Minutes of the Maresfield Parish Council Meeting held on Tuesday 16^th June 2009

at 7.30pm in Maresfield Village Hall

Present:       Cllr W King (Chairman), Cllr K Ogden, Cllr Mrs G Brady, Cllr D Finch, Cllr P Harris,

Cllr J Gutteridge, Cllr Mrs V Taylor, Cllr C Stevenson, Cllr A Clarke, Cllr R Galley, Cllr D Barlow,

Cllr J Handley, Cllr R Street, Cllr H Fry, DCllr Mrs S Martin, CCllr T Reid, CCllr Whetstone,

Asst. Clerk J Bradford.

A.   Public Session – In attendance, Mr & Mrs Manthorpe, Mr Taylor, Michael Wheeler, Mr & Mrs Thompson, Mrs Handley, Mrs Street, Cllr Mrs Kempe, Professor David MacGowan, David Hutchinson, Mrs Fry, Michael Card, Cllr R Kempe and Mr Trevor Scott, WDC.

The Chairman welcomed the members of public to the meeting, and noted that he was very pleased to have visitors in attendance.  Cllr King went on to introduce the key speakers, Cllr Robin Kempe and Mr Trevor Scott, WDC.

            A1.      Presentation on the Standards Committee by Cllr Robin Kempe – Cllr Kempe gave an interesting talk on the Councillors’ Code of Conduct, the Standards Board and associated complaints procedures, and answered all questions at the end of his presentation.

            A2.      Presentation on the Community Governance Review by Mr Trevor Scott, WDC – Mr Scott reported on the results of the Community Governance Review ballot, and discussed the next step of the review procedure.  He explained the background of the CGR, and then reported the statistics to the floor.

·                     Electoral Reform Services’ report showed that 2869 ballot papers were dispatched to householders and 769 papers were completed, resulting in a 27% return in the voting process.

·                     The basic response to the principle question “Should Maresfield Parish Council be abolished?”

60.1% of votes were against the proposal.

Fewer than 40% of votes were in favour.

·                     Behind the main question included a more detailed survey to which the following results were reported:-

56% were against the proposal.

41% were in favour.

3% gave no answer.

·                     The results were also divided by village:-

Fairwarp – 153 votes cast.     Maresfield – 273 votes cast.         Nutley – 343 votes cast

                  43% in favour.                            59% in favour.                        26% in favour.

                  54% against.                              38% against.                          71% against.

·                     Further detailed information given via the ballot:-

How would the structure of the ‘new’ Council be set?

*     55% preferred three separate Councils.

            *     31% wanted Maresfield to stand alone, Nutley & Fairwarp to remain together.

*     11% wanted Nutley to break away.

*     1%   wanted Fairwarp to stand alone.

                  In what style (name, not power or function) should the new Council be set?

It was voted in principle to retain the name ‘Parish Council’, rather than ‘Village Council’ which was the second choice for voters.

·                     Although 68% of voters chose not to make any comments on their ballot papers, the additional comments that were acknowledged were:-

*     That this proposal was a waste of money.

*     Voters preferred the state of affairs that currently exist.

*     A divided Council may weaken parishioners’ ability to express opinion.

·                     Mr Scott noted that a meeting to discuss this further is to take place with the WDC Regulatory & Audit Committee on the 29^th June 2009. 

The following points were raised and discussed by members of the public:-

·                     It is felt that the outcome of the ballot does not represent a true picture.

·                     Is there an official appeal process that WDC would have to abide by?

·                     WDC must look at the amount of people in the Parish who have not been involved in the voting process.

·                     Correspondence relating to the suggestion that the ballot was flawed, with WDC giving little time for local meetings to be held to enable Parishioners to make an informed choice.

·                     The WDC website was only updated with information once complaints had filtered through the system.

·                     Much confusion over the wording on the ballot papers.  It was felt that the ‘style’ in which they were written was misleading and lacked structure, which in turn lead to a 27% return rate.

·                     It is felt that the CGR lost the ability to “talk to the man on the street”.

