Burton Joyce Online

of £107,049

that some £68,549 will be spent on Wages, Admin and Parish office

Such a high cost to pay !

Is this really value for money ? 

  POSTING 3  

The style of presentation and content of the minutes has change very little over the years – they still LACK the substance and detail which would enable any reader to reasonable understand fully the implications discussed  and recorded .. Implications which were, and are, instrumental in arriving at decisions which anyone in the community can fully understand and appreciate. 

 In late 2008 we approached the BJPC via the Clerk and offered to provide FREE dedicated space within a new website – the community project we were developing ( burtonjoyceonline) complete with the FREE and uncensored posting of all BJPC minutes  and announcements. Our only stipulation being that it should be recognised that our website would always maintain our own freedom of editorial opinions and posting independence.

In  early January 2009 we requested via the Clerk of the BJPC  the opportunity to address the Council to explain precisely the nature of our community website project and confirm our offer to provide the BJPC with FREE online production capabilities thus assisting and eliminating the financial and time element of the existing BJPC administration in enlarging and improving their circulation of  information to the BJ community. It was explained that the earliest meeting at which our Presentation could take place was in mid February which we accepted without concern.

However a week or so later we were advised that the Council (  F&GP Committee had declined our Presentation request. No reason, just a curt dismissal)It was this refusal, without the courtesy of an explanation which began the “bells ringing”. We immediately sent a letter to the BJPC expressing our concern and disappointment at not even receiving an explanation as to their refusal together with a written explanation of the aims and aspirations of the project.

We did receive a response - to the affect that as our project was now online and appeared of interest – the Council undertook to invite us along to the April meeting to give the suggested presentation. 

 About this time we received an e mail  - 03/04/09

This is an enquiry e-mail via http://www.burtonjoyceonline.co.uk/ from:Steve Cluff “

Brian

Just a note to say how impressive the new website is- just what Burton Joyce needs.

As the Chairman of the Three Villages Gala I am keen to have input into community events and whilst we have our own website  www.threevillagesgala.co.uk I would be happy to discuss ways that we can help support your community effortsI also currently (hopefully not for long)run the Burton Joyce Primary School Website bringing them into the 21st century. Which we could do some reciprocal arrangements withhttp://www.burtonjoyce.notts.sch.uk/

As a final note I am a newly elected member of the Parish Council and am keen with Jackie to improve its performance and access in the community. Jackie will be contacting you shortly about our PC meeting last night where we suggested much more involvement with BJonline and was more positive. As there are many new councillors there is a definite desire now to update and refresh a somewhat tarnished reputation we are working on our own website which will be on line in about 2 weeks. Jackie Dawn is an ex Marketing manager so is very switched on about these things.I would welcome the chance for a chat at some point in the next 2/3 weeks

Good Luck with the Excellent site - the bunkers stuff was terrific

Regards Steve Cluff  “ 

“The bells were now starting to ring now – very loud” ! 

During our subsequent meet , it transpired that Jackie Dawn the BJPC Clerk, together with himself were in the process of creating their own site for the BJPC  ( no-where in any BJPC minutes could we find any recording of the fact that agreement had been given to proceed with the creation  a website – YES an investigation but not affirm decision to go ahead.)

It was not online and running at that point and, in the words of Cllr Cluff it was in no way as comprehensive as our BJOnline which was online, nor did the proposed BJPC website have the interactive facility we had incorporated and considered  vital for the community to participation with their views and opinions.

We were now suspicious as to the ulterior motive in seeking a meet BEFORE the Council presentation. A suspicion which was well founded as we have subsequently found out  .. 

..Now readers may ask why on earth there is a need to include the above information in this investigation report, at this opportunity -  Well in our opinion it is important to clearly illustrate situations of tacit relationships which exist within our Parish Council between individual members ( it should be emphasised that the Clerk  had only been in the position for approx 10 months and Cllr Cluff  had become a co-opted Councillor in office for just over 2 months)

There will be several other illustrations of tacit relationships following

In early 2009 we queried this ongoing practise of the lack of substance and detail in BJPC minutes, and possibly as a result of this query some following comment was added to the BJPC website - proceeding the schedule of the minutes posted    

“BJPC minutes are produced in correctly and accurately in accordance with guidelines and are an approved reflection of the agenda items and outcomes of proposal and views within that meeting.

