General Discussion

Ok so at first when reading through the discussions once you get past the main issue of the post it seems that it goes into a free for all on who can have a go at whoever the most including some local councillors. At first I thought oh grow up and stop acting like a child who's rattle has been thrown out the pram , but then on further reflection my view changed slightly into the thought that this maybe good.  After all who whould want to live in a place where all council members constantly agree, the public would get very little say in what they want or not ect ! So my question is does the back and forth bickering look good for Dawlish or not in respect of decision making and the future of the town.

At least they say what they feel instead of bottling it up. I certainly would not want all the town councillors agreeing on every subject.  It's a discussion site and as long as those who contribute stay civil I do not see that there is a problem. We are all human, I think, and we all get hot under the collar at times about things we believe in. I'm sure those responsible for the site would intervene if things went to far.

They also have a code of conduct to adhere to. Sometimes maybe it should be kept for council meetings but perhaps they don't talk to each other there?!

Good question.   I think the Lawn issue became unsavoury, it stopped being about views and got personal.  And when it does get personal people tend to think they are good/right and the other side is bad/wrong, which is what's happening now.    I don't know anyone on this site from Adam, I base this on what's being posted, but am I the only one who has figured out why Mrs C is goading Cllr Swift, who can't have cottoned on as she surely wouldn't keep up the retaliation.  It's becoming painful and I wish Mrs C would bring it to an end by declaring her hand. 

Would you rather the councillors kept everything they know for the secret closed session they always have after every council meeting. Its good they come on here and aire their views. What makes it more interesting is deciding wether to believe what they say or not.

In the old days when it was the Lib Dems v Conservatives we the electorate got to know nothing and you may have noticed its never the Conservative council members that comment on here mainly because their scared of crossing the party line. As for the code of conduct that needs to be abolished, council meetings and after meeting discussion need  to be open house so the public can see for themselves who says what and who disagrees.

Thanks Mjrpc. It's pretty obvious really isn't it?

@FredBassett   you refer to "the secret closed session they always have after every council meeting."     i don't know if you attend town council meetings, or even see the agendas, but everything that can be discussed in public  is.  anthing that relates to employee personnel issues and their own personal financial position, and anything that is confidential of a financial nature with contractors, can not be discussed in open session and will be set out on the agenda as a part ii item.  there is only one committee that you do not have the right to attend and that is the staffing committee, and i am not a member of it so can not attend either.  reports from staffing committee are most often made to full town council in part ii for obvious reasons. 

If there is not Part II item on the agenda then the meeting will close in open session.  

There is no other "secret closed session" that excludes you the public from hearing us debate matters of town council business. So, come along and listen and maybe it will change your views about our present council.

great question I wish I knew what it was all about what needs to be googled? if its not to rude to ask 

I do like that there is somewhere to air concerns with other members of the community and hear things that concerning them and its got to be good that we hear the way others are thinking most of all council members and so they can hear us

Thanks Fred Bassett for recognising that the Independent Councillors who post on here are doing something that the party political councillors generally avoid.

I did think long and hard about whether it would be a good idea.  Let's face it, social media and this site in particular can be a brutal place.

What swung it for me is that a big part of what I am trying in my own small way to do is to open up issues so that everyone can get involved.  I also want people to know more about what the town council is trying to do.

Sometimes it is as simple as passing on messages about flood warnings or when the mobile skip is coming.  I know a lot of people get their information from the internet, so posting snippets of information is part of the service.

I read the two Dawlish sites a lot because it does give you a wider sense of what people in the town think.  That's important to me as otherwise you tend to only hear the opinions of people you already know, and friends tend to see the world the same.

When I write on these sites, I try to walk a path of sticking to factual information and explaining why the Council is following a particular course.  I hope people find that helpful, even if they don't agree.

I keep out when postings become more personally antagonistic or petty point scoring.  I don't think that achieves much, and have noticed over time that it has caused people to stop writing on this site. 

