IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

9 Pages V  « < 2 3 4 5 6 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Allotment Dispute
Andy Capp
post Feb 22 2011, 08:22 PM
Post #61


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,733
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



Or at very least it should be debated in some form, but it seems the council don't want to do it. It makes me wonder how eager they are to save money.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Feb 22 2011, 08:23 PM
Post #62


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



Perhaps we need some old and frail people on allotments, the council would soon start cutting services then! tongue.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
panda
post Feb 22 2011, 08:42 PM
Post #63


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 266
Joined: 13-February 11
Member No.: 2,985



QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Feb 22 2011, 05:53 PM) *
The Wash Common Allotment Society surveyed it's members on self-management and from memory it was like 85% who were willing to contribute to the administration and maintenance.

I'm very happy to hand over all correspondence to any enquirery, the problem has been finding any authority willing to enquire. Do you have something in mind?

why are you not a committee member of the wash common allotment society anymore.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NWNREADER
post Feb 22 2011, 08:45 PM
Post #64


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,414
Joined: 20-November 10
Member No.: 1,265



QUOTE (panda @ Feb 22 2011, 08:42 PM) *
why are you not a committee member of the wash common allotment society anymore.


He's told us on another thread.

Are you a teaspoon?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dannyboy
post Feb 22 2011, 08:51 PM
Post #65


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,052
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51



QUOTE (Iommi @ Feb 22 2011, 08:19 PM) *
So 14,000 tax payers 'shouldn't have a say'? Like I said before, we should insist they self-manage, if it saves tax.

If it saves tax.

Like I said - get a campaign going.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
panda
post Feb 22 2011, 09:07 PM
Post #66


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 266
Joined: 13-February 11
Member No.: 2,985



QUOTE (NWNREADER @ Feb 22 2011, 08:45 PM) *
He's told us on another thread.

Are you a teaspoon?

He told you did he
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Feb 22 2011, 09:09 PM
Post #67


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



My friend has mailed this, I thought you might be interested.

QUOTE
Hi Ifor,

as the general secretary of an allotment association, with 14 sites, over 850 plots, and approx 650 tenants ( some with more than one plot) I am interested in the running costs of allotments. Our association, Great Yarmouth & Gorleston Allotments Association Ltd, affiliated to both NSALG and the RHS, manages our association for less than 16 thousand pounds per annum. (this includes room hire for meetings / presentations, insurance costs, affiliation fees, water costs, accountants / auditors fees, postage and printing, maintenance, etc etc)

could you let me know how your council manages to spend ‘around’ 61 thousand pounds on 525 plots?



Rgds and thanks.

Tony Pitchford, Gen Sec, GY&GAALtd.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post Feb 22 2011, 09:15 PM
Post #68


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,449
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



QUOTE (dannyboy @ Feb 22 2011, 07:36 PM) *
Yes but your biased.


How am I biased? I have not got an allotment? I a not a politician or a councillor?
I am a taxpayer and would like to know that the taxpayers are getting value for money and if allotments can be run as effectively and for less cost then I am all for it.

Then if you class that as being biased then yes I must be? wink.gif


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Feb 22 2011, 09:39 PM
Post #69


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,733
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Feb 22 2011, 09:09 PM) *
My friend has mailed this, I thought you might be interested.

Well it's 525 tenants, not plots... wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
panda
post Feb 22 2011, 10:02 PM
Post #70


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 266
Joined: 13-February 11
Member No.: 2,985



QUOTE (panda @ Feb 22 2011, 08:42 PM) *
why are you not a committee member of the wash common allotment society anymore.

still waiting for an answer
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NWNREADER
post Feb 22 2011, 10:16 PM
Post #71


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,414
Joined: 20-November 10
Member No.: 1,265



QUOTE (panda @ Feb 22 2011, 10:02 PM) *
still waiting for an answer


If you have something to say, get on with it.

Perhaps you are a Kenwood
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Feb 22 2011, 10:23 PM
Post #72


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Feb 22 2011, 09:39 PM) *
Well it's 525 tenants, not plots... wink.gif

I see what you did there, you believed the Council's figures didn't you.

They said the average allotment is 5.06 poles in area and costs £32.62, but at £6.94 per pole a plot of 5.06 poles should cost £35.12.

The Council's accounts show that they've taken £18,233 in rent, so if the average plot costs £32.62 then that suggests there are 559 plots, but if the average plot is 5.06 poles then that suggest there are 519 plots. As it happens the Council only refund outgoing tenants if they apply for a refund so some of that revenue comes from selling the same plot twice.

They also said they budgeted to subsidise the service with £42,500, but actually they budgeted to subsidise by £43,200, but they happened to generate £18,200 of revenue rather than the £17,500 they'd budgeted for.

Rather than these minor discrepancies it's probably more interesting to look at the £42,500 that self-management would have saved the tax-payer - and of course that doesn't include any apportionment of the several hundred thousand pounds of back-office admin and stuff that the Council didn't mention. wink.gif


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Feb 22 2011, 10:34 PM
Post #73


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



QUOTE (panda @ Feb 22 2011, 10:02 PM) *
still waiting for an answer

I felt I was embarrassing the Committee; generally because I believed the Council would not work with the Society whilst I was involved, and specifically because the Council had served me with a notice that my flag was breaking some imagined site rule and the Committee felt unable to support me.

Now, would you like to answer my question?


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biker1
post Feb 22 2011, 10:36 PM
Post #74


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,890
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



I know you can put people on "ignore" - but is there any way you can put a thread on "ignore"? tongue.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
panda
post Feb 22 2011, 10:38 PM
Post #75


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 266
Joined: 13-February 11
Member No.: 2,985



QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Feb 22 2011, 10:34 PM) *
I felt I was embarrassing the Committee; generally because I believed the Council would not work with the Society whilst I was involved, and specifically because the Council had served me with a notice that my flag was breaking some imagined site rule and the Committee felt unable to support me.

Now, would you like to answer my question?

which one
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Feb 22 2011, 10:41 PM
Post #76


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



QUOTE (panda @ Feb 22 2011, 10:38 PM) *
which one

http://forum.newburytoday.co.uk/index.php?...ost&p=35770


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Feb 22 2011, 10:42 PM
Post #77


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Feb 22 2011, 10:36 PM) *
I know you can put people on "ignore" - but is there any way you can put a thread on "ignore"? tongue.gif

Yes, and you can start by coming up with a thread more interesting. Something about capitol punishment, severe gaols, ASBOs, gassing paedos, immigration and the like should suit you.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Feb 22 2011, 10:45 PM
Post #78


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



Lookout, the resident clown's about!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NWNREADER
post Feb 22 2011, 10:48 PM
Post #79


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,414
Joined: 20-November 10
Member No.: 1,265



QUOTE (Iommi @ Feb 22 2011, 10:42 PM) *
capitol punishment


Is that what they call making someone listen to an American politician?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
panda
post Feb 22 2011, 10:56 PM
Post #80


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 266
Joined: 13-February 11
Member No.: 2,985



QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Feb 22 2011, 10:41 PM) *

I already told you that i didn't say there was a campaign against you.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

9 Pages V  « < 2 3 4 5 6 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 19th August 2018 - 05:26 AM