[meersbrook-house] meersbrook-house Digest, Vol 4, Issue 13

Fri Sep 12 08:56:14 GMT 2014

What is evident is that the first priority of the Friends of Meersbrook Hall is getting either in writing or a statement publicly as to what is definitely happening and what options are being discussed and whether the Council has any preferences and their reasons for those preferences. 
I know from previous experience that employees do not always know what is going on in the Councils mind. I agree with David it is wrong to quote second hand none official statements. Not because we are questioning the veracity but because it is not good practice.  Also if that employee has disclosed information that he/she shouldn't have, it could be tracked back to them and they would lose their job.  Apart from that being bad for the person who is trying to be helpful, if we have someone who is leaking useful information that we couldn't get otherwise do we want to lose that source?  
 > From: meersbrook-house-request at email-lists.org
> Subject: meersbrook-house Digest, Vol 4, Issue 13
> To: meersbrook-house at email-lists.org
> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 08:02:29 +0000
> 
> Send meersbrook-house mailing list submissions to
> 	meersbrook-house at email-lists.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	https://www.email-lists.org/mailman/listinfo/meersbrook-house
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	meersbrook-house-request at email-lists.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	meersbrook-house-owner at email-lists.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of meersbrook-house digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. Re: IP address for survey (David)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 09:01:53 +0100
> From: David <david at solar-active.com>
> To: Laura Holmes <laura at b4wd.org.uk>
> Cc: meersbrook-house <meersbrook-house at email-lists.org>
> Subject: Re: [meersbrook-house] IP address for survey
> Message-ID: <7ugovhj9rihwycr72l9h72d6.1410508913646 at email.android.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> I fully agree. David
> 
> 
> Sent from Samsung Mobile
> 
> Laura Holmes <laura at b4wd.org.uk> wrote:
> 
> Hi folks,
> 
> From my point of view, the decision is simple. We were told definitively by councillors at the first meeting that SCC would be moving their staff out of that building, in fact, its the ONLY thing they gave us a definitive answer on. So I think its perfectly fine to repeat what we have been told in a public meeting.
> 
> Best regards
> Laura
> 
> ~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~
> Laura Holmes 07736 844109
> laura at b4wd.org.uk
> laura at holmesadmin.co.uk
> 
> On 11 Sep 2014, at 22:45, David Garlovsky <david at solar-active.com> wrote:
> 
> Nick
> 
> Such discussions need to be encouraged to be presented, ?in person, ?to the steering group. These conversations may be useful - but for what purpose? We need to request the information in writing and not allow such informality to take precedence. We are Friends of Meersbrook Hall - no individual can stand for the group that is now forming. There seems to be some confusion that has arisen, from my point of view, about this move. ?1st we are told it is already starting to happen etc. now we are told not until the next financial year.?
> 
> We don?t want the SCC to create plans for the community without our direct involvement from the very beginning, and we can not accept ?that certain information is commercially sensitive as Cate has stated in the 1st meeting we had. The process must be transparent by ourselves and the SCC. I am not experiencing this transparency by the ?politicians ?that have been involved so far.?
> 
> David
> 
> 
> On 11 Sep 2014, at 21:55, Nick Roscoe <nick at nickroscoe.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi David
> 
> I trust this man and he is certainly not having me on - this is what he has been told. ? Private and informal conversations are very useful in these circumstances where you know there's little chance of getting anything in writing soon from SCC. ? ?The official position has already been stated - I've no reason to doubt this or what councillors have said, which is that IF there is going to be a move it will not be imminent - I think Cate McDonald said that if they were to move it would not be until next financial year at the big meeting. ?She wouldn't have said this unless she was confident that it was true - there's no point at all in saying that. ?
> 
> I'm as concerned as anyone that the council might be going to move everyone out and go on to sell, but as things stand, until SCC do confirm this there is no point in us stating it. ?By all means say the council MAY sell the building - it's good to say this, because they may and the public needs to know what is at stake, but if they are still at the weighing up stage we need to keep things like that and not aggravate by saying they're moving out when we don't know for sure that they are.
