Matters relating to the Pavilion and the Fund Raising Committee - April 2011
Firstly, it has to be categorically stated that the Middleton Parish Council, the Middleton Recreation Ground Trustees and the Pavilion Management Group are, and always have been, solidly committed to the building of a Pavilion on the Recreation Ground, of a size and configuration that meets the requirements of the Community and that would be self-financing in terms of upkeep, without detriment to other facilities existent in the village, if this is clearly and unequivocally the desire of a majority of the villagers of Middleton.
It is hoped that the above statement will lay waste to the continuing rumours that circulate about the Parish Council being obstructive, and that it will obviate any future recurrence of letters to that effect being sent by the Fund Raising Committee to our MP or other targets they may select.
It is unseemly that the actions of this small group of individuals are aimed at disrupting or delaying the best intentions of people who represent the vast majority of Middleton in progressing a scheme conceived by the community for the benefit of the community.
Resumé of the Bodies involved, past and present.
Middleton Recreation Ground Trustees are entirely comprised of current Middleton cum Fordley Parish Council Councillors, and hold the absolute veto on what, if anything, can be constructed on the Recreation Ground, in line with the original covenants.
The Pavilion Management Group (PMG) was set up in July 2010 to further the progress of the design and funding of the Pavilion project, following the dissolution of the original Toilet Design Group (see next paragraph) and comprises representatives of the Trustees (and thus the PC), the Middleton WI, the Community Council, the Village Hall Committee and the Fund Raising Committee, though the latter’s representative resigned after the Group’s second meeting and regrettably no new appointee has been forthcoming.
The Toilet Design Group (TDG) was originally conceived by the PC (as Trustees), following an Open Public Meeting at the Recreation Ground in June 2007, attended by 21 villagers, with the responsibility to evaluate the requirement for, and design of, a Toilet (later re-titled Pavilion) on the Recreation Ground. Their remit was to report back to the PC. At no point was the Group empowered to embark upon any actions that would lead to financial commitments without prior and express authority of the PC.
This Group was dissolved at the PC meeting in July 2010, following several months of continuing frustration due to the Group refusing to report back to the PC, and the design they were pursuing raising considerable concerns that it would be beyond the means of the Village to support.
The Recreation Ground Fund Raising Committee (FRC) was instigated in September 2007, by and comprising of, the same people as those forming the TDG. Independent of the PC and the Trustees, the FRC Constitution dated November 2007 listed the objectives as “to not only fund raise for a new Pavilion, to include toilets, but also to continue to raise money afterwards for future purchases required for the Recreation Ground or Pavilion.”
This Committee was not given, nor does its Constitution impart, the right to enter any commitments, financial or otherwise, to do with the design or use of the Pavilion. Its role, plain and simple, was to raise funds for the project.
It is obvious, both from past and recent correspondence from the FRC, that in their minds, the FRC and the TDG had ‘morphed’ into one body at some stage, though this was never requested to be the case nor acknowledged by anyone outside of themselves.
Resumé of the Designs and Drawings for a Pavilion, prepared to date (April 2011)
Cyril Wilby’s Drawings
Submitted to the PC for consideration during 2007. It was agreed at the PC Meeting in September 2007 that this set of drawings, prepared by, or for, Cyril Wilby, a member of the PC (at the time), as well as the TDG and the FRC, would be amended in line with the result of discussions by the PC.
The November 2008 Plans
To avoid costly fees, it was agreed the amended plans would be drawn up by Susan Robinson, a Parish Councillor, based upon the agreed alterations to be made to the drawings submitted by Cyril Wilby.
As such, they were approved by the PC in November 2008, and were to form the basis of future design and research by the TDG.
They were also the model for Malcolm Blakeney, a Parish Councillor, to seek funding for the Pavilion project from the major available sources nationally. He was charged with this role since he had been sent on a course specifically on this subject, paid for by the PC. No significant results were forthcoming.
However, the Chairman of the FRC declared that funds would have come from “moneyed people” (undefined), at a PMG meeting in September 2010.
The Architect’s Plan
This was the result of instructions being given by the FRC, following a number of meetings between the architect and members of the FRC where, according to the architect, possible uses and other aspects were brainstormed to enable a design specification to be drawn up. But no written brief or Business Plan was ever produced by the FRC, or the TDG either, for that matter.
The resultant design was both large and modernistic, with a frightening build cost. At the Open Village Meeting in August 2010, attended by a large number of villagers, this scheme failed to gain much, if any, enthusiasm.
The architect’s fee was met mostly by a grant from the Locality Budget of our SCC Councillor Rae Leighton, but required topping up by a payment from the Trustees’ Pavilion Fund account. In all likelihood, this sum, £840, will ultimately turn out to have been totally wasted, as this plan has been overwhelmingly dismissed by the results of the recent Parish Questionnaire.
NB: At present, (April 2011)the PMG are working on a design for a Pavilion that meets the chosen criteria of the great majority of respondents to the questionnaire. This design, when finalised, will then be subjected to the scrutiny and, hopefully, approval of the Community at an Open Meeting.
