minutes

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 12th October 2010 (Minute Nos. 410 - 419) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record, subject to an amendment to Minute No. 412 (ii) (Regeneration in Sheerness) to read 'Mr Purssord reported that following the sale of a community hall purchased with a £50,000 grant from Swale Borough Council some years ago, it had been possible to contribute £25,000 towards the funding of some changing rooms.'  

The KALC representative raised concern over the poor attendance of some Councillors at the Rural Forum.
With reference to Minute No. 412 (i) (Extension of chalet opening season at Leysdown), a Member advised that a meeting had recently taken place with the site owners and SBC Officers to take the proposals forward and the Chairman advised that a written response would be sent to Mr Purssord.

Cabinet Member for Sustainable Planning/Democratic Services Officer

declarations of interest

No interests were declared.

public session

Mr Burgess, a local resident, asked that as the forum discussed rural issues, why was there no Parish representation from Tunstall. He was advised that the KALC were represented at the Forum and information about the meetings was sent to all Parish Councils in Swale advising and inviting Parish Councils to attend. The KALC representative suggested that more rural Borough Councillors also attended so that they could have more of an impact on rural issues. He was advised by the Chairman that membership of the Rural Forum was detailed in SBC's Constitution.

Parish Councillor Purssord (Leysdown Parish Council and a local resident) welcomed the input that Rural Forum Members had made following the recent meeting with campsite owners with regard to the extension of the chalet opening season.

Mr Oswald-Jones, a local resident, asked whether there was any information on how many Parishes had completed or were progressing with a Parish Plan. Mr Harrison confirmed that he would be able to supply this information and would also be able to provide a further update later in the year. The Head of Economy and Communities advised that Communities and Local Government were looking at opportunities to work with Local Authorities on neighbourhood planning proposals.

Mr Harrison (Action with Communities in Rural Kent)

part b reports for the rural forum to decide

local engagement and partners and communities together (pact)

Inspector Swinney gave a brief update on crime in rural areas in Swale. In response to a question, he advised that it was possible that the recession, rather than a change in Police tactics, had led to an increase in crime. Crime levels had hopefully reached a plateau and the increase had equated to one additional crime per day since April 2010. He stated that the Police were committed to reducing crime and he assured the Forum that levels were already starting to decrease.

Inspector Swinney gave a presentation on the current engagement process and its future development. He reported that two-way dialogue was the key issue. Inspector Swinney outlined the PACT process and provided information on how this initiative had not been as successful as was hoped. Key issues had been poor attendance and this had meant that it was difficult to maintain a process where very few people attended. PACTs had not been representative of the local community, there had been a lack of priorities and also a lack of updates from issues that were raised.

Inspector Swinney outlined the new measures that were now being undertaken. These included holding surgeries and undertaking surveys and asking people what their priority issues were. He advised that the decline of PACTs, had not meant that engagement with the public had decreased, but that it had actually gone up significantly.

Inspector Swinney advised that although savings had to be made within the Police force, engagement with members of the public would still be important.

The KALC representative gave some examples of his experience of how PACTs had worked in his local area. He emphasised the need for consistency of Police workforce and the importance of knowledge of the area. He did not think that the use of networking with mobile phones would replace community engagement and suggested that when multiple bodies were engaged more positive results were seen.

Some Members suggested that it could be beneficial to utilise Parish Councils as a forum as they met regularly and they could be used as the vehicle for interaction. Members of the Forum also made the following comments: PACTs were initially well attended; lack of feedback; PACTs came across as an initiative from the Police; concerns that Police Community Support Officers' work was being split between wards; more Police needed in rural areas; success of engagement was results driven; and the public became disenchanted if no follow up action was taken.

Inspector Swinney advised that there was a commitment to target rural crime, resources were likely to decrease and this could affect the amount of areas that the Police staff covered, ie two wards rather than one. He considered that an increase in crime in rural areas was not related to there being less Police there than in urban areas. In response to acknowledgement that crime in Sheppey reduced this year, Inspector Swinney advised that there had been a change in tactics on the Island.

Inspector Swinney advised that feedback was important and this was done through the media, posters and computer messaging.

The Chairman thanked Inspector Swinney for attending the meeting.

rural traffic calming

Members raised the following issues regarding speeding farm vehicles in rural areas: lack of realisation from the vehicle driver that they were travelling too fast as they were higher than other vehicles; the size, load and width of the vehicles especially on narrow roads was a problem; speeding issues needed to be raised with the farmers; speeds were unsafe for rural roads; farm vehicles used routes not suitable for farm vehicles to avoid those roads with traffic calming measures; enforcement was needed to control speeding farm vehicles; consultation of proposed traffic calming was important and some drivers may not know the local roads well enough.

The NFU representative advised that if the law was being broken, ie a vehicle breaking the speed limit, it was a matter for the Police and access to individual farmers could be gained by contacting the NFU. He suggested that the width of the farm vehicles was often the problem and advised that the speed of a farm vehicle was limited through its gear box.

The Community Engagement Manager read out a statement from Kent Highway Services (KHS) which advised that the NFU were consulted on traffic calming schemes. The NFU representative advised that the NFU had not been consulted on the traffic calming in Tunstall and measures to address problems of calming affects on large vehicles was expensive.

Members were disappointed that an Officer from KHS was not present at the meeting.

information item

The Head of Economy and Communities introduced the report which set out the Big Lottery Fund scheme which would provide capital grants for community-use buildings in specific deprived urban and rural areas.

Members made comments regarding the postal code method of eligibility for the scheme and that the focus for funding criteria was on existing rather than new community facilities.

The Head of Economy and Communities advised that any comments should be forwarded to the Big Lottery Fund, via their website.

action plan

Members referred to the Action Plan.

The following points were raised: the attendance of a member of the Rural Regeneration Team at KCC was requested; dates needed to be added to the Action Plan; figures as well as percentages should be given on the London 2012 Open Weekend item; an update was requested for specific promotional initiatives and agenda topics needed to be more inviting.

venue for next meeting

The Chairman advised that there had been a request to have a Core Strategy item on the next agenda on 9th March 2011. A Member requested that information on this was provided in 'plain English'.

Members suggested getting the Parish Councils more involved at the invitation stage of the meeting and to be more specific that they were invited to attend.