General Discussion

Tonight's meeting had a great turn out. Please Please can as many people as possible turn out next week, 7pm Wednesday, the current planned venue is the United Reform Church (venue subject to final confirmation from the council). The more people that turn up to the council meeting the more chance there is of making a real stand on keeping a building that was originally purchased by you, the people of the town. Do you think that they have the right to sell a building that you or your parents / grandparents may have contributed money from their own pocket to originally purchase? Do you think that the council should have allowed it to fall into disrepair? Do you think that the Town clerk should have been allowed to terminate the tenancies of the organisations that were using the manor rooms and helping us pay towards the up keep of the building? Have your say next Wednesday

The meeting was postponed because too many people turned up!! The next meeting is to take place on Thursday 28th January 7.30pm at St. Gregory's Church. Please tell as many people as you can as there seems to be quite a bit of confusion over the venue and date.

As previously mentioned the meeting will be held in St. Gregory's Church on Thursday 28th January, however, the meeting starts at 7.00pm and not 7.30pm, may I also suggest that you arrive early, this will ensure that you get a seat.

And make sure you bring authentication that you live in Dawlish otherwise arrogant Town Clerk Winchester wont let you speak, he may even try to stop you entering

I wouldn't be happy if non-Dawlish residents were participating in this. So Mr Winchester is quite right, if what you say is correct. Personally, I'd like to see the Manor house sold off - but only on the understanding that the external fabric of the building remains as is, and that the gardens remain in the public domain. As it stands, in my humble opinion, the Manor House is not fit for purpose. And I'm sure there would be uproar from the usual suspects if hundreds of thousands of council taxpayers Pounds was spent in bringing it up to standard.

Dawlish Man "I wouldn't be happy if non-Dawlish residents were participating in this" I think you missed my point, you will need evidence that you are a resident, so if you forget to bring that evidence and wish to speak you will not be allowed to.

If one is daft enough to forget something as simple as bringing proof of address, I very much doubt that they would have anything intelligent to bring to the debate.

Thats a bit strong - your comment - how many meetings have you attended that you needed to prove who you are?

Agreed. Without disagreeing that the meeting is primarily to allow Dawlish people to make their voices heard, some of those living outside Dawlish also value the Manor as a public building. Anyone know about the legitimacy of enforcing what is effectively an ID check to gain entrance to a public meeting?

It is amazing that when residents are really interested, they want evidence of residency, but when they wanted to install CCTV a thousand people made comments of which 200 were tourists and only 16 mentioned CCTV. It seems to me that the only time the council listen to the dawlish residents is when they -residents - use numbers to make a protest, and I wish them every success. Just for the record using the FOI cameras have not caught and prosecuted one crime since being installed.

Without wishing to turn this into YET ANOTHER boring and fruitless dialogue about CCTV, can you please tell me how many crimes have been prevented since they were installed? Obviously that's impossible, but I can point to the official figures that show that crime is significantly down. To the matter in hand - I take it that you would be happy if hundreds of thousands of council tax pounds was spent on refurbishing the Manor House in order that council employees and elected officials may reside in greater comfort? I know that I wouldn't be. I'd much rather that our money be spent on regenerating our town for the greater good.

I dont think you read my post correctly ' take it that you would be happy' I said' I wish the residents every success ' The council have stated that if and when they acquire the new premises they would hold council meetings in different locations each month, how long will they put up with that, is there a hidden agenda here?

I'm sorry if you think I haven't read your post correctly. In what way do you wish the residents (interesting choice of word) success? Would the council spending hundreds of thousands of our pounds on a refurb count as a success? Out of interest, what do you think the hidden agenda might be?

They are going to spend I believe £140,000 to buy the new building, how much will it cost to adapt into offices for the staff?? Obviously the hidden agenda is solely my opinion - how long do you think they will tolerate having to meet in a different location every month, I believe when things have died down, it will emerge that they feel it is unsatisfactory and they will look to purchase another location. I was at a council meeting when it was muted to build on Manor Park, but that was as far as it went I believe

Have you any idea at all of how much it would cost to make the Manor House fit for purpose? Believe you me, the £140K you refer to re. a new building is a drop in the ocean. Excuse my ignorance but I don't understand why you believe they are going to meet somewhere different every month if they are buying premises? Is the new building for staff only, and not for council meetings?

So how much will it cost to make the new building fit for purpose? on top of the £140,000. I cannot remember which Councillor made that comment in the local paper - re meetings will be held at different locations each month - I would gues because the new building may not be large enough

You won't get much change out of £350K. Can you imagine the headlines and outcry if councillors were to approve such a huge outlay on what would be (wrongly) perceived as being a cosmetic exercise?

Somebody just told me they intend to knock the new purchase down and rebuild, does anybody know if there is any truth in that?

@User 4549 the cameras are a deterrent. even the yobs with half a gram of sense in the drug diseased brain know that if they commit a crime, they will be seen, so that is why more crime has been committed away from the town centre.

The council have bought 34, Park Road,(the old Salvation Army) at a price said to be £165,000 and submitted plans to demolish existing building and erect 6 flats. I understood the council wanted to sell the Manor House because there wasn't enough money for repairs and move their offices to the building at 34 Park Road,so why the decision the build flats and where would their offices be? £30,000 has been included in their budget for urgent repairs to the Manor House, I wonder if that £165,000 should have been spent on repairs to the Manor House?

It would have been logical since the Council offices and Committee rooms have to be paid for and presently (2008/09) cost the council tax payer £30,898 per year which the Town Council have the cheek to assume they get free of charge, and accuse the community users of being subsidised to the tune of £29,680. The figures don't coincide but they represent the same thing, the share of heat,light, etc., that makes up the cost of housing the Town Council functions. Then, if they move to Park Road the costs will rise to more than £34,000. But, their real aim is to build new Town Council Offices somewhere and that will cost a bomb, especially as at the moment they haven't a clue how much floor space they will build (I challenge you to find one Town Councillor who can give you an answer).