What can the council do to make things easier during COVID-19?
-
-
Latest Discussions
-
Ideally with double bed base and standard single on top, plain, solid wood preferred. Can collect anywhere. -
I've just gone over for the first time, and oh my - got to be the worst one yet. My issue has never been with the noise - although it is intolerable, it is only for three days. My issue is the environmental damage to our lovely park, which lasts a lot, lot longer. The obvious damage to the landscape is shocking - so widespread, so deep - but perhaps even worse is the litter. Without even looking too hard, within a few minutes I'd found dozens of bottle tops, can ring pulls, tubes of filter tips, fag butts, cut off cable ties, disposable vapes, even a tampon applicator, all either hiding in the longer grass where the entrance was, or embedded in the dried mud. This is apparently after there have been several 'teams' of litter pickers over the whole area, and representatives of the council have walked the area and given it the thumbs up. These are all things that aren't going to decompose, so will be embedded in the ground forever, literally turning the park into a rubbish tip. I just don't know how this can be allowed to happen, again and again and again? May I suggest that before anyone comments on this post, or on the state of the park, they go and have a good, slow, careful, hard look first, over the whole site. Try and find some litter, I guarantee it will be a matter of minutes before you do, then you'll find some more, and some more, and some more... -
I am looking for any left over masonry paint, if anyone has from a previous project? preferably in magnolia. let me know via pm if you may have anything suitable & also if any payment is required. many thanks -
A friend who is another long-standing member of the Dulwich Society and was present at the meetings on May 20th has sent me the following letter, and I reproduce it here with their permission: Maybe there is another side to this tirade which I guess was from either a Trustee or one of the plants in the first couple of rows? I had a good view from where I was sitting at the side. I am one of the people who signed up to oppose the new Dulwich Society rules, having read the letter by the signatories which was shared with me. I have known about the differences in opinion as I have a couple of friends who warned me about this schism. I actively joined with my support because all I wanted, and what they clearly wanted, was to leave those rules as they were, to make the society more accessible if there is an issue. It was not some kind of attempted coup. I have met several people who did not attend the AGM who asked me if I had been knocked up, as they had been. The long, long letter by the Chair ordering us how to think and how to vote! No wonder there was a huge turn out. And the point is this: the misrepresentation of what the original signatories was asking for, was carried on right through to the meeting. "I found it extraordinary that this grouping in Dulwich Society pushing for change....." - no, keeping it all accessible and as it was, not changed! How can there be any democracy if the Chair chooses who to speak, and made just one mistake by calling someone who accused him and the Trustees of taking a bullying stance. Oh, and by the way, speaking for 25 minutes in opposition to the Motions before they were presented and also with Trustees answering each Motion in addition to his unchallenged rant. Having received the very long letter from the Chair, I and many of the people who chose to support the signatories were astounded. By the orders from the Chair, repeated bold orders on how to vote, and a misrepresentation of the facts. Not only that, on the night of the AGM, to be given voting slips with an instruction on how to vote! I will put one thing right. I informally joined up in time to hear about the meeting invite for the signatories with the Trustees and a neutral chair. This only gave two days notice to everyone and of course this was completely unacceptable. Quite a few signatories (and me) were present at a Dulwich Arts Society lecture, and those who were not members did not want to attend Bell House as they simply could not speak for others. At the same time it seems the Chair attended Bell House with others to try and make the group against his ideas look as if they were somewhat cowardly. What rubbish. By the way, I am informed that the Pub upstairs meeting room was booked for FREE. The SGM costs were therefore non existent. The Chair has painted this group as trying to destroy the Society and threaten to resign along with all his Trustees (some looked a bit surprised at that) if he did not get his way. In fact a couple looked extremely uncomfortable. You cannot get away from the main fact that in the Constitution which was in place at the time, the Chair failed to call and hold an SGM in the correct period of 28 days., This meeting he offered was his way of looking as if he was open to talks but I and my new 'friends' could only see someone manipulating the membership. I am a member of One Dulwich but I am sure they were not behind any of this, and although they may have agreed with the anti-sentiments, I do not think they manipulated the group. I would ask add for allowing - against what the Chair said at the beginning - a rant from the balcony against one of the Proposers by a disappointed and vengeful ex-Tory, for more than three minutes, the meeting descended into a very uncomfortable rant against democracy. One of the Trustees answering a Motion completely lost it. All this from a sedate small amenity society in a defined geographical area. There were no anti-LTN feelings behind this group; we all simply wanted democracy to remain. To be asked our feelings about policies which the Society put forward as ours, to have the ease of calling an SGM with 30 members instead of searching for 120, to be included in discussions instead of not even being able to read Minutes showing what the committees are developing. It was very telling that the end of the post on EDG I am answering, it drew the readers to exactly transport issues and “online trolling”. Manipulation of events. Enough said.
-
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now