A Challenge

Everyone is aware we live in a changing world.

This is especially noticeable in the ways which central government is pushing for large County/Unitary and Borough councils to become leaner and more efficient (‘Value for Money’) and as a consequence less money is given to parish councils.                                                                                               

Some LA’s are refusing to pass on the money from the DCLG to parish councils.

Anston Parish Council has frozen the precept (Anston Tax) for 2016/2017 to reduce the financial burden on residents and has identified other costs which, if not controlled will leave the parish finances with a deficit which can only be eliminated by either raising the precept every year, getting rid of some services and/or reducing the workload of the groundstaff.

Parish Councils may only spend public money on projects or actions for which they have a Statutory Power. Breaking this rule is likely to result in a Parish Councils accounts being refused by the auditor and, possibly, the individual councillors being required to repay the money illegally expended. There is still, as there was in 1894, (The Local Government Act 1894) only one power which the Parish Council must consider using and that is to “provide allotments for the labouring poor”, if asked for them. All other powers are voluntary – the Parish Council is not obliged to exercise them and indeed the majority would find it difficult to raise enough money to exercise them all on a permanent basis. Parish Councils are funded by a small part of the council tax and get no general government grant, so they have every incentive to ensure that they give and get value for money.

Here’s the Challenge: Instead of a certain vocal minority carping on about ‘Why doesn’t the parish council do this or that’ or ‘We need a grant for ……’  Why don’t they-and certain keyboard warriors (You know who you are)- and other concerned residents try to work with the parish council and offer positive proposals and answers to some of these questions?

What is the maximum grant APC should give to any group?

Should groups be given reduced rates for the main room hire? (Current full rate is £25 per hour)

Should any group be given free room hire?

How much should be spent on Bonfire Night celebrations?

What other events (apart from the Steam Rally and VW Club show) could be held on Rackford Meadows to offset the £12,800 pa interest payments?

Should RMBC or APC have responsibilities for all grass cutting in Anston?

This list of questions is not exhaustive.

Something to bear in mind; We all want a new parish hall that will be spacious, energy efficient and with better facilities. The money for it has to come from somewhere and although a grant might be available the parish council does not have unlimited funds to initiate a new building programme.

Hence the Challenge.

Control costs, find new income streams or keep raising the precept?

Your Money.Your Choice.

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Community News, Parish Council News and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

111 Responses to A Challenge

  1. S Thornton says:

    TOM
    You make a valid point. But to dispel any myths about Labour, Anston (at present)is not a Labour Strong hold. In recent years the good folk of Anston and woodsetts have voted in a Tory, and an Independent. The Parish Council in Anston is an Independent controlled Parish Council ( although two Labour Party members sneaked on without declaring their Party Membership) Labour are not primed to win in Anston at all.

    Like

  2. Tom says:

    Hi Stuart
    If I remember right when Darren Hughes put up for Tory he won hands down, although he changed to labour it did prove the point that Anston was comfortable with the Tory Borough Councillor
    Yours Faithfully
    Tom

    Like

  3. S Thornton says:

    Dear Tom,
    Please read the thread. I made it quite clear. But just to be sure, If people want to get rid of Labour in Anston and Woodsetts, then the only way to do it is for Tories to vote for UKIP. ( Tories came no where near in the last election) The Independent Candidates will struggle to gain enough votes. At the last election the Tories garnered 500 odd votes, UKIP lost to Labour by 50 votes. If Tories vote UKIP, Labour will be finshed in Anston. Simple.

    Like

  4. miss f sales says:

    ALL cllrs this is not a personality contest it is about the future of a village it’s services it’s people dos it matter what party your from think not I don’t understand why apc cannot work to generate stability why pull anston day to bits o it was originally a labour idea so that won’t work well it as all group’s need support even the council cllrs owt to think before posting silly comenent s as this kind of behaviour as no value and will continue to create future unrest among themselves and public it seems to be look at me grandstanding in stead of doing all you can to the best of your ability to work with the community to wich you serve

    Like

  5. Tom says:

    Excuse me watchman this was not a snide remark about a councillor it was a question to Stuart who published what I had replied to, and also why only one labour councillor with a star against their name when there is more than one on that list

    Yours faithfully
    Tom

    Like

    • Watchman says:

      The councillor with a * against her name is a reject from Maltby and she was an RMBC councillor in 2012.
      I am not going to publish the full list of candidates because I gave you the link.

      Like

  6. Peter says:

    Very good question that tom why indeed didn’t cllr Thornton suggest independent over ukip

    Like

    • Watchman says:

      Hold it right there you two.
      If you can be bothered to read this through thread Cllr.Thornton has given his explanation.
      No more attacks on or snide remarks about any APC councillor will be published.