They should not and do not provide a narration of  individuals. Councillors are required to approve the accuracy of the minutes at the next meeting one month later. 

 Selections of BJPC minutes have been checked by N.A.L.C (National Association of Local Councils in year 2008/2009 period and found to be clear, concise and of high quality. There are no meetings in August”

QUESTION :

"If the BJPC meetings are NOT recorded verbatim either manually or digitally,  the content becomes the interpretation of the Clerk and Chairman some days later when they are written up.

The individual councillors  do not see these minutes ( even in draft form)  for almost a month after the relevant meeting,

Therefore you may ask, as we do.

” How can these minutes  possibly be adjudged to be clear, concise and of high quality, at some  later date by a remote and delayed   - “  Check by N.A.L.C” ?”.

 In any case how can they possibly be precise and clear, if we the community cannot interpret ort understand the content, because of lack of substance and detail.

Where is the OPEN and TRANSPARENT communication of information which the BJPC promise in their communication strategy which states

·         To effectively inform residents and stakeholders of the aims, objectives and activity of the Parish Council.

·         To build the capacity and motivation of residents and stakeholders to be involved with the Parish Council

.·         To use a variety of communication methods to ensure that the way we communicate keeps everyone included.

 ·         To build trust by being open and transparent.

 We can state that we are aware that in the past certain omissions from the minutes which have been queried by past councillors to which they received the answer  “ it is in the power of the Chairman to adjust  the BJPC minutes if they considered it relevant”.What happens if a resident is not satisfied with the Councils answer to their question.  Well we can advise you straight from the horse’s mouth  - that if the questioning does not meet the requirements and the queries are persisted with, the BJPC will bring their  “Plan B” into operation – their ultimate weapon –the “ Habitual, Vexatious Complaints Policy” .

 This policy was introduced into their repertoire in the middle of 2009 when difficult questions began to arise from their apparent questionable activities and comments within BJPC minutes, 

We now see for recent minutes that this HVC Policy is now standard/regular item within  the agendas of the BJPC meetings as discussed last September – This in itself tells a story !!

We join in the amazement of others and are appalled to learn that there are no checks or controls over the way in which a Parish Council works.

As has been so eloquently written,  there are many rules and statutes by which Parish Councils have to abide, but there is generally no-one to whom any one can complain if they do not fulfil their legal obligations - except in the case of

1)  corruption    

2) expenditure on things which are not permitted under Parish Council legislation or 

3) breaches of the Code of Conduct  by individual Councillors

Who is monitoring the work of Parish Councils ?  –  No one To whom can we complain or seek advice, if we have concerns about the way our Council in which our Parish Council is working

There is nowhere to take a concern or complaint about incompetence, failure to adhere to the law, money wasting of maladministration by the Parish Council as a whole.

There is NO OMBUSMAN for Parish Councils.

Why is it then that there are not any proper controls of Parish Councils – as the bottom layer of governance. The bottom layer of governance which can demand funds from the public which we cannot refuse to pay  - a privilege not available to any other  layer of governance

DO WE REALLY NEED A PARISH COUNCIL?  – we say NO

------------------------------------------- 

Part 4 

At this point we should say that the present BJPC and administration comprises of 11 councillors ( only a minority being elected –in other words,  the majorityof the BJPC comprises co-opted councillors)... plus the BJPC Clerk .Of this present group of 12, there i,s within a “GANG of 6”which  includes 3 possibly 4 , who are the main activists/ instigators..  ..  ..  ..

   During the early months of 2008 we had informal chats with both Jackie Dawn the Parish Council Clerk and Cllr Cluff ( newly co-opted. In these general conversations it transpired that Cllrs Brian and Julie O’Neill were resigning, we must admit that the manner in which this topic arose was quite surprising and somewhat abstract to the general conversation we were having (the high cost. Under utilisation  of the  “Poplars”). 

 We discovered sometime later that the whilst in office  Councillor  Brian O’Neill had undertaken a report into a comparison of the administration of Ravenshead and Bingham’s council run  leisure facilities and those being offered at the Poplars . It is quite evident from the later copy  minutes when Cllr O’Neill presented his report that a resulting connivance became the order of the day. Evidently several individuals connected with the Poplars committee took exception to his forthright investigative approach and had made it known to certain BJPC councillors.