The Problems that have arisen.
At the behest of the architect, a Site Survey Plan was carried out by a specialist company on the instruction of the FRC. Although they did not have the approval or constitutional right to do this, and the invoice for it was paid from the Pavilion Fund held by the Trustees (originating from contributions made by villagers during fundraising events prior to the FRC’s separate existence), they are refusing to make the results of this survey available to the PMG, who clearly may need such information when the project gets under way.
To date, it is believed that some £3,000 has been raised by the FRC since it was formed in 2007. At the Annual Parish Meeting in May 2010, the Chairman of the FRC is on record as having said that “the FRC Accounts, which have been audited, are open to inspection at any time”.
Yet recent queries by a member of the PC and the PMG for up to date information on the FRC fund balance led to a spurious ‘Disrespect’ charge being brought by the Chairman of the FRC against one of the Parish Councillors under the Code of Conduct. The case was thrown out, the appointed SCDC Sub-Committee ruling that the questions raised by the Councillor were perfectly reasonable and no disrespect was intended. But not before the FRC complaint had caused an unnecessary waste of public time and money.
Referring to the FRC Accounts, the set handed in to the Parish Clerk following the Annual Parish Meeting in May 2010 bear a number of numerical errors, a lack of detail or explanation and poor presentation, all of which is most surprising given we are told they were audited.
Prior to the resignation from the PMG by the FRC Chairman, the question was raised as to if and when the funds held by the FRC would be made available to the PMG, since it now had the responsibility for furthering the project.
The PMG were given to understand, in a letter from the Chairman of the FRC, that ‘major fund contributors’ would be consulted on what should be done with the existing funds, the FRC describing this move as “a democratic approach”.
To date, no definitive response has been given, but it is understood that a meeting was held recently, for invited persons only, at Theberton to discuss this aspect, to peruse plans (which ones are unknown) and other matters. Yet, to the certain knowledge of the PMG, several villagers who have willingly and earnestly contributed time, effort and money to the FRC’s fund and fundraising activities, were NOT invited to that meeting. It was thus hardly democratic!
It is the considered belief of a number of the members of the current PC, the Trustees and the PMG, that:
Until the Fund Raising Committee’s intention, concerning the funds held and the site survey report, are clearly stated and found to be acceptable to the villagers of Middleton:
(i) that no further support should be given to their efforts to raise money within this community, and
(ii) that the FRC should cease raising any funds for the expressed purpose of the Pavilion forthwith.
Pavilion Update January 2011
The final results of the pre Christmas survey on the possible pavilion are now based on 100 households/questionnaires and 213 people, so a significant proportion of the Middleton population.
Thanks to Pat Dowding for her analysis of your responses.
As well as looking at results for the total sample, we looked at households where no one is under 60 versus households where at least one person is 60 or over, recreation ground users versus non users, and sport active versus non active. There is a predictably strong correlation between users of the recreation ground and those who are sports active, which makes sense.
Whilst those in the younger profile households, recreation ground users and sports active households show some support for the 2 larger build options these are still greatly outweighed by those who support the small pavilion/storage + toilet, and storage only options.
There was very little support for any further thought of disposing of the ground in some way, which was viewed almost unanimously as an asset to the village
The Pavilion Management Group (Barbara Barker, Carol Barrier, Cllr Roger Dean, Cllr Roy Dowding, Robert Heather, Irene Ralph, Nigel Smith, Cllr David Turley, Richard Turner and myself) will now meet to produce some options, costings and proposals for the village to view in due course.
Pavilion Update
5th November 2011
A questionnaire has been distributed to the village with an accompanying letter as follows:
Dear Householder,
At a very well attended meeting in August, residents came together to try and find a way forward for the proposed pavilion on the Recreation Ground.
That meeting concluded with a clear mandate that further consultation was needed to provide a viable case for a pavilion. A Pavilion Management Group was formed from representatives of village bodies and residents.
This questionnaire aims to get a clear view from the village on the future facilities and activities they would like to see on the Recreation Ground.
In the questionnaire we are asking you to consider the future use of the Recreation Ground as a whole and various building options from a modest replacement of the existing structure to a much more substantial pavilion (see overleaf for comparative information on the alternatives mentioned in the questionnaire).
As things stand the grass cutting is currently paid for by the school and costs around £1500 a year. But with changes to school finances, there is no guarantee this will be continued.
The play equipment requires ongoing maintenance and some may soon need replacement. Whilst volunteer labour can mitigate maintenance expenses, the cost of any replacements will have to be found from fundraising activity or Parish Council funding.
Fundraising efforts may well not cover the cost of a new building. If we did have to borrow and repay the money on commercial terms, we might be looking at £700 a year (£3.50 per household) for every £10,000 borrowed on a 20 year loan.
We set out overleaf, the indicative costs associated with each building option. The on-going costs of maintenance, insurance and, potentially, rates may be covered by income from lettings from parties, receptions and discos etc – but any shortfall would need to be covered by the parish precept (each £1,000 would cost an average of £5 per household a year).
