We have listened to you and we are extending the dead line for comments and statements about the future of the pavilion and recreation ground to the 31 October 2023. We intend to answer your Questions at the November meeting of the Parish Council, and all Q&A and statements will be published on the website after this meeting. Please continue to send your questions, comments and statements to the Clerk (email@example.com)
Thank you to everyone who has already submitted comments and questions.
For those interested in the workings of the council, this statement was made by the Chairman, Caroline Aldridge, on 2 October 2023.
Thank you for confirming the minutes of the meeting held on 19 July 2023. The important fact that we have agreed upon is that Resolutions 1 and 2 arising from the recommendations of the Working Party remain the policy of this parish council.
It has been my ambition to formalise the relationship between the principal user of the pavilion, the KECC, and the parish council
The CC want a 25 year lease. I do not think that the only reason that a 25 year lease is required is merely to apply for grants. I think that this length of tenure demonstrates the commitment that the CC has to their home ground. They have played here since before the 2nd WW, with the grounds donated to the PC on 20 January 1948. This is a long time.
Unfortunately, the conflation of these 2 objectives has had an unfortunate impact on wider discussions.
There is no denying that the parish consider that the pavilion is a community asset for sport and recreation, and grants were obtained from SODC on the basis of this community involvement. I am keen to capitalise on the good will of parishioners to progress with resolution 1. The WP have my complete confidence and should start resolution 2. It is my ambition to expand the membership of the WP to include the Clerk, Mr Penfold and a non PC resident of the Hamlet, Anna Vorster. May I remind the council that the only reason that informal talks with the CC have occurred is because Paddy is a playing member of the CC. Before I am reminded that Paddy may have a conflict of interest because he is a member of the CC, may I remind you that 1. no decisions have been made with Paddy in the room and 2. the monitoring officer has stated that being a playing member of the CC is not per se a disclosable interest.
It has been an unfortunate by product of the public meeting on 16 September that the reputation of the council has been diminished. This tarnishes my reputation as chair man and I feel that I have let my parishioners down.
Without the work of the WP, we would not be in the position of actually being able to start formal discussions with the CC.
The WP now need to work out the terms of the lease that protect the PC from any financial risks. We need to inform the CC that whilst the public meeting was a mess, the position of the PC remains the same, we are pursuing resolution 2 and invite the CC to form their own committee to work with the WP. The next step of the WP should be to obtain legal advice.
The lease must work for the CC, the PC and for the community. The PC is the owner and controller of the pavilion and playing fields. The lease will be a means for KECC to demonstrate security of tenure.
Note to readers: The resolutions referred to in the statement above come from from the July minutes:
RESOLVED: 1 That, subject to the successful outcome of negotiations with Kidmore End Cricket Club as to the terms of a lease and service level agreement, a service level agreement be offered to the Cricket Club which grants a 25 year lease to the Club and clearly states the roles and responsibilities of all parties.
2 That the Tenure of the Cricket Club Working Party be instructed to commence formal discussions with the Club.