We suggest that the following BJPC minutes are very probably relevant and contributory to the Joint resignations of the generally renowned and respected O’Neills.

Obviously at that time there was, and still are, many questions and answers within the BJPC questions which are glossed over and brushed aside, with little or no attention and intent given  or expected of an open and transparent administration. 

It should be borne in mind that Julie O’Neill had a polled  a landslide with the largest number of votes for her platform of an “Open and Transparent  BJPC” in the  2007 elections,.It was a little time later that her husband Brian was co-opted to the Council following a resignation.

  Here are more examples of intrigues within the BJPC at that time   

  08/138 Budget Update 2009/10        Cllr J O’Neill advised the meeting that work had commenced on budget projections for 2009/10. It was noted that a meeting of the Finance & General Purposes Committee had been scheduled to take place on the 16^th December to

progress this further. Cllr O’Neill stated that there were four key issues to consider in future financial planning and these were   

         a) the poor state of Parish Council reserves  

          b) the cost of running the Poplars Sports Ground   

         c) the increase in salary bill and the possible implications of pension developments in 2012 and      

        d) the relatively high precept charged by Burton Joyce.    

    Cllr Randall challenged the projected £56k cost of running the Sports Ground and stated that part of the revenue grant and precept should be included within the income figure to offset costs. -

  Cllr J O’Neill stated that the revenue grant and the precept were based on total Council expenditure and size of population.-

 Cllr Greenfield expressed the view that all public sports facilities were subsidised and were unlikely to ever break even.        

     It was resolved to note the Budget Update 2009/10. 

09/011 Draft Budget 2009/10            In response to a query raised by Cll J O’Neill as to why the Draft Budget had been designated a confidential item, the Parish Clerk explained that the draft budget still had some outstanding issues around staff remuneration.

Following a brief discussion, it was agreed that the Draft Budget 2009/10 would be removed from the Confidential Session and heard in public and that the remuneration issues would be agreed at another meeting

. It was resolved: To approve the 2009/10 budget proposals as presented and to authorise the Parish Clerk to complete and return the provisional notification of likely precept requirements 2009/10 (form A) to Gedling Borough Council by the end of January 2009.

      The public session closed at 8.52pm and members of the public and Cllrs B & J O’Neill withdrew from the meeting having previously declared a personal and prejudicial interest in the confidential item.

The complainant remained.

09/012 Confidential Item – Letter of Complaint     The complainant addressed the meeting and the complaint was discussed in detail. Cllr B O’Neill’s written statement was considered as part of the discussion. The Parish Council found that statements made by a councillor at the Parish Council meeting held on the 4^th November 2008 had been unacceptable and apologised unreservedly for any

distress caused to the complainant by these statements. The Parish Council also wished to assure the complainant that he had their full

thanks and support for work he had undertaken.

It was further agreed that the complainants company would continue to be the Parish Council’s preferred electrical contractor- 

Draft Minutes of Meeting of the Poplars Sports Ground CommitteeHeld at the Parish Office on 15^th January 2009

Present:         Cllrs Blandamer, Greenfield, B. O’Neill & Potter

In Attendance: Cllr Cluff, Jackie Dawn (Parish Clerk), David List (Ground & Amenities Manager) and Chris Smith, BJ Archery Club 

1. Poplars Sports Ground Review: It was noted that formal responses were still required from Gedling Borough Council and Severn Trent Water with regard to licence and lease enquiries and these would be pursued again. (PB &JD)

 Cllr Brian O’Neill presented his reports on the Poplars Sports Ground for discussion and Ravenshead Leisure Centre for information

. It was noted that the reports contained the personal recommendations of Cllr O’Neill as a result of questions he had raised with club members and management as an individual Councillor and therefore did not necessarily reflect the views of the Poplars Sports Ground Committee or the Parish Council as a whole.*****

Following a discussion which centred on preferred maximum pitch utilisation and the existing policy of ensuring that the pitches were kept in a condition which would require no extensive repairs at the end of the season, it was agreed that David List would present a report to February meeting. (DL)

It was confirmed that Chris Smith, the BJ Archery Club Representative should send information prepared as a result of queries raised by Councillor Brian O’Neill to the Parish Clerk for distribution to all Committee members

. “****** What was going on here ,

Are we expected to read between the lines? – What was the motive in

“ It was agreed that further discussion on Councillor Brian O’Neill’s report be deferred to the next meeting”.?

