General Discussion
Has anyone in town ever managed to get any sort of help from our elected councilors either local, district or county without them having a vested interest in the issue themselves. They just seem to invite themselves onto made up commitees, attend pointless meetings and actually achieve very little. Can you justify the fence sitting, back slapping individuals who pretend to represent the community if so comment here. Thanks
Exactly what I had in mind, watch out at the next elections in May. We may however find that my application gets blocked on political grounds by the usual closed shop members, or if I get passed that stage the can't be bothered, supermarket loving population of our special town wont bother to turn out and vote.
If its not in my back yard why bother !
Why not attend the open day to get an insight to council's work. Friday 28th January 11am-8pm. You can meet the Town Councillors and find out more about the services offered by the council.
Thanks Ziggy - Not a new comer to town, know all the councilors and what they do or more to the point what they dont hence the point of this thread.
Will be at the meeting
If you get elected you get a very generous trouser payment of around 14k a year.
Hence why they want o discourage you to stand for election..
Guess what ZIGGY. Got to the manor house about 3 pm, met at the door by councilor Prowse who immediatly dissapeared before any of my party could sink their teeth into her. As for the others, who knows. Yet another waste of time and tax payers money. Funny to note the main attraction was the Amber Coast nonsense yet again Where they think the money to pay for any of that rubbish is coming from I have no idea. Better still is the plan to pedestrianise the Strand it has to be a joke or an attempt to keep everyone away from the town. Cant wait to see two of Stagecoach's double deckers head to head on tuckers plot bridge, which reminds me who gave them permission to run those wretched things on the totally unsuitable roads around Dawlish, the Warren and Starcross. Should be fun on the local roads summer 2012, with double deckers, Sainsbury's and hopefully Tesco's lorries plus the caravans. Oh deep joy
100% agreement, didnt waste my time, and you are so right regarding the Strand totally impractical!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You are wasting your time with Prowse she is just a social climber, your main problem is the Town Clerk who makes all the rules and they all fall into line like a lot sheep
Think his glory days may be numbered after the fiasco with the Manor house and the purchase of the useless sally army building. Dont for 1-minute think his position is protected in any way just because he's been there a long whille, like any employee his position can be made redundant.
As for the old school following like sheep make sure your votes go to the new standing candidates and hope they can make a differance ITS TIME FOR CHANGE SO MAKE IT HAPPEN
I think you are confusing Mrs Rosalind Prowse with wally Protheroe another waste of space who has done very well for himself as a councillor
Fronteraman .you'll have a long wait to see a bus on the bridge, not operated through Cockwood for 2 years!! ..double deckers is what passengers asked for. Did you say you were standing for Dawlish Council?
Fronteraman: I have a query which hopefully you can clarify for me which is ...... when you talk (see your penultimate posting above) of all the traffic problems caused by double deckers, caravans, Sainsbury's traffic etc you also say " and hopefully Tesco's lorries". So, are you saying that you want there to be two supermarkets?
I only ask as I got the impression that you think Dawlish shouldn't have one new supermarket let alone two.
Think he enjoys moaning lol...not sure if he wants people to come to Dawlish or not, needs to make clear his vision for Dawlish if he is standing for election.
@Lynne - to clarify my view point on supermarkets. i have always doubted this much quoted "need for a supermarket in dawlish" and my objections are quite clear on the planning website run by teignbridge. however now the precedent has been set there needs to be competition to sainsbury's and this can only be provided by another giant in the retail sector. the local businesses cannot compete and certainly will not survive, just wait and see.
@wondering - nobody mentioned cockwood bridge in relation to the double deckers, please read the threads more carefully (tuckers plot bridge).
The traditional feature of Dawlish is as a seaside holiday resort open for as many visitors as can possibly be accomodated and I fully support retaining this. The dfficulty is not with my vision but with the land owners, existing councilors and the planning commitees. On my own I cannot stop land owners selling to housing developers with the support of certain councillors and the subsquent approval of submitted plans. If you dont want to see the Warren, Shutterton and gatehouse become one big housing estate I suggest you speak with each councillor and get their views. Treat their response with a pinch of salt though.
@FRONTERAMAN - thanks for the clarification. agree that local businesses cannot compete with the new supermarket and i agree that many will not survive. however, at least one new supermarket is what we are all gonna get.
