wonder who set them up and who they are directed to? And why have two addresses when one is quite sufficient? Are these now official email addresses or have they just been set up for this specific purpose?

You see? We can only ever infer or second-guess what the Community Council is up to.

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 17 Apr 2010, 14:43

Bob Jefferson wrote: We can only ever infer or second-guess what the Community Council is up to.

'up to' ? You make the CC sound like the Stasi, Bob

But who knows what secret agenda the Portobello Older Persons Project has? Compulsory carrying of rainmates and the playing of Russ Conway records in all shops perhaps?

Are Joppa Tennis Courts just a cover for crazed individuals intent on outlawing all other forms of sport in Portobello? Should rugby and football players be hanging up their studs?

You could always rejoin the CC Bob (there's a space for a website group rep, you know) and organise us all.

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

No thanks - I'm having much more fun as a former member. As a member, I felt, as you must, in a difficult position at times when the CC was being criticised and often found myself having to defend it.

Now, how about a nice head and shoulders shot of you for the CC page? You could provide your own pen portrait (max 100 words?) and start the ball rolling. And that applies to any other CC member who is reading this message - just email me your pic and I'll crop, resize it etc.

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 17 Apr 2010, 16:41

Bob Jefferson wrote: Now, how about a nice head and shoulders shot of you for the CC page? ............And that applies to any other CC member who is reading this message - just email me your pic and I'll crop, resize it etc.

Can you offer other techniques? Airbrushing of wrinkles and scars ? I'd like to look, oh.....let's say, about 25 .......with a neat little nose and well defined cheekbones.

Bob Jefferson · Post 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.

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 17 Apr 2010, 22:08

Bob Jefferson wrote:Now, how about a nice head and shoulders shot of you for the CC page?

Hang on.....I've got a really nice one of her at a fundraising thingy........

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

I was in a village in the East Neuk of Fife today
They had a local news notice board, on it was a list of the names of all the community councillors along with playgroups, jumble sale announcements etc
etc
Accessible to all, even those without a pc

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 21 Apr 2010, 13:16

Marya wrote:
Are Joppa Tennis Courts just a cover for crazed individuals

Crazed individuals are already being well catered for, they can join either Portobello Campaign Against the Superstore, a cause that was succesful almost 4 years ago or if they are really crazy they could join PPAG. I believe dual memberships are also available to non-jet skiers.

Marya wrote:Should rugby and football players be hanging up their studs?

Hang up their studs?

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

Can't wait to hear how the CC's communication strategy has developed after tonight's meeting. I imagine they are probably busy working on their Bebo page.

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

Or not. Nick Stroud circulated the following prior to the meeting, but there was no time to deal with it and it was held over. If only they had some sort of online discussion facility, they wouldn't have to wait another month to discuss their communication methods.

Communication Methods

We need to discuss the complete range of options for communicating from and to the Community Council, and how we’re going to use them. A questionnaire recently circulated by Craigleith/Blackhall Community Council identified the following options, all of which we should consider (though not to adopt them all!):

• newspaper (Scotsman, Evening News)
• local community paper
• community noticeboards
• shop noticeboards
• leaflets
• website
• email
• sub-group dedicated specifically to publicity/communication
• participation in local events organised by other groups
• invited speakers on non-CC topics
• holding meetings in different venues
• presence at other events/locations
• number of people responsible for updating communications
• printed annual report
• involvement in campaigns

And that's quite without mentioning the whole social networking, Web 2.0 world – twitter, blogging, facebook, rss. It’s instructive to follow the online conversation at http://forum.talkporty.org/viewtopic.php?t=4793 – I think we should be listening to that.

I propose that we build on the good work established so far through the Portobello Reporter, the Library and our Community Information Boards by updating our presence in the Portobello website and setting up a Twitter account and email list, both to be advertised on the website.

Post by **wangi** » 27 Apr 2010, 21:52

Nick Stroud wrote:setting up a Twitter account

My advice... Don't bother.

(Facebook is where everyone except politicos, newshounds and celebs are at)

Porty · Post 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

Bob Jefferson · Post 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?

Post 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...