WHY was this? – political, vested interests, inter/personal relationships, connivanceWE WONDER   ??????”

As history shows very shortly after this situation - Cllrs Brian and Julie O’Neill and Cllr Marlene Dixon tended their resignation. 

The BJPC Chairman prematurely published an open letter of appreciation re the verbal intention for resignation by Julie and Brian O’ Neill -

Why did the Chairman willingly accept the later written resignations of the O’Neills without having a prior “face to face” to resolve any of the contentious points raised within their letters. The Clerk should also taken some initiative in resolving the subjects raised within the letters. This inaction was irresponsible and “a burying of “heads in sand” - wantonly throwing aside the undoubted skills, knowledge and contribution of two respected and established Councillors

 Burton Joyce Parish Council(With due reference to the origination published in the March edition of the Parish Magazine)

An appreciation - I would like to take this opportunity to note and thank two of its most active members for their valuable work on its behalf. Cllr Julie O’Neill and her husband Brian have decided to step down at the end of this month.Julie has contributed her considerable expertise and experience to the Parish Council during the two years she has been a member. As Chair of the Planning Committee and Vice-Chair of the Finance and General Purposes Committee she has brought clarity and much needed order to their running. She has also acted as the Parish Council’s expert on Flood being responsible for researching and preparing a report on the village’s flooding experience in 2006, preparing a flood emergency leaflet and acting as Flood and Emergency Warden.. Amongst other work she has undertaken for the Council are a communication s working part, a village traffic flow survey and a bid for funding to improve The Grove. She as also taken the lead in examining consultation documents received by the Parish Council and has been of inestimable value in supporting and providing practical help to our new Parish Clerk during her first year. Likewise Brian as brought a fresh approach to the Sports ground Committee during the few months he has been a Member. They will be greatly missed by both the Parish Council and the electorate, who I am sure would like to join in wishing them the very best for the future

Cllr Richard Potter  - Burton Joyce Parish Council

We at BJO together with many in the community wonder why this appreciation appeared so quickly – or  do we really?

Copies of the 3 resignations letters which had to be obtain by involving the FREEDOM of INFORMATION ACT have already appeared within HOT GOSSIP ,  

WHY? We ask should a member of the community have to invoke the Freedom of Information Act requested of their own Parish Council information to which they have democratic rights? Simply the BJPC wanted to hide and withhold truths and critisms   

Copies of  resignation letters can be seen at

http://www.burtonjoyceonline.co.uk/hot-gossip/195-why-do-our-councillors-keep.html

It was at the time ( April) that we presented to the BJPC our justification for an ONLINE association between themselves and BJ Online. This the BJPC accepted and agreed reciprocal inter website links. These were promptly put into being by both sides.

Little did we realise that one of the “Gang of 6” would be undertaking individual unsanctioned action..  ..  .,  

WE  DO NOT NEED A PARISH COUNCIL with such an agenda

PART 5 

 Council meeting on dated March 9 - The following minute appears

"Parish Council Website“ - Following a brief update from Cll Cluff It was resolved to support the proposal for the development of the Website"

"Burton Joyce On-line: Council considered the letter** and supporting documentattion in detail and were generally impressed by the way the site had developed since they had first looked at it. the potential benefits to the community were discussed and the Council agreed in principle to discussing reciprocal website links between the forthcoming Council Website and that of  Burton Joyce Online. It was resolved that Mr Alvey be invited to give a presentation to full Council at its meeting on the 7th April"

**The "letter" referred to in this minute was the correspondence sent by ourselves complaining of the “decline” of the offer of an earlier presentation (without even the courtesy of a reason)

Following that particular March 9th BJPC meeting, the "premature birth" of the “official” BJPC website began to appeared online – before the full BJPC meeting dated the 7thApril . The meeting at which we were now belately invited to "present" to the full Council. 

