Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,928
unfortunately so many secrets
does the monitoring officer have any legal background?
nice you suddenly have faith in the council you are always slagging off
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,706
Not really if you actually listened I regularly praise the officers, it is the politicians I have a pop at
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
kieth,the person you neglect to mention has withdrawn there bid,and now is up for retender.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,928
As iv not seen any report, and wonder how a legal person would view it all.
Whilst its good its gone to re tender
doesn't get away from what happened
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,879
I have little interest in the petty local politics that surround this issue, I am more concerned that these toilets are still closed at the height of the Summer season.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,928
Jan
just to clarify,
I support the need to have the toilets to be open, but it also needs to be seen that when the tenders went out
that no one was disadvantaged.
It appears in this case they may well have been.
Its about making sure its all done above board, that way none of the latest saga would have been able to happen.
I would be saying this if it was my best chum,
this doesn't appear to have been handled well, and how and when tenders are put out, and how they are dealt with does need to b e looked at.
I think its only right that if you feel this process could be seen as one person getting an advantage, and using a position to do so
(no matter how much the project is of need)
To turn a blind eye would be wrong
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
This bears out my point about councillors and officers working hard to achieve nothing. Sue worked to open the lavatories; others worked to thwart and embarrass her. Net result: nil. Except that Sue now fights for her reputation and Keef has opened up shop as Phorum Pharisee. An improvement on fence-sitting, admittedly.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,928
Peter
There are times I think your posts are crap, but I just go with the flow, and always supported that everyone is entitled to a view
and should be able to express it.
Now getting back to the thread.
I 'm unaware of anyone trying to thwart or embarrass anyone(except the usual express)
Had this not been called in for someone to look at to make sure it was above board
others may have said, it was all a fiddle
if theres doubt then surely its best to get it looked at before mistakes are made.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
so what is the point of the meeting on wednesday if it is being put out to tender again?
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Someone put the Express onto it, Keith. That wasn't all their own work.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
As there is no mention on the notice of why there is such a meeting, no agenda, no mention of tender/re-tender. It may just be about letting all know that the councillors are above reproach; artisans more than Partisans, as there is no place for a 'P'.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,928
couple of things here peter,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
1; alerting express certainly not me cant stand the paper
2; had this all been about g cowan rather than s jones
im certain you would all be wanting blood
strange what friendships do to cloud peoples opinions
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 782- Registered: 4 Oct 2012
- Posts: 357
Good question Howard! When was a re-tender announced?
In the meantime we have no toilet on the seafront - at least we have no open toilet on the seafront at the height of our season. If I read all this correctly there were three bids. Two were withdrawn. One was left on the table. That one was the Pebbles CIC. The application was referred to the monitoring officer at DDC for adjudication because of Sue Jone's position as a councillor and one that had been heavily involved in the toilets project at the beginning. The monitoring officer appears to have cleared Sue of any wrong doing under all the codes of blaa blaa stuff the codes state.
So there is no case to answer as far as the blaa blaa stuff is concerned, we still have one bid. Why has no decision been made? What a waste of time calling an EGM! It is about time the Councillors who were charged with making the decision grew a pair of balls and made a decision. Instead they are hiding and stringing out this debacle which as Peter so rightly says, has been a lot of hard work that has achieved nothing. We are told that Sue withdrew from the WC discussions once she and Ross had decided that they should put in a bid. Well done her.
3 bids overall. Two withdrawn. Does that not indicate to anyone that this is not really a money spinner?
Now, to further my rant a little bit. What is a CIC? It is a COMMUNITY INTEREST company. Ross Miller and Sue Jones by virtue of the hours and hours they spend working for, in and on behalf of the community demonstrate to me that they are INTERESTed in the COMMUNITY. The CIC statement on the Web site does not talk about running toilets! It says this about the network:
Are you a member of a local group, charity or organisation?
Do you need more members? More funds?
Would you like to network with other voluntary organisations?
If the answer to any of these questions is YES, you need to join our network.
Dover Community Network is a new way to collaborate to raise funds, increase membership and maximise activity. We all know how hard it is today to keep going and it is often difficult to step back and see what we could be doing better. We want to help by bringing together all the skills, knowledge and passion of the local volunteering community and sharing them so we can all benefit.
The network is free to join, you just need to be based in Dover or have the majority of your membership living in the town. Members will be listed together in one place on our website. New members are offered a free 1 hour session to review their needs. If there are specific areas with which you want bespoke professional low cost assistance we can offer this too.
Bespoke services include:
Updating your governance procedures and constitution
Reviewing funding needs and preparing a budget
Applying for funding
It seems to me that whoever is at the root of the S*** stirring and perpetuation of this non story should get with the programme and perhaps buy a ticket in to the real world! The very idea that a CIC (or anyone else for that matter) can run a toilet facility and a little shop/kiosk and make any money worthy of being called a salary is beyond my comprehension. Is there anyone that really thinks that Sue and Ross will be off to the Cayman Islands to register their Yacht on the proceeds of this enterprise?
This whole hulla balloo underlines to me one of the reasons willing and able people do not put themselves up for public service any more. The fact is, David in his inimitable way has a point, and I for one lament that these people are being lambasted for seeing an opportunity for serving this town even more than they already do. If there is to be a re-tender, maybe their detractors would like to get off their sorry backsides and bid too!
Bring back William Crundle.
Ends rant, and walks off in to the sunshine.
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,879
Thank you Simon
, your post it has clarified so many points on this whole ridiculous situation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 756- Registered: 6 Jun 2012
- Posts: 727
Best advice given to me re DDC was "if in doubt, declare".
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
the town clerk doesn't appear to agree with that if newspaper articles are accurate.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
They are not.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
tell us more peter we are all ears.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,928
yes peter we are all ears
im sure the express would like to defend its corner
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 977- Registered: 27 Jun 2013
- Posts: 1,031