The following points were noted in response by Mr Scott:-

·                     In was reported that independent experts carried out the processing of the statistics impartially and WDC are confident in the results.

·                     The overall authority is Wealden District Council, and their assessment on the results will be taken.

·                     The relevant WDC committee will be involved in looking at the meetings that took place in the villages.

·                     WDC did not receive many critical comments about the ballot form itself, which suggested an understanding of what the process was.

·                     DCllrs but not the public can put forward questions to the Committee on the 29^th June 2009.

·                     Once the CGR has come to a conclusion, an embargo is set for two years on the opening of a new ballot.

The Chairman noted the discontentment felt from those in attendance, and the unsatisfactory manner in which the ballot was carried out, but emphasised that it has now been completed.

            A3.      Other public matters – David Hutchinson reported that he could not locate the draft minutes of the last full Council meeting of 19^th May 2009 on the MPC website.

(The Chairman closed the public session and opened the meeting).

1610.   To approve apologies for absence and to note other non-attendance – Cllr Barlow, DCllr Hoy, DCllr Buck and the Clerk.

1611.   Declarations of Interests – Cllr Street as a member of the NWCTP partnership.

1612.   Minutes of the previous meeting held on 19^th May 2009:-

1.            For adoption – Re.Item 1592.III. It was noted that Cllr Fry’s name had been included on the Planning Committee in error; it should have been Cllr Finch.  It was resolved to adopt the minutes as amended.

2.            Matters arising from these minutes – Re.Item 1593.  Cllr King apologised for not having expressed Council’s appreciation to Cllrs  Barlow, Galley and Stevenson for their work as Chairmen in their related Committees.

1613.   Reports by and questions to:-

1.   County Councillors – CCllr Tony Reid reported on the ESCC elections, noting that out of 49 Councillors, 29 remained Conservative and 13 remained Liberal Dem.  He stated that there was a better turn out than expected.  ESCC meet on the 23^rd June 2009 to agree appointments.

CCllr Reid reported on the three challenges that have been identified; recession, overall funding and climate change. 

In addition, effort will also be put into working at addressing communities, community transport and finding new activities for youth.  It was noted that the general public saw these last three topics as important to them.

CCllr Whetstone reported on Withyham Council as being divided into three districts and made the comparison with our own Parish Council and noted that it may be a worthwhile activity to take a look at how the formal structure on their wards operate.

CCllr Whetstone also remarked on a newspaper article about a deer control group that want to have a cull on the Forest, but noted that the group is from Hampshire and that he feels they are only after publicity and that it should not affect the area on the whole.

Cllr King congratulated CCllr Reid and CCllr Whetstone on their election results.

Cllr Fry asked if ‘adult social care’ comes under the same umbrella that ESCC are currently looking at in their list of challenges; the answer was that it doesn’t.

2.   District Councillors – DCllr Mrs Martin reported on the 11,000 new homes that need to be built in the Wealden area.  Key aspects of the plan in relation to Wealden include:-

·                     Confirmation of required housing numbers of 11,000 (Sussex coast:7,000. Rest of Wealden: 4,000)

·                     Uckfield identified as a specific opportunity to meet wider housing needs.

·                     11,000 now confirmed as a requirement as opposed to a hope of 8,000 to be built by 2026.

·                     The Eastbourne/Hailsham area identified for economic and social regeneration with “associated” housing along the A22 corridor.

Cllr Ogden expressed the need for both ESCC and WDC to confirm as to who is in charge of grass cutting in the Parish as it was reported that grass is over 3ft high on the outskirts of the Parklands estate in Maresfield, which is causing a hazard and also looks unsightly.

Cllr King asked DCllr Mrs Martin if a date has been set for the LDF consultation which is scheduled for July/Aug 2009.  It was noted that dates had been arranged, and that the Clerk should have been informed.  Cllr King stated that this consultation should last for a 12 week period however on this occasion it is being carried out in half that time.  Cllr Clarke noted that consultations should not be held through the summer holiday period, as many people are away at this time.