What a strange situation some may ask?  – we cannot possibly comment 

During April BJ Online promoted and introduced an Online interactive Forum for interested members of the community to contribute and respond/debate their uncensored comments and opinions

Several members of the community saw this as an opportunity to question certain village situations which in the past had remained taboo or which were never heard . This created lively debate with two major topics “High cost, low utilisation of the Poplars” and “Why do our councillors keep leaving”   

 As a direct result Cllr Cluff  took up the challenge and posted several responses to points raised.

However this opportunity did not completely satisfy Cllr Cluff for he lobbied BJO for his interpretation of censorship - which was refused.

May 2009 saw the annual staging of the 3 Villages Gala at the Poplars 

There is little doubt that this is a grand display illustrating what our communities can organise and stage. Perhaps it is too grand for we understand the financial implications are just about “break-even” even with the free use of the Poplars ground sanctioned by the BJPC and the unselfish efforts of many volunteers.

 As the Gala is staged at the beginning of may the weather can be quite unreliable which can easily result in the event losing money. 

During April and May BJOnline gave free extensive coverage pre and post the event. However whilst the BJ Online Principals were out of the country at the e time of the Gala it happened that Cllr Cluff arranged with a subordinate within the BJ Online organisation, to have introduce into our Forum his brand of censorship - at the same time he successfully arrange to have multiple photos of the current 3 Villages Gala event featured in the website.

Now featuring the photos was no problem, in fact, we welcomed the opportunity of promoting the event, however the unsanctioned introduction of censorship within BJ Online was a step too far. This unsanctioned action resulted in an immediate reaction by the Principals (deleting a posting from abroad and censuring the individual within BJO  for exceeding his responsibilities) Cllr Cluff apparantly took exception to our action and immediate asked for his photos to be removed from BJ Online.

he also posted in our website Forum .

“20/05/09After reviewing my trial period of posting on this forum, I have reluctantly  come to the decision not to continue posting  or monitor any further posts.

I think the Forum medium is an excellent device for Burton Joyce Parish Council to communicate however in this instance  I could not agree a format of Area posting with the admin at BJOnline that I was comfortable presenting to BJPC  for approval. Therefore and subject to PC approval we may now have our own smaller version next month that matches the requirements I believ are required for a local government body.This is a personal decision and  not endorsed or influenced by the BJPC.Its been fun and informative &  I wish BJO success in its community venture

 Cllr Steve Cluff”

This posting is quite strange for at the following meeting of the BJPC it was suggested by Cllr Cluff  and approved by the Council  that the BJPC website should include an interactive Forum ( censored) 

This approved proposal was deferred indefinitely at the next BJPC meet

 What a strange situation some may ask?  – we cannot possibly comment

May 18th 2009 was the date and month when the Annual Parish Meeting had been organised and scheduled 

Here is our BJ Online posting made at the time

This is a posting by BURTON JOYCE ONLINE to bring to the community the facts and detailed comments arising at the  2009 Burton Joyce Annual Parish Meeting - 19th May- 7.30pm - Carnarvon RoomsRegretfully it is the official policy NOT to publish Minutes of this meet until the following Year - 2010 ????? 

The vast majority of “Official organisation & Administration” websites invariably provide a limited and biased view on their own activities, achievements and intentions. Over the past month since its premature launch, it appears the official BJPC website at www.burtonjoyceparishcouncil.org.uk will be no different to the plethora of existing administration website already on the www - Why ?

Well ! You had only to attend last nights meeting ( 19th May ) of the Burton Joyce Annual Parish Meeting to REGRETFULLY realise the “short comings” in the outflow of legitimate and precise information from the BJPC, and their continually failure to reach out and engaged with the community and local village groups.