      Like

  7. Tom says:

    Hi Stuart
    Could you tell Me why you ask conservative voters to vote UKIP when if you are independent, why not ask them to vote independent ?
    WATCHMAN
    could you let us have a list of the names of the candidates so we can see who were councillors at the time of child exploitation which Stuart has mentioned, perhaps you could identify these with a tick at the side of there names
    Yours faithfully
    Tom

    Like

    • Watchman says:

      The candidates for Anston and Woodsetts are:
      Astbury Lauren Amy Edith Labour Party Anston and Woodsetts *
      Clarke Phillip John UK Independence Party (UKIP) Anston and Woodsetts
      Foulstone Charles David Green Party Anston and Woodsetts
      Froggatt Bernard UK Independence Party (UKIP) Anston and Woodsetts
      Ireland Jonathan Charles Labour Party Anston and Woodsetts
      Jepson Clive Robert Independent Anston and Woodsetts
      Kavanagh Anthony John The Conservative Party Candidate Anston and Woodsetts
      Sadler Christine Independent Anston and Woodsetts
      Wilson Katherine Labour Party Anston and Woodsetts

      * Councillor in 2012

      In Wales ward Cllr’s Beck,Watson and Whysall were amongst those declared ‘Not Fit For Purpose’

      If you want to see a full list of candidates-http://www.rotherham.gov.uk/elections

      Like

  8. M Manship says:

    I feel even though there is a little bit less money to play with this year the council needs to do its best to provide services for the people of the village to the best of its ability. This can be something as small as giving a free room to a voluntary organisation that supports the village in some way to making sure we invest and develop in our current and new resources to optimise their use and availability to the public. It’s also important that if we can no longer provide the services we are open and transparent and consult the public to make them aware of the changes to the services we can provide.

    Like

    • christine sadler says:

      would you be referring to the anston day effort miles, of which you are one of the labour gang, yea thought so.

      Like

    • mick says:

      I thought political affiliations were not going to be posted in this thread anymore. Anyway why do people keep bringing up party politics with regard to the parish council? Parish councils should be party neutral. So come on Cllrs work together for us and Anston.

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      Best comment so far.
      Read and understand it everyone.

      Like

  9. Anonymous says:

    Hi I’m a new comer to your site but for what IV been reading over the past few months it is very nice to see a conservative candedate put up for Anston on there own with no split votes. As someone previously posted on your site it would be very nice to see the views of the private sector.
    The very best of look to the conservative candidate.

    Your faithful Tom

    Like

  10. Peter says:

    Very very interesting list for rmbc elections this is going to fun

    Like

  11. Peter says:

    Same name as my birth certificate and I totally agree with the Jay report cause trouble no ask questions yes as I am free to do under English law open and transparent in your standing oder s I think

    Like

  12. S Thornton says:

    Dear Peter (not your real name is it) YES I did ask Tories to hold their noses and vote UKIP. Why, Because I dont think they will stand by and say nothing whilst children are being raped. There are still RMBC Cllrs who are standing for Election, who were branded “not fit for purpose” or denied the Jay report on Child Sexual Exploitation. My mantra is ABL. (anyone but Labour) As for delivering Leaflets for UKIP, Ill explain yet again (because some people were just born to twist the truth) I delivered leaflets in exchange for a Charitable donation, The donation was given to the Royal British Legion. But You already know this, being a trouble maker seems to come naturally to you. Why do you post under a false name?.

    Like

  13. Peter says:

    Last post was not from me very childlike

    Like

  14. Anonymous says:

    Yes I understand they was not cllrs at the time but ther option s may still be the same in the public s view that was the only point I was trying to make

    Like

  15. Peter says:

    Yes watchman cllr Thornton asked conservative voter’s to hold ther noises and vote ukip and as also delivered ukip flyers when Mr frogget stud cllr tawn was seen on TV supporting the ukip candidate Mr frogged at the count at the last elections Mrs sadler was seen at the cutler waving ukip banners point is watchman labour are labour who are the independent s please tell us because we haven’t a clue

    Like

    • Watchman says:

      ‘when Mr frogget stud cllr tawn was seen on TV supporting the ukip candidate Mr frogged at the count’
      That was 12 months before Colin Tawn became a councillor so that statement is wrong.
      ‘Mrs sadler was seen at the cutler waving ukip banners’
      Before she was a councillor. That part of your statement is wrong as well.
      I don’t mind Labour supporters contributing to this blog but you’re making the same mistakes as the previous Anston Labour Cllr’s made close to an election: False and misleading statements.

      None of this has anything to do with the main thrust of this thread and I’d appreciate it if you and other posters did not try and divert attention from it.
      You’ve made your point, what have you got to offer in the way of sensible suggestions to help and improve Anston?

      Like

    • christine sadler says:

      Anyone but Labour, even a trained monkey if anyone out there has one.

      Like

  16. christine sadler says:

