[meersbrook-house] Public Meeting working group 24th July

[David Garlovsky]

NIck

Thank you for your comment. We need,  from  my point of view,  question the purpose of Cate’s view - I think it is politically very devise indeed to have said this - and already starting to cause division within. She seems threatened. The politics of Sheffield I have experienced since coming here in 1991. 

David

David Garlovsky
david at solar-active.com

"It's not  what you look at that matters, it's what you see." Henry David Thoreau

“Success is liking yourself, liking what you do and liking how you do it” - Maya Angelou


Schools & Homes Energy Education Project
84 Upper Valley Road
Sheffield S8 9HE
+44 (0)114 2587639
07968844891

On 22 Jul 2014, at 23:44, Anthony Ashton <info at technologikal.com> wrote:

> Some good links there Nick. I felt that it was pretty much clear at the last meeting that the name can be up for discussion when we've informed/consulted the wider community and preparation for the public meeting is the primary focus of the group now.
> 
> 
> On 22 July 2014 14:39, Nick Roscoe <nick at nickroscoe.com> wrote:
> Hi Laura and All
> 
> I still want to come to this on 24th - let me now where it ends up being.   Kaktus are you coming to this?
> 
> Not many people came to the last meeting, which is a worry, as with only about ten people you don't really know if the decisions of the meeting are that representative.  With this in mind, and in light of a suggestion Cate McDonald made to me that we are a 'self selected group' I think it is essential to focus on promoting this meeting for a wide attendance, and to use the meeting to accurately record the sentiments of the local community, as there is no guarantee any council led 'public consultation' will succeed in doing this.  
> 
> I think Cate was perfectly entitled to make that point, but the question that it begs is, what are the primary concerns of the local community? - in terms of users of the Park, obvious stakeholder organisations and in particular the residents of Brook Road directly facing onto the building.
> 
> A friends group with lots of members signed up can be a powerful representative of public sentiment, provided there are strong aims and objectives, but even now I think there is too much potential in them for pavilion users to be played off against those whose main concern is that Meersbrook Hall and chunks of Meersbrook Park.  
> 
> So I think the shape of any questionnaire at the Sept meeting or otherwise is very important.  We need a record of the concerns and priorites of local residents and groups.
> 
> Note that our working name was almost agreed as 'Friends of Meersbrook Hall' at the last meeting, but 'and Pavilion' was added for the time being to attract pavilion users to the public meeting.  Ultimately we need robust and unified objectives which will be attractive to funders and they are primarily the HLF, Big Lottery and Locality related projects  (see this - just announced -http://locality.org.uk/projects/power-change/)
> 
> re legal structure, a discussion of that needs to keep an eye on these pots of money. I have lots of thoughts but can't do 4th Aug, any chance of early next week instead?  Though all we can really do is outline options which a management committee should be able to decide on.
> 
> On the subject of HLF - this building is listed and has plenty of interesting history around it and the park.  The connection with Ruskin is important and adds to the historical weight of our project.   It is a big mistake to pit 'saving an old building' against securing community resources.  The building is not under threat, but also it is not just an 'old building'.   It is an important listed building with interesting history and a legacy as a community asset wrapped up into it.   As someone who has tried to save non listed old buildings I know only too well that the listed status and historical aspects will be key to a proposal for this building can be reclaimed AS a community resource.  That's where a lot of the money is which could kickstart this project.  Moreover HLF are currently making a thing about parks as public assets and the threat they face from cash starved local councils - this can only be a good thing as far as funding from them is concerned.
> 
> http://www.hlf.org.uk/news/Pages/StateUKParks.aspx
> 
> 
> Nick
> 
> On 20 July 2014 21:53, Laura Holmes <laura at b4wd.org.uk> wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
>  
> 
> Can I just check who is planning to come to the working group meeting on 24th July? I know a lot of people now have other commitments.
> 
>  
> 
> Just a reminder that the proposed agenda is up on the forum at http://meersbrook.technologikal.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=18 – please shout up if you are having difficulty accessing this.
> 
>  
> 
> Helen – have you been able to book the Pavilion? Will need to make sure someone with a key is coming or make arrangements to get access.
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Laura.
> 
> 
> 
>  	
> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. 			
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> meersbrook-house mailing list
> meersbrook-house at email-lists.org
> https://www.email-lists.org/mailman/listinfo/meersbrook-house
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> meersbrook-house mailing list
> meersbrook-house at email-lists.org
> https://www.email-lists.org/mailman/listinfo/meersbrook-house
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Kind regards
> Anthony Ashton
> 
> Office - (0114) 383 0114
> Mobile - (07738) 150 322 
> 
> www.technologikal.com
> _______________________________________________
> meersbrook-house mailing list
> meersbrook-house at email-lists.org
> https://www.email-lists.org/mailman/listinfo/meersbrook-house

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.email-lists.org/pipermail/meersbrook-house/attachments/20140724/ad6528e0/attachment.html>