For this reason, and this reason only, we intend to use this space to report in detail the full content of the meeting of the 19th May. ( this is now actually posted in full within Local Adminstration section  (BJPC category)First of all let us inform you that in fact there was only 5 members of the public in attendance - “ 2x Husband and Wife couples plus one other gentleman”There were 4 members of local groups - BJ Preservation Society, BJ Residents Association and the BJ Village Plan Committee.The Local Police representativeA representative of Severn Trent Water

But the most surprising situation is that there was a marked absence in the presence of experienced BJPC representation. For whatever the reasons,In fact the Council which should comprise of 11 members were represented by only2 established and experienced serving members - 2 years plus - Cllrs Blandermer & Greenfield, 3 co-opted councillors Cllrs Lashkar Singh Bilan ( Nov 08), Cllrs Cluff & Welton ( Jan09)

Unfortunately the Parish Clerk could not attend - regretfully it appeared no one had been adequately briefed as a stand-in

The existing BJPC Chairman and Deputy Chairman were also absent.

However it is understood that there is publicity advising that there are currently vacancies for 2 Councillors 

 ( we are now advised it could be 3) Cllr Marlene Dixon had now tended her resignation)

The Parochial Council failed to provide a representative

What on earth is happening ?

Why is it that the BJPC does not appear to be engaging with the community?  Were personal invites sent to local groups ? if so, Why was there no representation

Teenagefrs, Singles - Married - Parents ( single and partners) - Matures, Seniors - Shop Owners - Business Owners - Tradesmen etc, etc.Minority Groups - Stroke Club - BJ Runners - Calligraphy Group, Sugar Craft Guild - 1 to One - Senior Citizens Club - BJU3A,St Helens Baby & Toddler Group - BJ Duplicate Bridge GroupTrent Valley Art Group - BJ Players - Scouts - Guides -Teachers,The W I - Mothers Union - Local History Society, the Primary School, The Church organisationsThe Sports Clubs - Cricket, Football, Archery, Bowls ( particular as these are the most heavily activities subsidised by the BJPC and Community) etc etc

The first item on the Meeting Agenda was 

Election of a Chairman -  in the absence of both the existing Chairman and Vice Chairman. Cllr Cuff ( co-opted to the Council in January 2009 ) was proposed as Chairperson by Cllr Greenfield ( a Cllr of a couple of years standing) - T

his was particularly surprising as he is the “new kid on the block” - and there were other more experienced  BJ Councillors present ( Blandermer/Greenfield ).

 Surprising, for these two lady Councillors have obviously been witness to past Council and Village matters over a much longer period and thus on experience alone should be more knowledgeable with previous Council decision, actions and circumstances.

We will not report once again this particular meet as it our interpretation of the event  was posted within BJOnline with in a few days – NOT THE 12 MONTHS DELAY for ANNUAL MINUTES  As is the normal period taken  by the BJPC

You may well ask why – we cannot possibly comment !!!

May 2009

Why did the BJPC Chairman Cllr Potter and the Clerk willingly accept the written resignations of Mrs Dixon and not attempting to resolve the matters raised within her resignation letter. Again an act of staggering individual irresponsibility, incompetence and a further example of “burying heads in sand” - wasting the undoubted skills, knowledge and contribution of a well respected Councillor with past experience of fulfilling posts of high profile in Chair/Vice Chair and Tribunal Judge positions

DO WE REALLY NEED A PARISH COUNCIL ???

PART 6 

2009 Annual Parish Meeting –

Cost of the Sports CentreEvery year since 2003 questions have been annually asked about the cost of the Sports Centre

In 2005 the Chair at the time could not answer – he said he would need notification of the question in advance.

In 2006 a question was written in advance, but the Chair at the time said he could not answer because the Clerk was away and he had not received my written request.

In 2007 a further written question was submitted but the Chair had changed the month before and the new Chair did not have the information. The Clerk at the time said she did not know as the previous Chair always did the accounts. The Chair at the time undertook to provide the information (which he did not – as can be seen from Matters Arising in the Minutes of the 2008 meeting.)

In 2008 Mrs Dixon asked the same question together with a question about the increase in the precept by over 15%..The Clerk was advised in advance that the question would be raised and that she should have the information to hand.

However, at this years (2009) annual meeting the questions not even minuted.

This is becoming embarrassing a monotonous bore

WHY ??you may askWe cannot possibly comment !!!