"competition to Sainsbury's" howsabout the big new Morrison's planned for Teignmouth? Are you also saying that had Tesco been given planning permission to build at L. Mile and Sainsbury's refused at Shutterton Bridge you would now be arguing that Sainsbury's should also be allowed to build?
Re local planning. Did you find anything out about the new Localism Bill and the new approach to planning when you visited the Manor House yesterday?
i@Lynne - thanks for continuing the discussion, you know my main issue with the sainsbury development is whats being planned in addition to the actual store itself and the ridiculas and totally unproven reasons for it in the first place. the town could have gained so much more than the measerly 200,000 for regeneration of the town center once they have destroyed it.
Its just an ever increasing trail of deceat, lies,pocket lining and jobs for the boys, Sainsbury's donate to the Conservative party, the Conservative lead council dont object to the plans. You know what I mean
Its too late now to keep going on about it, the major land owners in and around will get their way eventually the holiday business will decline to a halt and the area will become an extension of Exeter with thousands of new houses the much needed supermarkets etc etc
The sad thing is with the exception of you me and a few other minnions nobody actually cares
Didnt spot anything new at the manor house, but then again there was only 3 people there and they seemed to prefere chatting to themselves.
The seen before Amber Coast nonsense and the proposals for making the town a total no go area, both projects which have'nt involved real local people only outside consultants making assumptions at the tax payers expense
I would love to know what the genuine 13,000 or so local people really think about whats happening but cannot think of a legal or fair why of finding out
Frontierman .. I assumed you had to be talking about Cockwood and the narrow bridge whatever its called.
I know this wont be easy but Save the Manor campaigned outside Lloyds Bank, could not something similar be done along the lines do you REALLY want the town PEDESTRIANISED
@ PJD - How about we pick a really wet and horrible day when we know there's going to be a full council meeting. Then block the entrances to the Manor forcing the ones that think its a good idea to drive round for ages trying to find a parking space before getting soaked and all because they have business to attend to like most of us do every day.
Again its not really a local issue because Devon County decide what happens to highways of which the strand is one. As I tried to explain to Lynne its probably to late as the decision has already been made and funds allocated
Agree that £200,000 is a joke amount given the profits that Sainsbury's make and the impact their store will have on the town centre. However, the planning authority is Lib Dem controlled Teignbridge District Council and not Tory controlled Dawlish Town Council. So.....which council was it that was responsible for agreeing to that miserly sum? I don't know but someone must.
What other things re Sainsbury's development are you talking about? The work units (which are part of the overall scheme) or the new housing which are totally separate planning applications.
If you stand for election in May might you find a way via your election address to find out what the other 13,000 or souls in this town think about what has happened/is proposed.
Yorkshireman is wrong to say that councillors pocket £14k. There are no allowances given to Town Councillors, and that is what this thread is about, it seems.
The £200K for Town Centre improvements is only part of the Sainsbury's Section 106 agreement. How it's used depends on how much care anyone took to look at the Devon Highways displays in December and ask questions before leaving preferences. Unless you speak to people manning exhibitions you'll never get beyond blind prejudice and I don't think that will get you elected.
Facts are what are needed.
I was right the Lib Dems are not going to support any new candidates for the forthcoming elections. All the old school will be standing again scratching one anothers backs and towing the Alan Connett line. As for the Conservatives same here by the looks with the exception of Mrs Mugford who I understand is to ill to stand again.
Dont know of anyone standing alone and independant because of the cost, so it looks like the old school have it stiched up for another term
to Fronterman
Why do you expect existing councillors or candidates to stand aside for you. If you do not belong to a political party, then stand as an independent. It costs little or nothing to stand for Parish/Town Council, just hard work. Your election address can be printed on your home computer and distributed by yourself or your friends, it does not have to be professionally printed. If people think you have the right message, word gets around and they will vote for you.... but does it mean enough to you to put in the hard work.... or do you just talk a lot
Sorry but I dont talk to anyone in particular, I just like winding people up on here, it relieves the boredom.
The election message from myself is simple and no amount of talking and printing crap will alter this.
option 1 - If your happy with the way the town is run and your money is spent . Then vote for the usual crowd, and carry on as normal. Conservative + Lib Dems = self intrest
option 2 - If you want your questions and opinions to have an unbiased voice, Then vote for the Independants who dont have to tow the party line and can say what the people want them to. Independant = a better chance to be heard and for things to change without political interferance
option 3 - if like the majority you just dont give a shit anyway then thats fine, just dont moan on here about what happens after the May elections.
