Urgent: Help Reopen Closed Melbourne Grove and adjacent roads

[legalalien]

They certainly applied for it. Will double check.

[legalalien]

I think they have - see agenda item 8 (?750 vale residents assn)

http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/g6618/Public%20reports%20pack%20Tuesday%2025-Feb-2020%2019.00%20South%20multi-ward%20forum.pdf?T=10

[nxjen]

They applied for funding for 3 street parties to be held over the summer, I don?t think they were successful. ?215 was raised through crowdfunding for the decorations

https://www.crowdfunder.co.uk/melbourne-grove---halloween

For a background to the decorations go to https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/nightmare-on-dulwich-street-residents-cast-a-spell-over-their-road-name-for-halloween/. You will see that one of the aims was to increase footfall to the businesses.

[legalalien]

If I?ve got that wrong I apologise (it would help if they posted minutes)- although generally I think the approve the recommendations? The application refers to Halloween as well as the street party as I read it.

[Rockets]

As admirable as it was to try and create footfall to then troll some of the businesses you are trying to help with the insensitive messages on the gravestones is really quite odd. Looks like whomever designed the messages let their heart overrule their head.

[nxjen]

I don?t see any trolling. I came across the decorations last week and didn?t see any insensitive messages on the gravestones. As for heart over-ruling head ...

[nxjen]

legalalien Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If I?ve got that wrong I apologise (it would help

> if they posted minutes)- although generally I

> think the approve the recommendations? The

> application refers to Halloween as well as the

> street party as I read it.

The word ?Halloween? is certainly there but it makes very little sense and appears out of context. Remember this is an agenda for a meeting held in February - is it likely an RA would be looking so far ahead?

[FairTgirl]

nxjen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> legalalien Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > If I?ve got that wrong I apologise (it would

> help

> > if they posted minutes)- although generally I

> > think the approve the recommendations? The

> > application refers to Halloween as well as the

> > street party as I read it.

>

> The word ?Halloween? is certainly there but it

> makes very little sense and appears out of

> context. Remember this is an agenda for a meeting

> held in February - is it likely an RA would be

> looking so far ahead?

They have been looking that far ahead - are we looking at the same one, this one here attached discussing Halloween events in 2020? If they have received council funding and this is what they have done with it? They and Southwark have alot of explaining to do.

[nxjen]

Yes, that?s what I was referring to. How does reference to a play street ?next weekend? on Derwent Grove equate with applying for funds for Halloween decorations on Melbourne Grove?

[FairTgirl]

legalalien Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If I?ve got that wrong I apologise (it would help

> if they posted minutes)- although generally I

> think the approve the recommendations? The

> application refers to Halloween as well as the

> street party as I read it.

hey Legalalien - is there a way of finding out what was approved?

Also having a peruse of this, and who has been receiving money why aren't Link Age Southwark a statuatory consultation body on road closures. Seem an obvious choice.

[legalalien]

its' quite hard to know what has happened. The application refers to the summer parties and says

"We are a Resident's Association of 3 streets (plus a couple of connected streets) with the aim of connecting our residents and creating a better local environment in which we all can share. This year with the help of funding we held 3 separate street parties over Summer (Melbourne Grove, Derwent Grove & Tintagel Crescent), and have a 3-road Halloween play street booked for next weekend on Derwent Grove for all residents within the VRA to come together and join in. We would like to repeat this in 2020 to help keep our residents connected and engaged, especially as this raises the VRA profile and encourages engagement with the Association which helps us better understand and tackle local issues when they arise."

The application process is annual, so the "next week" referred to is Oct 2019 and the aim is to repeat, presumably a similar range of parties (both summer and Halloween) in 2020.

The South Wards multiforum page only has the agenda which recommends funding.

Then - if you do a "decision" search on South Wards decisions in the general decision finder, you see that the decision from this meeting is "Closed - Reason 3". I have no idea at all what that means. Maybe they couldn't allocate this year's funds due to a global pandemic?

(I think I've now used up today's patience in trying to navigate the council website). It seems maybe noone got funds this year....Don't know!

PS there was an allocation for street parties for the previous year though:)

http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgAi.aspx?ID=52262

PPS I think I have got there. If you go to this page

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/engagement-and-consultations/empowering-communities/empowering-communities-south

And click on "Funding Awards Decision 2020/21" you'll see a list which shows that there was an award of ?500 for application 1316109, which is the one quoted above (so ?500 of the ?750 applied for).

Why is this so difficult!! As before, happy to be corrected if I have got this wrong. I am probably a bit of a grinch but I can think of better things for the council to be spending its money on in all honesty!