    Is anyoneout interested in actually doing something to make Anston a better place to live.
    FIRST UP GET OUT AND USE YOUR VOTE INSTEAD OF SITTING AT HOME WATCHING CORRO.
    SECOND UP DO NOT STICK YOUR TICK ON LABOUR JUST BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT YOU HAVE ALWAYS DONE SAME AS YOUR DAD BEFORE YOU.
    The latest leaflets put out by Labour are a joke. Central Government stated in the Casey report that The Labour controlled Rotherham Borough Council was NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE.
    Nothing has changed lets be clear on that.
    Labour is making wild promises about the improvements they are going to bring about.
    Labour are responsible for all that is wrong and needs to be put right.
    You can thank Labour for the state of the roads, The abundant litter. The dog fouling. The cuts in service to the elderly. Cuts to everything that affect the man in the street.
    You can ask yourself why Anston does not receive a fair share of the budget, Oh would that be Labour by any chance.
    Take a leaf out of my book and start asking questions and also start doing something. I regularly pick up the foul mess left by irresponsible dog owners. Do you know that you can report dog fouling and litter to Streetpride who will arrange to have this cleared, their phone no. is
    01709 336003. Our beleagered dog wardens will arrange extra patrols and welcome reports and descriptions of dog foulers and their pets on 01709 822453. they love to prosecute if they can catch ’em that is.
    So please no more moaning lets actually do something, however small, it will make a difference.
    And above all DO NOT VOTE FOR LABOUR.
    Look beyond the glossy leaflet put out by Labour at great expence no doubt—–I wonder who is paying for all the stage setting like photos outside Anston Parish Hall—What the heck is that about, I can’t remember the last time I saw a Labour Borough Councillor in there, oh and while we are about it why are Labour parachuting foreigners into our village, what do they know or care.
    I await your answers.

    Like

    • If you like most of your taxes going to Rotherham Town centre instead of our community then by all means vote Labour.

      If you want to assist criminals and move all our police officers away then vote Labour.

      Or grow a brain and don’t!

      Like

    • Peter says:

      Fact is anston will vote labour as it always has

      Like

    • Peter says:

      All I sead is this area is a labour strong hold and straight away insults dictatorship comes to mind

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      Why do you think is it wrong to criticise the Labour party?

      Like

    • Peter says:

      I don’t think it’s wong to criticise labour or any other party what I don’t understand is why independent cllrs are asking us to vote ukip if the labour party in anston as damaged themselves that bad why are the independent cllrs so worried

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      Fair comments.
      Which Independent Cllr’s are asking electors to vote UKIP Peter?

      Like

    • christine sadler says:

      A reply to my own comment, that has to be a first. Why are Labour parachuting candidates in from outside our area, is it because they are scraping the barrel, is there no long list of wannabees who live in Anston itching to join a salubrious club where the only credentials are that you do as you are told by THE PARTY, where are the last lot of Labour candidates, have they been de-selected by the Labour party and if so why, I have a few theories but will leave that for another time. The point is all you Labour voters need to start thinking of why and wherefore, and a good start would be to attend Anston Parish council meetings and see how some cllrs perform (myself included) or choose the alternative and watch in the comfort of your own home on U Yube, happy viewing all.

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      I will not publish anymore comments about councillors or political party affiliations.
      This thread has gone wildly off track and nobody has offered a single suggestion pertinent to it.

      Either send in something you want me to consider publishing or post sensible comments.

      Like

  17. Janet says:

    Sorry I do apologise seems the matter about crowgate is a sore subject but however I am a member of public and this community, and just like you am very much intitled to have my opinion which no doubt you will disagree with , maybe if certain things wasn’t done under handed then people wouldn’t be so discusted by the actions towards some councilliors decisions , yeah i understand you are limited to what you can do.

    Like

  18. Janet says:

    Watchman… There not much in the village as it is for our children and they tried to give away one of the few things they do have , aren’t you suppose to be doing things to better our community ? It may be down to rmbc about the crossings but you’d think think the councilliors of our village would stand up and voice there opinions on how this would effect local people local children’s safety for our locals schools, how many parents do you think rely on on them crossing for there children to cross safely . Are you suppose to improve the community ?

    Like

    • Watchman says:

      I’ve edited part of your post because I said yesterday the discussion on Crowgate is finished. It is no more. It is a dead subject.
      AFAIK the parish council agreed to send a letter of objection to RMBC about the loss of School crossing patrols, remember some parish councillors have young children as well and they are also affected by RMBC’s decision. I will also point out to you-if you don’t know already-RMBC refused the parish council’s request for a pedestrian crossing or safety refuge on the A57 which, considering 9 homes are being built on land opposite the Shell petrol station seems rather odd.
      I do understand your frustrations however I think it would be beneficial if you took the time to search the ‘net and researched the limited powers parish councils have compared to the powers and duties of Metropolitan Councils.
      In this instance Big Brother rules.

      Like

  19. Janet says:

    As a young mother of children and a resident of this village , and use crowgate playing field to let my children to run free and play in safety , for some members of the council to have made a decision like they did is very unceptable , the parish council should be more concerned about issues like school crossing protrols been removed …as any concilior even asked any of the schools what effect this will have on them and more to the point , I don’t know who the contractors are who you keep talking about but seems to me there the only ones whose thinking about our community

    Like

    • Watchman says:

      For heavens sake! How many more times? It does not matter who has control of this piece of land it will still be there.
      School crossing patrols are under the remit of RMBC, Anston Parish Council had nothing to do with the decision. Why not ask one of the Labour candidates to give you an explanation why RMBC cut School crossing patrols?

      Like

    • Patriot says:

      There are about half a dozen people writing on here using EXACTLY the same bad grammar, same atrocious spelling, time and time again, and same pathetic attempts in trying to put down the current Council or to be more precise the Independent members of the current Council. It is obviously one person using multiple alias’. They must think all of the other, genuine contributors and readers who don’t contribute, were born yesterday. Doesn’t he (and I say he because I am almost certain who he is) realise that his tirade of hatred is working against him? I suggest that he puts his brain into gear and quits this verbal assault on the Council before the damage that he is doing to himself and his business becomes irreparable, if it has not already done so. Think hard and carefully about what you are doing and what the consequences could be sir, that is my advice to you.