There you go - now pass the word around, because Im unemployed and cant afford the printing and the fancy campaign plus I have no family living locally to do the leg work. I will stand and I will fight for what the people of Dawlish want.
I'd be happy to make a financial contribution towards printing costs - however you have to let us know your manifesto and explain how you intend to turn words into actions. Seeing as you are unemployed, then at least you will have the time to distribute the leaflets and to press the flesh as you spread the word. I'm looking forward to you walking the walk, though I'm a bit confused about your comment re. winding up people on here? People might think that you only talk the talk! Surely you can't be bored - not with there being so much that needs doing?
and.......are you sure that you will fight for what the people of Dawlish want? For example what if the people of Dawlish only want the one supermarket at Shutterton Bridge. Would you fight for that?
And also what the majority wants rather than a few big-mouthed opinionated voices that shout the loudest.
Party politics have no real part to play on Dawlish Town Council, but, getting others to vote with you is all important. Yes those from the same club will most likely stick together, but not necessarily along party lines. If you try and change things, from within, you will find yourself up against the old guard, who will stick together through hell and high water (believe me, I have been there). If any independent intends to get themselves onto the council they will need others as well, for example, a group from local businesses to get voted on as a new "party" of at least eight.
As far as other views expressed on this forum, I do not believe any councilor votes for his or her own self interest, regardless how it might look.
@Lynne 16/02/2011
The planning committee at TDC has a Tory majority - people should as Dawlish's Conservative councillors about how they voted - http://cllrdavidcox.blogspot.com/2010/01/tesco-tastrophe.html
Yes, you are correct. Despite the Lib Dems now having the majority cllrs on the council as a whole, on the Developement Control Committe the Tories have a majority of one. However, there are 4 Independent Cllrs on this committee and its Chair is a Lib Dem. I imagine the Chair would have a casting vote in the event of a tie.
Total of 25 councillors on TDC Development Control Committee = 11 tory, 10 Lib Dem, 4 Independent.
I cannot for the life of me remember the exact voting figures when the last Sainsbury & Tesco planning applications were put to Dev. Com in March last year but I do remember that both Cllr Connett and Cllr Cox abstained. Both are LDs. They both gave reasons at the time which I think I can remember but not wishing to libel either I'll not repeat them here just in case my memory is playing tricks.
Dawlish Conservative Councillors voted for the Sainsbury application and against the Tesco one. In that action I have to say that on that occasion I do think they were voting as many in Dawlish would have wished them to. (ie for a supermarket at Shutterton Bridge and not at Lady's Mile).
Of course those who wished and wish to have no supermarket at all or, if they wished for one, for it to be at Lady's Mile would disagree with my statement in the para above.
well at least one good thing will come out of it all, When they do build sainsburys you and others like you will not have to stay unemployed sponging off the rest of us and talking rubbish all the time! trolley boys money is not bad these days! lol then you can print all the leaflets you want!
The voting figures for the Sainsbury application at Shutterton Bridge were:
19 for, 3 against and 1 abstention
(and yes, I know that doesn't add up to 25 but those voting figures are what are recorded in the official minutes).
it wasn't at you! i just think thats if all the "job seekers" can get a job in sainsburys then they can spend their money in the local shops which will help everyone in the long run.
Yes, I agree, Dawlish Conservative Councillors in voting for the Sainsbury application did what proberbly the majority in Dawlish wanted. Howevermy point is that a delay in making the decision would have allowed negotiation for “…a better contribution for Dawlish town centre from Sainsburys than the derisory £200,000 offered –Dartmouth got £383,700 from Sainsburys”.
Perhaps what needs investigating is who agreed in the first place that £200,000 was an 'okay' amount.. And by who, I mean was it officers (ie employees) of Teignbridge District Council or councillors? Who was involved in negotiations with the supermarkets (both Sainsbury and Tesco) re planning gain?
