Community Coalition Meeting July 2018

Hanover & Elm Grove Community Coalition

July 18th 6.30 – 8pm

Phoenix Gallery

Present:  Cllr David Gibson, Fiona Levack, Tim Read (BHCC,  Amy Allison (TDC), Alexia (HCC) Simon Bannister (BHCC) Christina (Phoenix Gallery) Sarah McCarthy (Phoenix Estate), Denise Browning (May Road)

Apologies: Ian Macintyre, Sarah Davies, David Hearn, Paul Tilley, Jane Brown, Jill Peters

The meeting was unable to access the planned venue of the Phoenix Community Centre, thanks to Phoenix Gallery for stepping in at the last moment and providing a space.

Meeting Chair: David Gibson

Minute taker: Simon Bannister

1              Terms of reference/constitution

  • ToR document was circulated. It has been modelled on the Hove Station Partnership constitution, which is a constituted and recognised Neighbourhood Forum.
  • Comments on the document:
  • It currently just refers to residents. As a network of groups is a strength of our coalition, we would need participation of group reps on the committee to be included.
  • It is unsure if the equal opportunities section is suitable – this needs to be checked
  • In councillor participation, this should be limited to Hanover & Elm Grove councillors only
  • A minimum membership of 21 may be too many at present. This is a statutory requirement for a formal Neighbourhood Forum, but this level and type of organisation may not be what we are seeking at present

Action: David Gibson to redraft and circulate amended version

2              Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)

The council is looking at changing the way that developer contributions work, moving from Section 106 to CIL. Both forms basically cover the same situation – a new development or significant change to an existing development can create pressure on infrastructure – parks, roads, schools, public transport etc…. and S106 & CIL are planning mechanisms which require developers to make contributions toward mitigating these pressures. The main difference between the two is that S106 tends only to be levied on a small proportion of developments, and must be site specific in its outcomes, whereas CIL works with pooled contributions from a wider range of developments and with a broader scope as to its application and use

A key change in the CIL regulations is that a percentage 15 – 25% can be passed to a Neighbourhood Forum to spend on local priorities. The percentage depends upon the type of group, which is why it is important to think about the sort of constitution we would like to adopt.

BHCC are currently developing their approach to this, and if change happens it will not take place until December 2019, so there is time to consider this further.

  1. Restorative Practice Update

Tim reported back on the recent Restorative Practice steering group. This meeting agreed that the RJ pilot should focus on three projects, which will all bring in aspects of community learning and capacity building, positive community focussed interventions and practical activities to repair community harm.  Tim is updating the delivery plan and will circulate it.

  1. Theme updates:

Most of the themes have been developed by working groups to the point where they need to be shared with service providers and potential partners. Two themes – health and community safety – still require work.

It was agreed that all of the working groups should sent the most recent version of their theme to Simon who will be able to put them on the website and circulate them amongst the coalition.

Themes and Theme Leads (if you have been named and are not the theme lead, could you let Simon know)

Refuse & Recycling – Ian Mackintyre

Greening and sustainability – Paul Norman/Hanover Action

Hanover & Elm Grove Online – Simon Bannister

Neighbourliness & community spirit – David Gibson

Community Safety – no lead – suggested that the LAT + RJ steering group could work to this

Health – no lead – check with Sam Warren BHCC

  1. Next steps

Engagement with service providers: similar to other NAP areas, it was agreed that we put on an event aimed at service providers/partners to look at the theme objectives and get their practical support to assist with delivery. It was requested that all theme leads compile a list of key partners/service providers who will need to be involved in this.

  1. Next meeting

The next meeting will take place on Wednesday September 5th, and by this date we hope to have the themes in their final draft stage and ready to share with partners.

  1. AOB

Communications: Some members of the coalition don’t use email, and it was agreed that hard copies of materials will be mailed on request. Anyone  who would like this should contact Simon.