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      It isn’t only me then who gets tired of spammers?

      Like

    • Patriot says:

      The thing is Watchman, there are almost certainly people reading the posts on here that are quite capable of realising just who this man is. By this I mean people who have the power to pull the rug right from under his feet. Then I expect he will come bleating that he has been hard done by, but, HE HAS BEEN WARNED! He would only have himself to blame and these posts will still be here, even if he is no longer able to afford a computer..

      Like

  20. roy says:

    Yes one seat was filled a few meetings ago 2 seats now available no need for insult s

    Like

    • Watchman says:

      Who are the three councillors you said had left? I can name two of them so who is the third one?

      Like

    • Jean says:

      I have been reading this for quite a while and I find you quite insulting WATCHMAN about people’s grammar and maths
      Not everyone is quite as clever has you

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      Being ‘clever’ has nothing to do with it, taking pride in your Mother tongue (and using a dictionary-whether a hard copy or an on line version) helps to make a sentence or comment readable, coherent and enjoyable.
      Who takes pride in not being able to spell or using slang?

      Like

    • Jean says:

      Watchman I don’t know who you are as you too won’t reveille who you are, but I think you thrive on peoples misfortune, bit of a bully I think

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      ‘Bully’ is not a word I recognise when it refers to me.
      I would suggest you mean ‘Robust’. Plain talking is not a crime nor a sin and I do not “thrive on peoples misfortune,” but this blog thrives on the inability of RMBC, Borough and Parish Cllr’s.to do what is best for Anston.
      I don’t mind people speaking their minds with the proviso they get their facts absolutely right.
      Posting conjecture and supposition as ‘facts’ leaves posters wide open to criticism and looking at the number of hits on this blog during the past 7 days I must be doing something right.
      You’re welcome to comment anytime.

      Like

  21. roy says:

    In the last eleven months three cllrs have left so something is not right. And to be honest more will follow and it doesn’t matter who you speak to in anston the contractor s have public respect thing is we have 2 empty seats

    Like

    • Watchman says:

      Were you off sick the day they did sums at your school?
      You said “three cllrs have left” (Who would they be?)
      Then you said “we have 2 empty seats”
      Hmmmm……………?

      Like

  22. David Cawkwell says:

    Why do the contractors and other ill informed people think Colin is still the Moderator of this blog?
    He gave it up when he became a councillor, I thought it was common knowledge but obviously it isn’t.
    Perhaps the Moderator could post something to identify him/herself?

    Like

    • Patriot says:

      I very much doubt if the Moderator will reveal his/her identity David however I can say that it definitely is not Colin who I know very well. While I am on here I notice that “Knocker” seems very well informed about last nights meeting, leading to the conclusion that he is either one of the Contractors or one of the Councillors. Judging by the spelling and grammar I think I know who “knocker” is more likely to be.

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      To David and Patriot; Thanks for your support.
      It is true I took over from Colin 24 hours after he became a councillor. I have previous experience in moderating a blog and I was happy to offer my services.
      My personal details are privileged information but I will say I live with my family on the outskirts of Anston.
      One thing this particular thread has shown me: Not a single person has put forward any ideas and suggestions to help Anston.
      The responses are what I should have expected, Negative and with diversionary comments all of which tells me the local residents who read this blog have no idea what working for a better community really means.
      FWIW, several posters have been blocked for the simple reason they are incapable of writing comments which concentrate on the main thrust of this thread.
      As Mr.Colman pointed out a few days ago I can spot a false email address and signature very easily-and trace them if I wish.

      Like

  23. Knocker says:

    NEWS FLASH
    Anston Parish so called contractors cause mayhem at tonight’s council meeting trying to protect our children’s green spaces, when certain councilors make a illegal decision to let the lease go on Crowgate

    Like

    • Watchman says:

      You’re right about one thing only. Contractors caused mayhem. No change there.They were mouthing off-as usual.
      Your crappy school didn’t teach you English comprehension did it?
      The decision made was not illegal nor was it claimed to be illegal, it was suggested by Cllr.John Ireland that the decision was a procedural irregularity (Look it up in a dictionary if you know how to use one)
      In your little world transferring full ownership back to RMBC does not protect “children’s green spaces”?
      Grow up.
      Your signature is a pile of total and utter garbage and will be replaced in future with this message. If it has to be replaced we will be very cross. If you are to dumb to understand this, do not go near a computer. Seriously.

      Like

  24. miss f sales says:

    Anston resident thank you my point precisely not 1 cllrs as been honest enough to post on this site and admitted ther is a issue

    Like

    • Watchman says:

      I’m at a loss to understand why your comments are continually negative. If you read the post and my comments I have to ask why it is so difficult for you and others to offer positive solutions. Is it the case you don’t have any?
      Any fool can criticise.