Thank you in advance for taking the time to give us your views. We would like to reassure you that any information provided will be used solely for the purpose stated.
Once the results have been collated, we will call a further Parish Meeting to present the majority view and a proposal for the future.
|
Option |
Size* |
Construction |
Capital cost |
Maintenance/ insurance/ contingency cost |
Potential rates |
|
Just replace the storage facilities but no other additions |
20 m2 |
timber |
£4,000 |
nominal |
|
|
Replace the storage facilities and add a low maintenance toilet |
25 m2 |
timber |
£12,000 |
£500 |
|
|
Build a small pavilion with storage facilities, changing facilities and toilets |
60 m2 |
timber |
£45,000 |
£2500 |
|
|
Build a larger pavilion with storage facilities, changing facilities, toilets, showers, small kitchen and small seating area |
120 m2 |
brick |
£130,000 |
£3500 |
£1,000 |
|
Build a large pavilion with storage facilities, changing facilities, toilets, showers, kitchen and function room(s)
|
260 m2 |
composite |
£400,000 |
£10,000+ |
£3,000 |
OPEN PUBLIC MEETING HELD ON TUESDAY 10TH AUGUST 2010
IN MIDDLETON VILLAGE HALL AT 7:00PM TO DISCUSS A PROPOSED PAVILION
At a very well attended meeting, residents came together to try and find a way forward for the proposed pavilion on the recreation ground, which had increasingly become an issue of misinformed opinion and conflicting views for the Trustees of the Recreation Ground to resolve.
The Chairman briefed the meeting as to the background behind the proposals for a pavilion on the Recreation Ground. He also informed them of the Trustees’ and Parish Council’s concerns relating to the direction this project had taken and gave details of the newly formed Pavilion Management Group.
The Chairman handed the meeting over to Roy Dowding (Trustees Treasurer) who provided more background information to the public and voiced the Trustees’ concerns with regard to the additional running costs and insurance of the proposal by the Architect compared to the smaller Nov 2008 Scheme. A slide show was then presented to the public detailing how we got to where we are now, outlining the benefits of having a pavilion and displaying the two schemes, explaining and comparing the pro's and con's of both with regard to facilities within each building.
The public were then introduced to Jon Swallow, the Architect, who gave a more detailed description of the proposed design, including materials and the scope of its use. He informed the meeting that he felt the cost would be approximately £1500 per sq metre for any new build.
A lively discussion ensued with many members of the public giving views and information. Comments ranged from those who expressed concern that any building was being considered at all to the most widely held view that before any more expense was incurred some proper research should be carried out to assess the need in the village for a pavilion or other construction to support identified activities or groups.
Guarantees were sought that any proposed scheme would not conflict with current areas of activity or deflect any viable funding away, particularly from the pub and the village hall.
A number of speakers queried how we had arrived at an architect scheme of ambitious proportion and cost without a proper research and business plan being prepared.
There were also concerns about finance – both money spent so far and the ongoing upkeep costs to the village.
Roy Dowding informed the meeting that the amounts spent or to be met including the Architects fee, were covered by an amount from the Locality Budget received from County Councillor Rae Leighton for £750 and fundraising money.
Votes were taken as follows: -
.
· Vote: For the large scheme as per the Architect’s drawings.
Verdict: No votes.
· Vote: Would any of the public like to see no pavilion?
Verdict: 10 members of the public raised their hands.
· Vote: Public in favour of a scheme of any kind going forward only after further research.
Verdict: Majority were in favour (which included some of above 10).
It was suggested that the maintenance on the existing pavilion needed looking into.
A member of the public asked if anyone could join the newly formed Management Group to which John Morris replied they were very open to suggestions.
The meeting was concluded with a clear understanding that in depth research needs to be carried out to provide a viable case for a pavilion and that fund raising should be continued.
Since the meeting, the first gathering of the Pavilion Management Group has taken the mandate from the public meeting and will be consulting the village in a number of weeks on the need and viability of a number of options for the Recreation Ground and building thereon.
Toilet on the Recreation Ground
The 19 residents initially attending the meeting held on the 11th June 2007 voted unanimously that a toilet was required on the Recreation Ground. Two residents arriving later were not happy for this to happen.
However, after much discussion it was decided that there was a need for a unisex disabled toilet with nappy changing facilities and an adjoining male toilet. Both to be vandal resistant, with all services hidden and cleanable by hose (as public toilets at Wickham Market, Saxmundham and Sizewell). Design to utilise energy saving construction and services.
It was further decided that there was a need for additional building space for use as an area for hygienic food preparation when events held. 
Changing facilities to be available in this area.
Three residents volunteered to join a group with Parish Councillors to progress the project. Funding will now be investigated. Organisations involved in “green” buildings and energy saving to be approached regarding the design and assistance in seeking funds. Three designs to be sought for consideration.
Middleton Parish Council wish to thank those who attended the meeting and for their contributions to the discussion.