> 
> The development of this Friends group is very much part of the decision making there. ?I think it is best to get off to a strong start off with a robust Friends group with high expectations, an optimistic outlook, loads of public support and evidence of that. ?This takes time, and it takes time to attract good people who know about this sort of thing- we need architects, quantity surveyors, people with experience managing and developing buildings. ? With those sorts of people on board, and a good business plan, then we might actually turn out to be the best option for the council. ?That's for the future, but for now I think there's nothing to be gained by ascribing plans to SCC which we can't substantiate.
> 
> Leaflets - Anthony has found a cheap printer here, ?they are UK based and not Vistaprint, I will circulate the minutes of the last meeting tomorrow, but we have no money and Kaktus has said MPUT would offer some funds towards this. ?I don't think a small charity like MPUT should be expected to effectively make donations to local business - let someone a bit more well off make that call.
> 
> Nick
> 
> On 11 September 2014 20:35, David Garlovsky <david at solar-active.com> wrote:
> Nick
> 
> Thank you for this information. The question arises - Who do we believe????
> 
> We need urgently from the SSC, in writing, is what their plans are. Does anyone have such a document? Has the Meersbrook Park User Trust ?been contacted with such information. I can not remember if Kaktus has mentioned this in any of the meetings he has attended.?
> 
> With all respect, we can not simply go by a private informal conversations you or anyone else has had with one of the parks staff or any of our elected councillors. ?I am very wary of such dialogue. The park staff can come to our public meeting if they like and present their situation to the community and be prepared to answer questions. I would guess none would do this. Nor would they be allowed i expect.?
> 
> LEAFLET
> 
> I will put some further thoughts on the leaflet on the Forum. However, I would support our going to a local printer even if more expensive. If I or my charity and company had ?the extra cash I would put in the ?100 for the quote I received for the 5000 leaflets. I would like to hear from the steering Group that we look for a sponsor for ?this money. As a local community group we need to maintain certain principals from my point of view. Going to Vista Print in the Netherlands ?for printing the leaflets I do not support.?
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> 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 11 Sep 2014, at 18:28, Nick Roscoe <nick at nickroscoe.com> wrote:
> 
> ps - pavilion has one l
> 
> N
> 
> On 11 September 2014 18:27, Nick Roscoe <nick at nickroscoe.com> wrote:
> Hi Anthony/All
> 
> Just caught up on your notes re hosting etc. Before you go off on you jollies please can you point survey.meersbrookhall.org.uk to?69.89.25.181, ?I want to experiment with the survey scripts and there are a few built in on this server, so would be better, especially as you will be away.
> 
> I'll let people know here when a 1st draft ?is available to try and everyone can run through it and pass on any comment. ?
> 
> re the Facebook page, ?looks good and you pitch things well, but we need some admins,especially if you are away. ?I'm used to doing this (manage a few similar pages) and happy to help whilst you are away, though it's not something I want to do long term. ?You judge what to say well, but there is one comment - and it is reflected on the leaflet too - which still bothers me. It's not you - it's something lots of people have been saying. ? I spoke with a Parks officer yesterday, he said they had been told there were no definite plans and if they were going to move it wasn't going to be imminent. This echoes what we have been told by the councillors, ie the official position.
> 
> I'm wary about us just stating 'the council are moving out' as I think we need to prioritise getting an agreement from the council to delay moving out to give the organisation, when it is constituted, a chance to get its act together. ?Can we have 'in the process of moving out', ? or ? 'have moved some officers out already' ??
> 
> Ideally the council will change its mind and not move them out. ?This (and certainly a reprieve) is still possible, even if a remote chance. ? Councillors can be very sensitive about having controversial decisions ascribed to them which they have not made (or at least announced) ? Of course the council have moved some staff out - but as long as there is the chance of parks staff staying I think it is better to sit on the fence with this in any official sounding announcements.
> 
> cheers
> Nick
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <https://www.email-lists.org/pipermail/meersbrook-house/attachments/20140912/dad7a08b/attachment.html>
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Subject: Digest Footer
> 
> _______________________________________________
> meersbrook-house mailing list
> meersbrook-house at email-lists.org
> https://www.email-lists.org/mailman/listinfo/meersbrook-house
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> End of meersbrook-house Digest, Vol 4, Issue 13
> ***********************************************
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.email-lists.org/pipermail/meersbrook-house/attachments/20140912/9e532198/attachment.html>