      Like

  25. miss f sales says:

    I find this interesting the council seem to totally ignore the fact it has a problem with staff related issues and productivity when the general public post ther views they are addressed as knocking or go even further an try naming and shameing I can only assume this is done by councillor’s trying desperately to hide ther failure Instead of researching posters issues and claims rmbc when down the same route and finished up with children being abused so congratulations cllrs for bringing confidence in apc to all low only ostrich s Bury the heads in the sand

    Like

    • Watchman says:

      I must have missed the quantum leap in logic between APC staff and RMBC’s failure to protect vulnerable children.
      You conveniently forget most of the current working practices at APC are the legacy of the previous Labour administration and as far as I know parish councillors are in the process of reviewing working practices.
      Due regard has to be given to all relevant employment legislation and staff have to be consulted before any changes can be made.
      (Ask your boss)

      Like

  26. Anonymous says:

    I have read all the posts on here and yet again the “knockers” have got it all wrong. I suspect one of the “knockers” is Mr Pearson, ( posting under a false name) the very same man who has contracts with the council worth several thousands of pounds . I base my assumption on the fact that in my many conversations with him over the last few years the question of the Council staff`s “efficiency” has occurred several times.
    Its time for some facts. The playing field at Crowgate is owned by RMBC. Some years ago ( around 20-25 years) APC entered into an agreement to rent the land for £1 a year, in return APC maintained the land and building. The lease for this arrangement ran out in 2013. Councillors were not aware of this. At roughly the same time the Labour controlled Council agreed a three year grass cutting lease with RMBC. So for the last three years APC have been paying approximately £1400 per year for the grass to be cut and maintained, yet the lease had run out. What a gig, RMBC pass the land to the Parish Council who maintain it for 25 years at no cost to them, yet still have no rights or control. Currently the budget for the ground and buildings are £3,000 per year. This last financial year, as well as paying for the grass contract and other maintenance, with out full council approval the Previous Clerk ordered the trees to the rear of the site to be “pruned” at a cost of approx. £2,000. To the one who suggests those are the only trees, go and have a look before making comments. There are approx. 30 more trees on the inside of the boundary that runs along the Farmers track ( south side of the site).
    Over the last three years, the grass contract has included the upkeep of the football pitch, which includes white lining and the erection and taking down of the football posts. The football pitch was not marked out nor posts erected in the first two of the last three years. A second hand statement given to me was that RMBC were trying to suggest that the “junior” pitch at the rear, was only marked out in mistake. There has been no pitch marked out to the rear, for at least three years and probably longer. (yet we still paid for it)
    During our recent budget meetings the subject of Crowgate came up, some Members wanted to renew the lease, and others wished to make a £3,000 saving by not renewing it. A resolution was put forward not to renew the lease. Both the Chairman and the Previous Clerk would not allow a democratic resolution to be put forward. One of the reasons put forward for keeping it was that Anston would lose the pitches and the children would not be able to play there. Utter, Utter Rubbish. RMBC have a duty to maintain the field as a recreation ground. Any change of use would require Consultation and planning permission. Sport England would not allow them to get rid, and if they agreed, RMBC would probably have to supply a similar piece of land to replace it. THE GROUND WILL STILL BE A PLAYING FIELD AFTER APC DO NOT RENEW THE LEASE.
    At a very recent Meeting of the Council a resolution was passed not to renew the lease, thus Cllrs have saved the Taxpayers £3,000 on the budget. ( look, its not stopped being a recreation field) Sad to say it now looks like Cllrs John and Jonathan Ireland are trying to overturn a democratic decision of the Council, just because they chose not to be present for the vote. It remains to be seen if the Chairman will be backing them. There`s the facts on Crowgate.
    The Parish Council received a request from the previous Clerk to the Council to reduce his hours of work. This was agreed. A number of hours were reduced, and in turn a new Clerk to the Council has been employed taking up those reduced hours.
    The Village Green, North Anston, is in a Conservation area ( as in buildings and land.) This was denied by the “knockers”, but they were wrong and had to accept the truth.
    Trying to be brief, some local groups have been given free use of the Parish Hall over the years, most other groups have to pay, with regular bookings, being given a reduced rate. The current system is grossly unfair to some users, and is currently being looked into. All hall users should be charged the same, its only fair.
    I apologise for the long winded post, but people should deal in facts. The knockers will always spread alarm, because they have a mission to bring down the present council.
    If you want the truth, just ask.
    S Thornton

    Like

    • Watchman says:

      Thank you for your comment which puts things into perspective.

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      Looking at the number and quality of comments so far it seems nobody has any worthwhile ideas and suggestions which address the questions I asked. Everyone seems to have an opinion on what they perceive as waste and/or overspending but no-one has put forward anything resembling a constructive set of ideas which could help the parish council to achieve better value for your money and increase revenue which would benefit every resident in Anston.
      It’s no good being just a keyboard warrior if you aren’t prepared to participate in shaping the future of your village.
      This also includes getting off your butts and attending parish council meetings because if you do not speak up and mention your concerns and ideas you cannot expect councillors to be mind readers.
      Like every other organisation they act on the information presented on the agenda.
      If you’re not prepared to get involved in parish affairs you shouldn’t complain.

      Like

    • jeff says:

      Advice from Yorkshire Association of Local Councils that the resolution made regarding crowgate field was in breach of standing order 16 and is therefore invalid and void. So panic over. Hopefully this item will be discussed again in full council.

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      You make your point but what has it got to do with the thread which is concerned with value for money and not Crowgate?

