13 Willow Lane

Great Cambourne

 

19th February 2005 (original sent 6th January 2005)

 

Notice Boards and Megalomania

I have been requested by Ted Bocking the temporary Parish Council Clerk to explain the notice board item in the Mad Monk article in the Crier in February, and feel the residents of Cambourne should be aware of my response to the following:-

 

"I wonder how you could have got so wrong an impression of the Council's decision?  Would you please be kind enough to confirm to me that you have given your apologies to the people concerned and, in all the circumstances, perhaps it would be appropriate for the correct situation to be publicised through the Crier."

 

I am happy to explain this but it may be not what they want to hear.

First the history.

Notice boards play an important role in a village being the formal place that official notices are displayed for planning issues, elections, and agendas for official meetings, as well as being a place for residents to display details of groups and services.

When the notice board in Great Cambourne was provided by the developers, the Cambourne Residents Association were given permission by the developers to use the boards. I personally paid for the key and agreed to manage the board for the CRA. I subsequently did the same when the Lower Cambourne notice board (and 2 replacements) were provided.

I sought help with this and two sets of residents volunteered to help with the day to day care.

 

This worked well during the days of the MLC which was part of our formal representation (pre Parish Council) along with Bourn and Caxton Parish councils.

The MLC clerk sent me all the formal notices and I ensured they were posted up.

 

When the Cambourne Parish Council were formed the MLC clerk became the temporary clerk for the Parish Council. She continued this arrangement, with the agreement of the Parish Council.

The Parish Council then appointed their first official clerk.

What happened next ? I am not sure, but I was phoned by a member of the Parish Council asking about the notice boards and how he could get keys.

I pointed out that the developers still owned the notice boards and he should approach them.

His response was "nothing is ever straight forward in Cambourne".

 

I continued to take general care of the boards, still with the resident helpers as there was no further contact from the Parish Council, but I now know that the newly appointed clerk had been to see the couple who looked after the Great Cambourne board, asking for a key saying (in their words) she was "from the Council". They had no idea who she was.

 

At the end of December the question of availability of Parish Council minutes was raised on the forum. It was claimed they were available on the notice board. I had never seen Minutes on the boards; all I ever saw were the agendas. A member of the Parish Council then visited the couple in Great Cambourne and asked them if they had removed the minutes. They were in fact on holiday at the time so there was never any question that they had.

 

There was a meeting of the Parish Council in December with a new temporary clerk, Ted Bocking (I understand the previous clerk had resigned).

It was discussed and alledged that minutes had been removed, and their solution was either to buy two new boards (the temporary clerk gave details of the costs) or to reserve areas on the existing boards, exclusively for their use. They decided to ask for areas to be reserved on a trial basis, despite the fact that this had never been necessary in the past as formal notices had always taken precendence.

Clearly they were taking control, so the next day I emailed the clerk, the vice chair and chairman asking for clarification of the new management arrangements. I also asked for a letter of thanks to be sent to the two sets of residents for their previous help.

 

I heard no more until a few days after the Mad Monk article first appeared in late January (February issue).

During the interview for the clerks job   I was asked how I had managed to interperate their decision so wrongly. I was also quizzed at interview on what I thought about the Megalomania article and my involvement in its publication, I was able to say that I did not know who was responsible.

 

I was also asked how it was deemed that they had "taken over" the management of the Lancaster Centre.

 

It had been agreed by all that it was necessary for the Parish Council to take over the lease rather than the two residents who had agreed to take this on before we had a Parish Council, as it involved financial commitment should there be any problems.

The Parish council took up my offer to continue taking bookings. When I asked about management they told me that they had appointed a management committee from the Parish Council. I was not invited to be part of this management committee.

I later asked about invoicing and banking; they decided to take over the funds and place the responsibility for invoicing in the hands of the paid temporary clerk. In future all payments would be made to the Parish Council and the £4300 in the Lancaster Centre bank account that the previous management team had opened would be transferred to them and the account closed. I pointed out that it was necessary to ring fence at least the £2000 start up grant from SCDC which should go the Community Centre. (They have now agreed to ring fence the whole amount).

During the few days that followed I felt I was the subject of a witch hunt by emails from the temporary clerk, asking me to explain everything again and with the request to apologise.

I copied to them all the relevant emails confirming the sequence of events, quite expecting an apology. None was forthcoming.

 

Needless to say, I did not get the job. Neither did the other applicants it seems ! They are now advertising the job at an even higher salary !

 

Megalomania

A psychopathological condition characterized by delusional fantasies of wealth, power, or omnipotence.

An obsession with grandiose or extravagant things or actions.

 

You decide

 

Roger Hume