Mrs C's attacks on me started when I took a screen shot of a particularly nasty and vile post she put on this forum about two hard working people in this town. She removed it the next morning at the suggestion of Michael Clayson. It was a particularly nasty and vicious attack and had no place on this forum. Since then she attacks me at every opportunity. I mostly ignore her posts except when they are blatently inaccurate or particularly personal.

Like Michael Clayson, I try to provide information, as I did about the lawn proposals as people were not well informed about the whole project, and I like to read what people on here are talking about and what they think needs improving.

Maggie, it seems like your memory is failing again. 

I started questioning your motives well before I questioned the destination of public funds towards the people you refer to (the same people whom you've yet to acknowledge having Googled about).

You rarely provide information Maggie; you more often than not only post on here in order to continue your petty and mindless feuds against people you know and people you think you know. 

Nice try at electioneering though...

Margaret, as a councillor who should looking out for council tax payers, are you 100%, absolutely, categorically, certain that Mrs C's post was not only nasty and vicious, but more importantly, factually inaccurate?  

I saw the original vile and disgusting post before Mrs C removed it the next morning, and 100% agree with Margaret Swift.

So Burneside, which parts of it were inaccurate??

Mcjrpc, I don't think town Councillors investigated the backgrounds of any of the recipients of the flood relief fund and I would not have expected them to. 

@Mrs C

I have no intention of repeating your remarks on this thread, could be potential libel.

So Burneside, that would be "none" then? And, as you know, there's nothing libellous about repeating facts in the public domain. 

How is the Isle Of Dogs btw?

I'm not a lawyer Mrs C, hence I won't risk repeating potential libel in public. 

Repeating facts. Facts. 

How is the Isle Of Dogs?

I want to press the Agree button, but...

I don't believe I have exercised any poor judgement, I have not been on the committee distributing the money, and I do not indulge in witch hunts. What people have or have not done in the past is their business and the poor judgement was the broadcasting on a public website. The possibly libellous comment was the one made about taking flood relief money under false pretences. You need to go and do your background research.

Oh pardon me, I thought you were referring to the bit about taking housing benefit under false pretences.  That's okay then. 

Maggie, no questions were raised about flood relief money, it was about claiming compensation from Network Rail for not being told about that part of the seawall being re-opened. 

@Judith Chalmers. I  think I  mentioned this before but even though I`m not local nobody said a word. OOPS, sorry I  better go I `m not local so I`ll dissappear. lol.

Exactly. 

Can everybody please leave this couple alone now and let them get on with trying to make a living.

forgive but I seem to be missing something here JC are you saying there is some reason the people from red rock cafe are not entitled to the help D C F & T D C & D T C legally or morally or is about claiming for from network rail because they werent told it was open yet you or someone else knows they did know ?

please reply politley I am trying to understand your point 

@Annother46 that is a very good question and we all await with bated breath for the answer! 

When do we get a summary of the feedback from the Lawn proposals?   

The quantative data from the survey is available on the Town Council website

We don't yet know the outcome of the CCF stage one bid.  This is a crucial detail as it will tell us how quickly the council has to move to adjust the proposals in light of the public comments.  It may be that quick action is required if we are still in that race.  

In the meantime Councillors will want to study the comments written on the survey forms.  Clearly changes to the scheme are needed, and this should be guided by what people have written 

There is to be a Council meeting on July 30th where all of this will be discussed in public.

I should add that the CCF decision is due in July, so we expect to hear any day.  Hence waiting for this key extra factor before getting into further detailed discussions

Thanks, just looked at it.   Am surprised, and of course disappointed.  With all the chatter from those against I thought it was heading for a resounding rejection.  Clearly not.  I guess we just have to accept people have different views on what's good for Dawlish and good on those for pushing ideas forward in the first place.   

Unless... now are you quite sure the voting wasn't rigged?  I hope the Town Council thought to bring in UN election observers to monitor it  ;)