      Like

    • Patriot says:

      jeff. One bit of information and one question for you. YALC is clearly wrong in it’s decision as SO16 states and I quote ‘ no motion may be moved at a meeting unless the business to which it relates has been put on the agenda by the Clerk’. Item 19 iv) which was put on the agenda by the Clerk said, and I quote ‘To receive update on Crowgate lease’. The update was received and the Clerk read it out. Therefore the business to which the motion was applied was in fact on the agenda. It was a democratic decision in a full Council meeting with the quorum met. The Clerk at that meeting Mr Gazur had been in office for I believe about 12 years and he saw no reason to inform the Chairman of any irregularities. I fully intend to send this information to Cllr Tawn who was the acting Chairman at that meeting requesting that he contacts YALC to overturn their wrong decision which would save Anston residents £3650 every year for the next 25 years plus £10000 which is required for immediate maintenance work. Now for my question. Why is the panic over? Were you panicking that Independant Councillors would maybe be credited with saving Anston residents all of this money while still having access to the Crowgate field while Labour Councillors and their followers both on and off the Council oppose this saving?
      Anston residents, before you go to the polls remember exactly who wants to waste your money and who wants to save it. Labour has already cost you a kings ransom buying a farmers field. You must prevent them from continuing to do so, before we are bankrupt.

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      Thanks for your comment.
      I think a typo happened whilst you were writing it? It was Cllr.Tarmey who was Chair of the meeting AIUI.
      Your comment about the Clerk is an important one and it could be that his non intervention strengthens the issue of the validity of the motion and the vote.
      It is my information that Cllr.John Ireland discussed a motion that was taken in confidential session in public?

      Like

    • Patriot says:

      My apologies to Cllr Tawn, it was indeed Cllr Tarmey. If your information about Cllr Ireland is correct with evidence then he should be reported to the RMBC Standards Committee as I believe another Councillor was reported for an alleged similar crime last year. The Council must show that this sort of thing will not be tolerated and must not treat one Councillor any differently from another. Councillor John Ireland must not think he can get away with it just because his Son Cllr Johnathan Ireland is standing as Labour candidate in the forthcoming elections.

      Like

    • keith says:

      To patriot
      You are totally wrong. The agenda item was to purely to receive an update on the lease. The agenda item was not to discuss the lease. Therefore the advice received was correct.

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      “The agenda item was to discuss the lease.” No it was not. The agenda item was to discuss Crowgate.
      Please keep up at the back.

      Like

    • keith says:

      To quote exactly as printed on the agenda.
      19. (iv) To receive update on Crowgate lease and consider tree survey(request from public session 15/2/2016.
      Watch man I do believe you are now at the back. Please keep up.

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      Not at all.
      Your first post said ” The agenda item was to purely to receive an update on the lease.” Now you’ve added the rest of the agenda item which included consideration of the tree surgery.
      The clue is in the word ‘update’. n. v.t. to bring up to date; incorporate new information in. Which by any definition means the lease could be discussed in depth. It does not mean it could not be voted on.

      Like

    • Patriot says:

      Keith, In my post I QUOTED the relevant wording content of both the STANDING ORDER and the AGENDA ITEM. It cannot be clearer. ‘To receive update on CROWGATE LEASE’ = The exact item wording. ‘ No motion may be moved at a meeting UNLESS THE BUSINESS TO WHICH IT RELATES has been put on the agenda by the Clerk’ = The exact standing order wording. The motion was legal because THE BUSINESS TO WHICH IT WAS RELATED WAS CROWGATE LEASE. All other criteria was met. The YALC decision was wrong.

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      As of right now the discussions about Crowgate are finished. No more comments about it will be accepted.
      Either comment on the substance of the thread or go to bed.

      Like

    • albert says:

      You are both wrong again. Anyway let us wait until the next meeting and see what happens. Oooh! Exciting is it not.

      Like

    • quentin says:

      By the way watchman it’s tree survey not surgery. Still at the back. Keep up.

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      No dummy. Tree surgery had already been carried out.
      Now buzz off.

      Like

  27. reg says:

    Come on now watchman 3 members of staff running round the parish delivering news letters and agenda s when there’s councillors looking to save money I’d call that over staffing dos eney parish councilor really no what s going on or more to the point no how much money is wasted I think the parish is now paying 8 wages with little out put

    Like

    • Watchman says:

      If you think the 3 members of staff just ‘run round the parish’ then there is no point in continuing this discussion.

      Like

    • Anston Resident says:

      I am sorry that I agree with posters who say you don’t know what is happening or don’t want to know your staff just seem to do as they please, I only see apc vehicle with 3 men in it at Worksop Dinnington and Woodsetts and else where, you have to realise a round trip of 1 hour cost the rate payer 3 hours, 3 of these trips in 1 day is one mans wages. You really do need someone from the private sector to explain to you about unproductive working hours has I believe you have no one with the experience of the private sector to over look your staff 😁

      Like

  28. reg says:

    Apc cannot survive on grants or hand outs but must set a clear and working budget curb over staffing make better use of assets

    Like

  29. m ward says:

    Anston parish hall is in need of updating to generate more income and needs marketing better the council carnt rely on grants at the moment so must rely on self funding and allowing groups to pay half rent is well just silly the groups must understand that to provide services it as to generate income to off set running costs it seems the parish council as little idea of marketing strategy and how to get income flowing into the parish

    Like

  30. miss f sales says:

    Thank you for confirming ther will be a net increase and for how long as the public been made aware of this I really don’t think you can ask how to save money then make a statement like that

    Like

    • Watchman says:

      Is it the case in your world that it is not possible to employ another person and still make savings overall?
      The discussion about Clerks is finished and further comments which concentrate just on this will not be published.
      See my previous reply.