Sainsbury's were surprised that they were not pushed for more than £200K on their first application. But the planning officer was recommending refusal on technical grounds. He was outflanked by the members from Dawlish turning up in force and speaking for the Shutterton site in preference to losing the camping grounds at Lady's Mile. At which point the Leader of TDC spoke energetically and said that the £200K was an inadequate amount. So, what was to happen next? To refuse the application and wait for another to negotiate a new 106 agreement, or to get on with it? The committee decided to follow the arguments of the Dawlish members and approved it.
Then Tesco's application was refused on the grounds that one supermarket was enough. They took it to the High Court and it ruled in their favour to quash the Sainsbury's approval, and S reapplied and this time the two applications were heard together. Once again the planning officer recommended the Lady's Mile scheme over Shutterton and was over-ruled. So Sainsbury's have been in negotiation with TDC officers on a number of occasions and might assume that they have now squeezed as much as they can from S, not just the £200K but also the various other contributions to highways, sewerage, etc., You should add in the cost of these other factors to the £200K cash contribution to town Centre improvements to make realistic comparisons.
Officers generally deal with the technical processes and members are there to ask questions and ensure that the officers have prepared the ground for the elected members to take the decisions against complete background information. (Which doesn't often happen in Dawlish Town Council meetings - compare TDC agendas with DTC agendas)
We may yet have two supermarkets because some technical aspects appear to be chamging and Tesco are arguing still (and will when their appeal hearing is resumed) that two supermarkets will not damage trading in the town centre. Huh!
If you want to read the way the Planning Officer handled the last twin planning applcation Tesco vs Sainsbury, look at http://www.teignbridge.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=24126&p=0
You will see that he advised against Shutterton site and only set out Section 106 benefits for the Tesco site (including only £200K for town centre improvements). I'm not sure if there are procedural reasons for doing so. Logic would lead one to suppose that he should have shown the Section 106 deal for both sites, for that to be a consideration against all other planning issues.
I say, well done to Sainsbury's for persistence, and let's hope we don't get Tesco as well.
Has anyone tried the range of Frontera wines at One-Stop shop?
Would the One Stop Shop have anything to do with Tesco does anyone know? I seem to remember someone saying that it does. Is that right?
Lynne. I understand Tesco own it. You will note the same Tesco red and blue cards on the sheves but they show One Stop. Interesting the planning application be Tesco happened to be on the pole opposite the post office... it may still be there.
One-Stop is owned by Tesco. This is in the Daily Mail (so it must be true!) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1259842/Tesco-charging-higher-prices-groceries-chain-One-Stop-local-shops.html
“It was proposed by Councillor Mugford and seconded by Councillor Clemens that the application be approved subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement for contributions and conditions as reported above by the Area Planning Officer. An amendment was proposed by Councillor Cox and seconded by Councillor Connett that the application be deferred to enable further clarification to ensure that this is the best available site and to negotiate improved terms for Dawlish Town Centre. The amendment for deferral was lost by 9 votes and 13 against. A vote was then taken on the motion of approval and this was carried 15 votes for and 9 against.”
All interesting stuff this, one party blaming the other. Could it be that at long last people are begriming to realize just what these people have done to Dawlish by allowing Sainsbury's into town. It all stinks off back handers don't it.
does anyone know if the 200,000 has actually been paid into council funds yet or is this just another con
Roll on Tesco's appeal I cant wait to find out where Teignbridge are going to get the money from to fight this one but, think we can all have an educated guess on that can't we.
All this finger pointing going on. It's enough to make you wonder if local elections are on the horizon and that it might be a close call at Teignbridge District Council.
Wot's that you say? Oh, really?
I keep reading and hearing people suggesting that Councillors are taking backhanders.
Might I suggest that the proof is brought forward for us all to share in.
That will certainly help me with my voting decisions in May.
Won't hold my breath waiting, seems to be the usual, groundless whingeing that seems prevalent in Dawlish.
I look forward to apologising when I'm proved wrong....
What proof do you need Sainsbury's are a major contributor to Conservative party funds, Conservative councillors are ordered by the party whip to recommmend approval of their planning applications. Not rocket science is it. Dawlish is is not the first Town to suffer the system and certainly wont be the last.
Try asking councillors Mugford and Clemens why they voted against the district council leader.
The suggestion here is not aimed at individuals but at the system its a Big Brother situation
perhaps if you dont like the "groundless whingeing" which seems prevalent in Dawlish you should direct your comments elsewhere.