1614.   Council bodies – Reports by and questions to Chairmen:-
1. Environment – It was noted that a meeting had not been held since the last full Council meeting on the 19^th May 2009, and that Cllr Mrs Taylor, now being the new Chairman would like to speak to Cllr Barlow to get up to speed with all the key items on the agenda.

Cllr King reported on the long grass that is located at the junction of Parklands and Batts Bridge Road, stating that it has grown very tall, making it difficult to keep young children in sight.  It was noted that this is ESCC responsibility to keep the grass in order.

            2. Finance & Administration:-

I.          Month 2 - 2009/10 Financial Reports – The following points were noted in discussion:-

*           Re.Item 4025. Shows a deficit as MPC were awaiting funds from Zurich Ins. for the repairs on the bus shelter at Cackle Street, Nutley; funds had since been received.

*           Re Items 4071, 4073, and 4086.  Cllr Handley reflected on these figures, and reported that he was happy with them.

*           Re.Item 4269. Shows a deficit.  This is due to the additional grant made to MCG for improvements to the Maresfield Recreation Ground.

            3. Planning:-

                        I.          Minutes of the meeting held on 5^th and 18^th May and on 1^st June 2009 – The minutes were received and noted. Cllr Harris noted that he would endeavour to find new and better ways of dealing with the planning process. 

            4. Strategy:-

I.          Minutes of the meeting held on 16^th April 2009 – The minutes were received. 

II.         Draft Minutes of the meeting held on 14^th May 2009 – Noted.

            5. Maresfield Recreation Ground Access Sub-Committee – It was noted that a letter has been written to Zurich Insurance Company, which needs to be counter-signed to confirm we have the cover they have described.  Cllr King will endeavour to telephone Zurich and speak to the person dealing with this.

            6. Maresfield Recreation Ground Improvement Working Party – Cllr Taylor reported on this working group, stating that it is still current, with work continuing on the repair of pot holes in the access track.  The group held a quiz night which raised £350.00 towards ongoing works.

            7. Working Party on development of the Parish Office – Cllr Finch noted that, following his report at the last meeting of Council, a letter has been sent to the Nutley Social Club, expressing his concern at its

reluctance to accept the proposals.  It was resolved that if MPC has not received a satisfactory reply from the Social Club by the 23^rd June 2009 it must give notice to terminate the lease, i.e. that the Clerk issues the notice with 6 months to leave the premises. 

1615.   Outside bodies – Reports by and questions to members of outside bodies – None.

1616.   To receive reports from the Chairman:-

1.         on the Annual Assembly and consider possible actions in the light of the Assembly

2.         on work done by him and to ask any questions.

The Chairman asked the attending Councillors for their input in the possible action plan which he hopes will be created in light of the Annual Assembly.  Cllr Street made reference to the idea of a policy committee, in which smaller groups of people can make recommendations.  Cllr King noted that MPC does not currently have a policy committee. Cllrs Finch, Street and Ogden volunteered to review the ideas raised at the Assembly and to bring forward possible actions for review in September 2009.

Cllr King asked all attending Councillors if they wished him to write to the Chairman of the Audit Committee in light of the Community Governance Review.  After much debate it was resolved by clear majority to not write a letter.

(CCllr Reid and CCllr Whetstone leave the meeting)

1617.   Payments to be made - for approval – It was noted that the payment to Mr Waughman for the damage to his car was settled on an ex gratia basis.  It was resolved to approve the scheduled payments amounting to £8276.63.

1618.   Communications:-    

            1. Nutley & Fairwarp Village fetes 2009 – Cllr Fry offered his support in the Nutley Fete on 27^th June 2009.  It was reported that MPC presence at the Maresfield fete which was held on the 25^th May 2009 was a success, with positive feedback received from parishioners.

It was noted that at the forthcoming fetes, notices for Community Transport, the SpeedWatch campaign and the re establishment of Post Office services in Nutley, will be set up in the marquee.

1619.   Date of next meeting – 21^st July 2009 (Nutley) – Cllr King emphasised the need for Councillors to have questions in mind to put forward to Kelvin Williams at the next meeting of Council.

(There being no further business, the meeting closed at 21:22).