      Like

    • What was the rationale behind splitting the job in two? Does it enable the role(s) to accomplish something a single one could not?

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      Mr.Michael Gazure is preparing for his retirement and he now works reduced hours while at the same time acting as RFO to the council.

      Like

  31. Peter says:

    I think she means that crowgate might be looked at for building if handed back to rmbc also your mag don’t deliver to all the parish some areas are currently done by ground staff witch can’t be cost effective one group does get hall hire at half rent While most others hope for grants from council in fact I think ther looking in to grants so they may feel a bit hard done to as the one that gets half price is cash rich as for the rest of her post she’s spot on.

    Like

    • Watchman says:

      I don’t think RMBC want to be in the position where they are seen to be building on a greenfield in that part of Anston at the present time.
      I agree, if you are correct that using parish employees to deliver the newsletter is not cost effective but this is a legacy of the previous administration and my own view is this will not continue.
      If you read the article properly you will see I ask the questions about grants, I did not ask for opinions about which group(s) currently get grants.
      Why is it so difficult to get honest answers to simple questions instead of criticism of who does what?
      Top Tip: Read and understand what is written before leaping to your keyboards.

      Like

    • If a developer wants it then RMBC will move heaven and earth to give it to them as they will welcome the capital receipt.

      And we all know from the greenbelt consultation how highly RMBC rate our countryside!

      Like

  32. miss f sales says:

    Hand crow gate back to rmbc to be sold for building like Parkstone house rmbc will pass all none profit making items to parish council s ie grass cutting for one fact Next value for money apc is over staffed whot as the new council done to address this hiring a second Clark . Production study on out put by staff last done or reduced working time in winter 3 members of staff are spending time delivering news letter s how is this cost affective yes rmbc have made cuts and it is a time to watch your pockets but please note apc can make a wide range of savings but not by targeting local groups and make income from renting out some of the land it owns for one

    Like

    • Watchman says:

      Your information is wrong. Who said RMBC will build on Crowgate?
      APC have not ‘hired a second clerk’. The new Clerk to the Council is taking over from Michael Gazur prior to his retirement. Mr.Gazure is still the RFO (Responsible Financial Officer) and will also be Clerk to the Charity in the interim.
      “Production study on out put by staff last done or reduced working time in winter” I don’t quite understand that statement but I do know the groundstaff will not have ‘reduced working time in winter’in the future. Nor do they ‘spend their time delivering news letter’. As I understand it the newsletter is distributed with the local ‘You Mag’.
      I’d be interested,as would the readers in ‘what wide range of savings’ APC can make? Do you have any valid suggestions?- Which is what this article is about.
      What is your information about local groups being targeted?

      Like

    • So just to confirm splitting the clerk’s job has NOT resulted in a net increase in expenditure?

      i.e. salary for previous single role => two salaries for separate roles and two people?

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      Of course there has been a nett increase but Miss Sales alleged APC had employed a second Clerk which is not the same thing.
      One person will eventually replace the other. Two people doing two jobs-one for the Parish Council and one for the Charity-is not a permanent arrangement.
      Thanks for your comment.

      Like

    • Is Crowgate heavily used for football events? Or for informal practice by local kids?

      As always we need facts before we can look at things and make objective decisions. Making a decision on the basis of a belief or gut feeling is rarely a good idea!

      Personally I think Crowgate is a muddy hole ringed with dog muck, but of course other people may use and value it.

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      It is my understanding a ‘proper’ game of football has not been played on Crowgate in the last 4 years.

      Like

    • Bit like the New York Stadium then?

      Like

  33. christine sadler says:

    Anston Parish Council need to save money especially with impending withdrawal of Rotherham funding. Before someone starts bleating about RMBC having themselves taken cuts in funding from Westminster let the truth be known that RMBC have in fact been given the money but are choosing to use it for other things—-I wonder if it will be used to pay another manager of something or other. This Labour controlled pathetic so-called councill have a history of mis-management and in my view are not to be trusted with a bacon barm let alone our money.
    Then as if that is not enough for voters to put up with we have Labour councillors sitting on Anston Parish Council refusing to hand back Crowgate field to RMBC. This recreation area is currently leased by APC from RMBC but the rub is that it costs a fortune to maintain, all of course at no cost to the Labour controlled RMBC but massive cost to Anston Parishioners. WHAT FOR YOU MIGHT ASK. I dunno seeing as this field is going nowhere and will be there for public use whoever foots the bill.
    Maybe our wanabee -a- Labour- Borough -Councillor can enlighten us. Don’t hold your breath as this is the same cllr who loudly stated in a council meeting that Anston Village Green is not a conservation area.
    Will this madness ever end. ONLY THE ELECTORATE CAN MAKE THE CHANGES THIS VILLAGE NEEDS