[nxjen]

?Also having a peruse of this, and who has been receiving money why aren't Link Age Southwark a statuatory consultation body on road closures. Seem an obvious choice.?

Link Age Southwark are an admirable organisation but why should they be a statutory consultation body?

[nxjen]

?And click on "Funding Awards Decision 2020/21" you'll see a list which shows that there was an award of ?500 for application 1316109, which is the one quoted above (so ?500 of the ?750 applied for). ?

This though was for street parties in the summer which I guess didn?t go ahead, so probably money not awarded, due to lockdown

[FairTgirl]

nxjen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ?Also having a peruse of this, and who has been

> receiving money why aren't Link Age Southwark a

> statuatory consultation body on road closures.

> Seem an obvious choice.?

>

> Link Age Southwark are an admirable organisation

> but why should they be a statutory consultation

> body?

Because they represent elderly people in Southwark for whom blocked roads, reduced access, reduced parking, delayed buses etc would have the greatest impact. Maybe there is another group in Southwark that better represents the elderly but they should be being represented, especially as they are the least best placed to be using apps to state their opinions and concerns.

[nxjen]

They are not however an emergency service eg fire, police, ambulance

[legalalien]

nxjen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ?And click on "Funding Awards Decision 2020/21"

> you'll see a list which shows that there was an

> award of ?500 for application 1316109, which is

> the one quoted above (so ?500 of the ?750 applied

> for). ?

>

> This though was for street parties in the summer

> which I guess didn?t go ahead, so probably money

> not awarded, due to lockdown

The application is clearly for both summer and Halloween parties as I read it. In past years I believe that the process has been for the successful applicant to invoice the council shortly after approval and prior to the event (and then provide info about the event once it has happened). Obvs have no idea what the RA did or didn't invoice for....

Anyhow, a useful heads up to people about the existence of the funding and the sorts of things that are awarded funds.

On the consultation point, the statutory consultees are who they are, but if Southwark chooses to consult other groups (for example it appears to have built Southwark Cyclists into its consultation process), I agree it would make sense to have a broader range of these.

[FairTgirl]

nxjen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> They are not however an emergency service eg fire,

> police, ambulance

Not statutory, correct, my mistake, but a body of people whose opinion should be sought and held in higher regard than that of most given the reasons mentioned. Stakeholders certainly.

[nxjen]

?The application is clearly for both summer and Halloween parties as I read it.?

I read it that the ?Halloween play street booked for next weekend? is background to their application for summer street parties in ways they are keeping their residents ?connected and engaged?

[legalalien]

I don't agree. And in fact "this", which is singular, sounds more like it applies to the Halloween thing. The previous year's application uses identical wording so sheds little light...

Anyway, I'm sure they could confirm that absent any summer parties they'll either be forfeiting the funding or giving it back.

nxjen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ?The application is clearly for both summer and

> Halloween parties as I read it.?

>

> I read it that the ?Halloween play street booked

> for next weekend? is background to their

> application for summer street parties in ways they

> are keeping their residents ?connected and

> engaged?

[nxjen]

If the previous years application said the same, and they were awarded the money, this implies, if your reading is correct, there would have been council funded Halloween decorations in 2019. Were there?

[legalalien]

It implies that they had a pot of money they could spend on the four parties mentioned. We?re clearly not going to agree on this!

[nxjen]

But did they receive any money this year or was the offer withdrawn due to COVID which I think is most likely. In which case your original assertion that the Melbourne Grove Halloween decorations were Council funded is misleading, especially as I posted that link earlier to a crowdfunding page that had raised ?215.

[Rockets]

nxjen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I don?t see any trolling. I came across the

> decorations last week and didn?t see any

> insensitive messages on the gravestones. As for

> heart over-ruling head ...

Yes because Rat Run and This is a Dead End are such familiar phrases used globally at Halloween aren't they...how silly of me...

[legalalien]

I think I?ve been pretty transparent about what I have and haven?t been able

to find out and what documents I?m basing it on. I could waste the council?s time by putting in an FOI request (never done that before, always up for a new experience), but life is too short. For anyone who thinks the decorations are offensive, maybe just email the ward councillor, Cllr McAsh, and say you?re concerned, can he think about this when considering the current funding round*. Given how tight things are for the council financially it would be strange to fund a particular residents? assn street party three years running in any case.

* I have zero idea whether any application is being made this year.

[nxjen]

Yes you have been transparent, basically you don't know if the decorations were the result of council funding but are still suggesting anyone who is offended contacts Cllr McAsh to ensure VRA do not receive council funds. You have also not addressed the money raised by crowdfunding.