All these incidents of avoidance are “nought” compared to this year - Why? Because, the Chairman - Cllr Potter, the Vice Chairman Cllr Hutt, and the Clerk all failed to attend the 2009 Annual Parish Meeting

We wonder if there will be any change to these responses at the 2010 Annual Parish meeting for the Clerk has assured us that Time Sheets were to be introduced to provide a true cost figure to the Labour content of maintain the Poplars 

 During this 2009 period the BJPC also decide to introduce their Habitual and Vexatious Complaints policy. A policy which clearly explains in detail that the complaints referred to are those specifically related to and covered by i) the Freedom of information Act .ii) the Data Protection Actiii)The official BJPC Complaints procedure

The introduction  this policy was supposed the answer to two residents in particular supposedly asking an increased number of questions of the BJPC

Was this the work of “ gang of 6” – we cannot possibly comment

During JULY 2009, we requested and was given access to the BJPC accounts. Our particular interest for many months had been and still is the High Cost of running the Poplars – we were most interested in the Poplars Booking Procedure and related income and cost.

.. ..

We were given access to the Poplars Booking Diary. (This was the normal ongoing daily diary), the entries and accompanying information was surprising sketchy, to say the least.

 There was definitely NO X-referencing ( confirmed by another resident inspecting the same material immediately after my own inspection)

Our observations were as follows

1) The entry is completed without stating the name of the individual booking person,

2) Without showing a relevant Booking Reference number ( for later X -referencing to an Invoice).

 3) Without stating the actual activity booked.

4) Without booking an anticipated time/duration period.

 5) Without a quoted cost.

6) Without issuing a numbered invoice/receipt for deposit received.

7) Without the later confirmation that the activity actually booked, really did occurred at the time place and within the time frame actually, before a final X reference invoice is issued

These “SEVEN withouts” must result in the overall booking system being just about as watertight as a sieve - with the possibility of - inadvertent, unintentional/intentional omissions which are difficult if not impossible to be checked and balanced by X -referencing or later inspections How can the system be robust and no errors identified if information entered in the diary does not have all the necessary “checks and balances” to verify every entry ?. What about an entry which may have been inadvertently omitted or overlooked - How can this be possibly picked up ?

The Clerk who is also the Responsible Financial Officer for the BJPC and the Chairman of the Parish Council should certainly have been aware of “in-place” systems and procedures, particularly for the one facility which actually consumes approx 50% of the Council‘s total expenditure ( the actual labour costs associated with this facility are still NOT known or logged and can only be guesstimated even with the constant questioning at recent Annual Parish Meetings - surely a neglect by both the Council and the Responsible Financial Officer

 MINUTES OF THE BURTON JOYCE PARISH COUNCIL MEETING

*************Held Tuesday 7th July 2009 ************

i) I t was felt The Parish Council felt the originally expressed intention of creating an un-biased community based forum designed to inform residents of news and events. Had not been met

ii) The Parish Council had been made aware that a number of clubs associated with the Poplars Sports Ground had been seriously distressed by the views expressed on the site. had not been met

iii) that the website contained a high volume of inaccurate, speculative and potentially defamatory comments and the Parish Council did not wish to be associated with these or in any way be held responsible for them

iv) It was felt that the site portrayed Burton Joyce in a consistently negative way and recent images and articles did not reflect a balanced view 

“BJO finds it quite disturbing that the BJPC consider themselves equipped to be “Judge and Jury”, issuing a dictum together with comments and decisions based upon non-specific generalities and hearsays supposedly attributed to “unnamed individuals/friends of the Poplars”  ( could these be the same as “unnamed individuals/friends of the Poplars” who complained about the then Cllr O Neill’s investigation a couple of months ago.)

Non-specific generalities and hearsays by , presumably stated, and propose/ seconded by “un-named” Councillors - accepted in Committee and full Council Meetings without any note in the minutes of the resulting voting - “majority” or “unanimous” Council decision “ on unsubstantiated generalities 

These are the precise BJPC minutes which we at BJO are continually requesting the Parish's justification for the recording and  publication. -

Answer to these ongoing requests are continually avoided and clouded by other unrelated comments  - Also why even today ( March 2010) are these particular minutes still missing from the relevant section on the BJPC website 

We ask if this simply the result of the lack of “know-how” or the inability of the Clerk or the  designated councillor (responsible for the upkeep of the BJPC website) or are there deeper connotations – the “Gang 0f 6”-

 . You may well ask the question , but we cannot possibly comment !!!

PART 7 to follow  

----