    Like

    • derek says:

      I am astounded that some parish councillors want to halve the amenities for children in South Anston. If this facility goes, children will have to go to North Anston to use a football pitch. Not very safe crossing a major trunk road. Is the parish council going to fund a crossing to keep our children safe? Anston Parish Council have already made the savings to cover the reduction in funds without increasing the ‘parish tax’ (precept). What are the specifics of the mismanagement that you state. The Labour councillors are in a minority on the council, so explain how they can ‘refuse’ to hand back the facility without backing from the rest of the independent councillors? How much is the cost of maintaining the facility per year? Be specific. And finally Anston Village Green is not a conservation area in it’s own right. FACT. It is only just part of the Anston Conservation Area. FACT. Anyone who has lived in the area for a decent length of time knows this. 40 years plus. You newcomers should read up on local knowledge.

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      How does handing back control of Crowgate to RMBC ‘halve the amenities for children in South Anston’?
      The field will still be there whoever has responsibility for it.
      RMBC charge APC £7,176 over 5 years to cut the grass on Crowgate. Plus there are the additional costs of reinstating the stone wall,tree surgery and providing new changing room facilities all of which RMBC expect local taxpayers to fund.
      There was some talk of Jones Homes funding this work as they built new homes on the old Parkstone site but nothing has happened in the last 18 months and it seems unlikely it will happen in the next 18 months.

      Like

    • derek says:

      There will not be any provision for football provided by the parish council, thus halving the facilities provided by them. This will just become a field left fallow. Some facility for children. The borough council already provide an excellent park and playing facility including football pitches and cricket field in the ward at Greenlands Park, it would be unreasonable to expect them to provide dulicate facilities in the same ward.The charge is not just for grass cutting. The provision of a football pitch is a more specialised job. Slicing,seed sowing,weeding, fertilising and line marking. This is not exhaustive. Anyway 35 pence per year per tax paying household is good value for money. Reinstating which dry stone wall? and funding is available for the changing rooms from sport england and the FA at no cost to the tax payer. Good value for money. As for tree surgery the six or so trees that are the parish council’s responsibility have been done. The remainder of the trees along the boundry are not on the field and are the responsibility of Jones Homes. Major tree surgery has already begun at Parkstone House.

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      The boundary wall.
      The tree surgery was paid for by APC-your money. As APC lease Crowgate (at present) it is a matter of some debate whether RMBC should have either paid these costs or refunded APC.
      The criteria for funding sports facilities: All applications must have security of tenure either by freehold or leasehold. A minimum of 25 years security of tenure is required by leasehold.
      Priority for applications involving professional club community programmes will be given to projects that are located within areas of high deprivation (as defined by the Governments Indices of Deprivation). For projects outside of these areas, priority will be given to those that can demonstrate that it draws a significant proportion of its participants from neighbouring deprived areas.
      Applicants must be able to demonstrate that all available options for match funding have been exhausted and to be able to provide evidence for this. As a guide, projects would normally be expected to secure 50% match funding although each project will be assessed based on individual circumstances.
      http://www.footballfoundation.org.uk/funding-schemes/premier-league-the-fa-facilities-fund/

      Like

    • derek says:

      As usual watch man you do not address the posts that people put on this site. You always write slightly related statements that do not inform only try to create a smoke screen to cover you inability to admit the truth about posts you may not like.
      Yes you are correct that Anston Parish residents money paid for the upkeep of this facilitiy through the tree work next to two Anston tax payers houses. I believe this was done through a duty to parishioners and to avoid any possible costs through probable further property damage. Is this not the whole purpose of being part of a communty? You mention a debate about the responsibility of the cost of tree work, as the occupier of the field the parish has the responsibility. As you have the internet do some research over the legalities, not just presume.
      That is the end of the rant.
      The following is information that peolpe may find of interest and show what can be possible if grants are sucessful.
      As for your quote from the football foundation website, this is already common knowledge to myself but may help others understand that funding is out there and is fairly distributed to those who deserve it. You could also look at the Sport England site which gives information regarding funding for changing room refurbishment, pitch refurbishing, sports lighting the list goes on. Through Sport England the funding for parish councils is 100% so would not cost the tax payer if a bid was successful. As you must realise until a new lease is signed for 25, 50, 75 or even 125 years there is absolutely no chance of any funding to enhance the facilities for the people of Anston.I am sure you will find it interesting reading and if you find anything that you think would be of use to the community you could report back via this media. I do hope this is of use. I am a long time resident of Anston and do only have the village at heart. All I want is this village of ours to continue to be a pleasant and friendly place to live.

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      If you read Anonymous’s comments you will see that APC has had no responsibility for Crowgate since 2013.
      You make some valid points but don’t ever accuse me of not answering or addressing comments.
      Who said you and other posters have the monopoly on Truth and Wisdom?

      You wrote you are a long term resident of Anston and ‘ do only have the village at heart.’ Let me suggest therefore that there is nothing to stop you-and other like minded residents-from forming a group to help to retain and/or improve the leisure facilities in Anston and work with the parish council to that end.
      All parish councils need and rely on volunteers who take pride in their local areas.
      There is no ‘Them amd Us’. Only communities.

      Like

Comments are closed.